first_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsored Animals, Biodiversity, Conservation, Economics, Economy, Environment, Environmental Politics, Featured, Governance, Green, Happy-upbeat Environmental, Health, Human-wildlife Conflict, National Parks, Nature And Health, Parks, Protected Areas, Public Health Article published by Jeremy Hance A new study finds that living near a protected area in the developing world decreases poverty and increases childhood health.Parks with tourism or multi-use were the best at delivering benefits to local populations.There is an untold part of this story: conflict with wildlife was not incorporated into the study. This post is part of Saving Life on Earth: Words on the Wild, a monthly column by Jeremy Hance, one of Mongabay’s original staff writers.center_img Citation: R. Naidoo, D. Gerkey, D. Hole, A. Pfaff, A. M. Ellis, C. D. Golden, D. Herrera, K. Johnson, M. Mulligan, T. H. Ricketts, B. Fisher. Evaluating the impacts of protected areas on human well-being across the developing world. Science Advances, 2019; 5 (4): eaav3006 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aav3006 Imagine, for a moment, a world without national parks. Yellowstone National Park is just a combo of cattle ranchers and gated communities for rich people who like the empty views. The wild American bison is extinct and no wolves wander anywhere near the lower 48. Manú National Park, in the Peruvian Amazon, was logged out decades ago — and the indigenous tribes that inhabited the area are all dead. The migration across the Serengeti was slowly crushed by roads, trains, sprawl, agriculture and hunting; by the 1980s just a few wildebeest limped through churned-up plains. The Serengeti’s last lion died before the new millennium. Jim Corbett National Park in India is today just fields of marginal farming: the tigers that were once there are long gone — in fact, tigers in this counterfactual universe went totally extinct in the 1990s from the wild. But, hey, they still perform in circuses!Without national parks, and by extension all varieties of protected areas, our planet would be even hotter than it is and we would have lost thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of species still found on our Earth today. Protected areas remain our best tool against mass extinction and ecological degradation. They are also ridiculously beloved: a study in 2015 found that natural protected areas received 8 billion visits a year — greater than the total population of humans on Earth. The researchers estimate this could generate $600 billion dollars a year (even though globally nations only invest $10 billion a year into park management, which is pretty much woefully inadequate). According to the Protected Planet Report in 2018, 14.9 percent of global lands are protected, covering 20 million square kilometers (7.7 million square miles) — nearly twice the size of China.An elephant in Kruger National Park in South Africa. Photo by: Rhett Butler/MongabayYet what about the flip side of this coin? How do these protected areas economically impact those who live next to them, especially in developing and poorer countries? If thinking about it simply, one would likely believe protected areas drag down local economies — after all, the very purpose of such parks is to set aside large areas of land, essentially rendering them inaccessible in terms of direct economic exploitation.But it turns out the reverse is true: a new study in Science Advances, the largest and broadest of its kind, has found that protected areas provide both economic and health benefits to their adjacent populations.Benefits of living next doorThe study found that not only did protected areas provide economic benefits to local communities, but children living near protected areas were healthier as well. However, there was one caveat: protected areas either needed to have tourism or be designated as multiple-use protected areas, which means they allow some regulated access to natural resources inside the park.For those living near a nature reserve with tourism, wealth scores rose by nearly 17 percent and the likelihood of poverty plunged by 16 percent compared to rural households living nowhere near a park. Living near a park allowing multiple-use access and tourism translated into wealth scores jumping by 20 percent and the likelihood of poverty cut by 25 percent.Perhaps more surprisingly, these parks also impacted the health of children under 5 living nearby. Parks with tourism and multiple-use access increased height-for-age growth scores by almost 10 percent and reduced the likelihood of stunting due to poor nutrition by 13 percent.Such results aren’t super surprising if one has tracked this kind of research in the past: a study in 2011 had similar findings looking at parks in Thailand and Costa Rica.However, the new study has one thing past research doesn’t: it’s freaking huge. The researchers looked at a stunning 600-plus protected areas across 34 countries, analyzing data on 60,000 households and 87,000 children.A birdwatching guide in West Papua, Indonesia. Tourism can bring money into local communities and give an incentive to conservation. Photo by: Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay“This is much a much larger and more widespread set of data than has been used in the past to address this topic, and furthermore, our data were collected using the same methodology,” says Robin Naidoo, the lead author of the paper and a senior conservation scientist with WWF.He added that the study took several years of work because it required “[integrating] environmental and social data in a rigorous way.”Moreover, the study also found that even when protected areas didn’t have tourism or multiple–use access, they still didn’t harm local populations financially.“There was also no evidence for any negative impacts of protected areas on human well-being in any of our scenarios,” reads the paper.This means that, on average, there are no economic downside to parks — but Naidoo was quick to point out it doesn’t rule out that in particular instances a park could be economically harmful to locals.But why would parks deliver such sizable benefits? There are some theories. Tourism, for one thing, brings in direct economic benefits, jobs and often greater infrastructure and more local institutions. Multiple-use parks, meanwhile, allow some access (theoretically sustainable) to natural resources.Moreover, all protected areas have the potential for greater environmental health and ecosystem services spillover, meaning the nature protected inside the park will, of course, find its way outside the borders: cleaner water and air, flood buffers, access to plants and animal populations outside the park borders.But some say there’s another side to this.Unmeasured costs Earlier this month, a leopard in South Africa’s Kruger National Park scrambled over a fence and killed a toddler the child of a local ranger. Officials described such attacks as “rare,” but also killed the leopard as a precautionary measure.Our planet is nothing if not complicated and nuanced. And while Naidoo’s research shines a light on the potential benefits of living next to protected areas, not everyone sees it as a final word on the subject.A tiger snarls at tourists in the foreground at a park in India. Tigers can be incredibly difficult animals to live near. Photo by Rhett Butler/Mongabay.Niki Rust, an environmental social scientist and consultant, says the study’s results are “basically meaningless” because they neglect one thing: wildlife conflict.“I don’t doubt that the scientists did a great job with the limited data they had available and I agree with their conclusions in that — with the data they used — it appears on first inspection that protected areas do not put the local communities living near them at a health or economic disadvantage. However, the data used completely misses the biggest costs of living next to protected areas,” she says.Living adjacent to wilderness can be dangerous and difficult. Wildlife conflict can include anything from the loss of life due to a tiger attack or lion, to crop raiding by monkeys and birds.“There is a dire need to integrate human-wildlife conflict data into these studies so as not to vastly misrepresent the true picture of what it’s like to live near a protected area,” Rust says. “We need to know the full cost of what it’s really like to live with dangerous animals like elephants, lions and crocodiles that can destroy livelihoods and lives. We have to collect data on the number of people killed or injured by wild animals, the amount of crops eaten by primates, the livestock killed by carnivores and the number of wells destroyed by elephants.”Rust adds that there are also the less-addressed costs of wildlife conflict — such as the fear and stress of living next to potentially killer predators or dangerous herbivores.“As with any study, ours has limitations,” says Drew Gerkey, a co-author of the paper and a professor of anthropology at Oregon State University’s College of Liberal Arts. “Certainly human-wildlife conflict is a very real, negative impact that local people around protected areas can experience. In an ideal world we would have had data for each protected area on the prevalence of such conflict, and this information could have been included in our statistical models in the same way as other variables. Unfortunately, these data simply don’t exist, and so that wasn’t possible.”Gerkey says there simply isn’t any “comprehensive data set” on human wildlife conflict or, he added, protected area governance, “which was something we had hoped to include in our analysis.”But he says he believes this lack of data doesn’t necessarily negate the paper’s findings, given that less poverty, increased wealth and better health outcomes for children would still be valid.Of course, it’s also important to remember that wildlife conflict is not equal everywhere. It can be particularly high in regions like sub-Saharan Africa — think elephants, lions, leopards, hippos, buffaloes, etc. — and parts of Asia — especially those areas with elephants and tigers — but may be minimal to nearly non-existent in other parts of the world. For example, protected areas in Latin America and the Middle East have considerably less wildlife conflict. In places like the Caribbean, such conflict could be said to be near zero, with feral pigs (non-native) and some birds the most likely nuisances.Naidoo says that every protected area in every region has particular situations that may cause “the story” to differ “from average impacts.” He adds that researchers should consider building up a library of “detailed case studies” to provide greater understanding.The research also shows that the structure and management of protected areas are vital. Everywhere, protected areas are largely underfunded and in some parts of the world amount to nothing more than paper parks. But investing in tourism brings real benefits to local people, as does creating parks with at least some areas that allow multiple use of natural resources.“We need to ensure the benefits of living with wildlife outweigh the costs,” says Rust, pointing to conservancies in Namibia as one example of how people can directly benefit, and manage, their own wildlife.A flock of macaws at a mineral lick in Manu National Park. Photo by: Rhett A. Butler/MongabayNaidoo, meanwhile, says their findings support the idea that protected areas actually deliver on two of the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals: wildlife conservation and poverty reduction.“We now have widespread evidence to suggest that it’s possible that these can in fact happen in concert,” he says.Researchers have argued for years that one of our strongest tools against both mass extinction and climate change are protected areas. Indeed, in the last few years a number of conservationists have called for Half Earth, the idea of setting aside half of the planet as various types of protected areas and indigenous areas to avoid mass extinction and ecological collapse.The naturalist and author Wallace Stegner called national parks America’s “best idea.” And while the U.S. did legally codify parks for a new age, the idea of “protected areas” actually has a long human history: indigenous tribes have long set aside areas of land as “sacred” or untouchable, allowing the protection of wildlife in these areas. In some ways, we’ve always had “protected areas.” And maybe that will be our salvation. It certainly was, even in all its complexity and challenges, one of humanity’s best ideas.last_img read more

Posted in ldobahmb

first_imgOver the past decade there has been a rise in corporate zero-deforestation commitments, but very few companies have shown progress in meeting their goals of reducing deforestation in their supply chains by 2020.The Accountability Framework Initiative, launched by a group of 14 civil society organizations, is the latest tool to help companies make progress, and hold them accountable, on their zero-deforestation commitments.The Accountability Framework Initiative is expected to be especially important for markets like Europe, where demand for crops like soy has been linked to rising deforestation in places like the Brazilian Cerrado. In 2010, some 400 companies grouped under the Consumer Goods Forum agreed to the goal of achieving zero net deforestation by 2020 for the four commodities responsible for the majority of tropical deforestation: soy, palm oil, pulpwood and timber, and beef.Nearly a decade later, though, even as more companies have made similar pledges, “the results are sobering,” says Daan Wensing, program director for global landscapes at IDH-The Sustainable Trade Initiative. An analysis conducted by Climate Focus for the Prince of Wales’ International Sustainability Unit in 2018 concluded that, “there is no evidence that the rapidly increasing private-sector commitments have led to tangible reductions in deforestation.”Deforestation and conversion of native forestland from agricultural commodities is still on the rise, and as the self-imposed 2020 deadline draws nearer, the goal to reduce or even eliminate deforestation from supply chains will most certainly not be met.“We have only a year and a half to go until [the end of] 2020,” Wensing told Mongabay in an interview. “There needs to be way more urgency about how we move forward if we want to make real progress beyond 2020.”Illegal deforestation in the Awá Indigenous Reserve in Brazil’s Maranhâo state. Forests are illegally cleared by outsiders in preparation for cattle or crops. Image courtesy of Mário Vilela/FUNAI.‘Accountability loop’A recent report by Forest Trends found that of 865 companies identified as “the largest, most impactful, and/or most likely to have commitments,” fewer than 10 percent have actually committed to achieving zero deforestation for at least one commodity. Only one-third of those that have made such commitments have reported any progress.A new initiative, launched on June 12 in Utrecht, the Netherlands, by a coalition of civil society partners, aims to close the “accountability loop” that they say has prevented more than 500 companies from achieving progress to remove deforestation from their supply chains.“The Accountability Framework Initiative (AFI) is an attempt by the environmental community to provide a benchmark for the companies making these declarations of what a commitment ought to mean and how it can be implemented,” says David Cleary, director of global agriculture at The Nature Conservancy (TNC), one of the environmental NGOs that helped create the AFI. “Companies need these benchmarks to validate their commitments.”The Accountability Framework sets “common norms and guidance for establishing, implementing, and demonstrating progress on ethical supply chain commitments in agriculture and forestry.”Directed toward companies, it was developed to help make sure corporate commitments, activities, monitoring systems and reporting practices are in line with common and agreed-upon norms and best practices.“I don’t think companies can ignore when you have some of the biggest environmental organizations and human rights organization around the same table coming to an agreement on standards,” says Vanessa Jiménez, senior attorney at the Forest People’s Programme (FPP), who helped lead the human rights segment of the initiative.Munduruku children swimming in the Tapajós River in the heart of the Amazon. Protesters say that increasing development pressure by the bancada ruralista agribusiness lobby, which dominates Brazil’s congress and executive branch, has put the future of indigenous people across Brazil at risk. Image by Otávio Almeida/Greenpeace.From promises to actionWhile traceability of commodities was initially seen as a barrier to implementing corporate zero-deforestation commitments, various platforms now exist for commodity producers, consumers, investors and other organizations to monitor deforestation from commodities. These include Trase, an online supply-chain tracking tool developed by the Stockholm Environment Institute and Global Canopy, as well as the Global Forest Watch Pro platform announced in June and already used by more than 80 commodity-producing companies and organizations to monitor and track their commitments.Confusion over definitions and standards and a lack of accountability are widely seen as major reasons that zero-deforestation commitments have failed to deliver. One of the obstacles many companies encounter is finding a common definition of what a forest is, for example, and thus what constitutes deforestation. “Creating a common language, one that resonates better with companies, will make sustainability more accessible to businesses,” Wensing, whose organization was not involved in developing the AFI, says, adding, “I think the AFI will help in various ways.”Beyond just providing environmental standards, the AFI also brings on board human rights organizations like the FPP to draw up a set of ethical guidelines that look beyond traditional certification systems that have focused largely just on forests and native vegetation.“Zero-deforestation or no-conversion is … tremendously important, especially for climate change,” Jiménez says. “But that has to go together with respect for internationally recognized human rights. We know that some of the most vulnerable people [in these landscapes] are laborers and indigenous people.”The inclusion of human rights in the AFI is especially important in places like Brazil, where the new government is actively trying to dismantle legal protections for indigenous peoples.Industrial cultivation of soy on a Cerrado plantation. Image by Otto Ramos/Greenpeace.Zero deforestation for European marketThe AFI will also be key for Europe, where the debate around deforestation from agricultural commodities is heating up. Europe is an important market for forest-risk commodities such as soy and palm oil, making European demand one of the drivers of tropical deforestation.A recent report by IDH took stock of European imports of major agricultural commodities linked to deforestation. It found that while three-quarters of palm oil imported into Europe for consumption was responsibly produced, less than one-quarter of soy was.“Soy is an embedded product — you don’t see it,” Wensing says. “Consumers are hardly aware. The production of responsible soy far exceeds demand.”A large percentage of the soybeans that Europe imports comes from the Amazon and Cerrado regions in Brazil, two of the most active frontiers for deforestation in the world. In 2015, six European countries — Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and the U.K. — signed up to the Amsterdam Declarations, pledging to ensure deforestation-free and sustainable agricultural commodities in their supply chains by 2020. But in 2017, 15 percent of the soy imports by these six countries came from the MATOPIBA region in the Brazilian Cerrado, which made up 82 percent of Europe’s deforestation risk, according to an analysis by Forest500.Many of the companies active in the Brazilian Cerrado have committed to various zero-deforestation and environmental sustainability commitments,  but continue to be linked to deforestation.“The focus is not on banging the drum and getting more companies to sign on [to zero-deforestation commitments],” says Cleary, “but rather get those companies to start implementing their policies.”Banner image of deforestation for soy production in the Bolivian Amazon and Chaco, by Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay. Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsored Article published by hayatcenter_img agribusiness, Agriculture, Amazon Agriculture, Cattle Pasture, Corporate Environmental Transgressors, Corporate Responsibility, Corporate Social Responsibility, Deforestation, Drivers Of Deforestation, Environment, Food, Forests, Industrial Agriculture, Land Use Change, Palm Oil, Rainforests, Soy, Supply Chain, Sustainable Forest Management, Traditional People, Tropical Deforestation, Zero Deforestation Commitments last_img read more

Posted in ldobahmb

first_imgMongabay Latam confirmed that one of the new trafficking methods is the modification of fuel tanks in vehicles to allow room for more fuel, which is permitted by the Ministry of Transport and Communications.After Operation Mercury 2019, the communities of San Gabán (in the Puno region) and Amarakaeri (in the Madre de Dios region) were identified as areas that could see an influx of displaced illegal miners. Upon traveling through Lechemayo, a town in the Puno region of Peru, many visitors come to the conclusion that the town is a hub for fuel sales. The strong smell of fuel and the signs hanging on storefronts are just a few clues. The town’s combis, which are vans that normally carry passengers, instead hold barrels of fuel. The barrels are camouflaged because most of them will be transported from this unrestricted area to a region where fuel sales are currently banned: Madre de Dios. This is the region that has been hit hardest by illegal mining in the Amazon.The route is from Lechemayo to La Pampa, a setting that illustrates the impacts of illegal activity in Madre de Dios, and the vans filled with fuel must navigate through three different checkpoints managed by the police, agents from the tax department (known by its Spanish acronym SUNAT), and personnel from the energy regulator (OSINERGMIN). These obstacles are typically easy for traffickers to bypass.This short stretch of road is home to various illegal fuel pumps. A truck is supplying fuel to the area. Image by Vanessa Romo for Mongabay Latam.Although fuel trafficking has decreased since Operation Mercury 2019 and the execution of the Comprehensive Plan against Illegal Mining in La Pampa and Madre de Dios, the Puno region’s town of Lechemayo is the heart that pumps fuel to different arteries where illegal mining continues to devastate and contaminate the land. Furthermore, since the government intervention, new points of distribution have been opened.The heart of illegalityLike in many other communities in the Puno region, Lechemayo is driven by its fuel business. The problem is that in this town in the San Gabán district, this business often has an illegal destination. This small town, which can be traversed in 10 minutes, is not just a hub that makes fuel trafficking possible. It is also surrounded by a problem that appears much larger: illegal coca crops. On the horizon, along the buffer zone of Bahuaja-Sonene National Park, lie acres upon acres of the illegal coca.last_img read more

Posted in svmkhfch

first_imgArticle published by Karla Mendes Amazon Conservation, Amazon Destruction, Amazon People, Controversial, Corruption, Deforestation, Drivers Of Deforestation, Environment, Environmental Crime, Environmental Politics, Forests, Green, Indigenous Cultures, Indigenous Groups, Indigenous Peoples, Indigenous Rights, Land Conflict, Land Grabbing, Land Rights, Land Use Change, Rainforest Deforestation, Rainforest Destruction, Rainforests, Social Justice, Threats To The Amazon, Tropical Deforestation A task force is investigating the murder of indigenous leader Emyra Wajãpi, who was found dead on July 23, stabbed close to the Waseity indigenous village where he lived, in the northern state of Amapá, according to the Wajãpi Village Council (Apina).On the night of July 26, a group of 50 gold miners — some reportedly armed with rifles and machine guns — allegedly invaded the neighboring Yvytotõ indigenous village and threatened residents, forcing them to flee, Apina reported. Authorities are investigating the alleged incursion.The violence in Amapá came as far-right president Jair Bolsonaro continues pressing for legalization of mining and agribusiness operations within protected indigenous reserves. Indigenous groups argue that the president’s rhetoric encourages invasions of indigenous lands, escalating violence against native people.The indigenous villages where the alleged crimes took place are part of the Wajãpi indigenous reserve, an area of about 6,000 square kilometers (2,317 square miles), rich in gold and other minerals. Brazilian authorities are investigating the murder of an indigenous leader in the northern state of Amapá, in the Amazon region, where violence has escalated since a group of 50 gold miners — 13 of them reportedly heavily armed — allegedly invaded the Wajãpi indigenous reserve.On the morning of July 23, indigenous chief Emyra Wajãpi was found dead, stabbed close to the Waseity indigenous village where he lived, according to the Wajãpi Village Council (Apina). His death was not witnessed by any Wajãpi, Apina said in a statement.On the night of July 26, a group of non-indigenous men armed with rifles and machine guns reportedly invaded the neighboring Yvytotõ indigenous village and threatened residents, which forced them to flee to the nearby Mariry indigenous village, according to Apina.The indigenous villages where the alleged crimes took place are part of the Wajãpi indigenous reserve, an area of about 6,000 square kilometers (2,317 square miles), rich in gold and other minerals demarcated as a protected area in 1996. Half of its territory lies within the National Copper and Associates reserve (RENCA), which former President Michel Temer tried to abolish in September 2017. But Temer was forced to step back from his decision after international outcry accused him of selling out the Amazon to foreign mining interests.The Federal Police and Federal Prosecutor’s Office in Amapá have launched inquiries into the events inside the Wajãpi reserve, following violence claims publicized by Senator Randolfe Rodrigues on social media. After receiving requests for help from indigenous groups, Rodrigues demanded immediate action from authorities to prevent further direct confrontation between the invaders and indigenous communities.“We are in danger. We urged the Army and the Federal Police to help us. If no help is sent soon, we’ll need to act ourselves,” said Jawaruwa Wajãpi, an indigenous city councilor in Amapá state, in an audio message sent to Rodrigues.Jawaruwa Wajãpi, an indigenous city councilor in Amapá state, hunts in the Okakai region, in 2012. He reported the violence in the Wajãpi indigenous reserve. Image by Bruno Caporrino.The senator acknowledged that this is the first violent invasion of the Wajãpi reserve since it was demarcated in 1996. “We have to unite in order to avoid the bloodbath that is about to happen. We have been in contact with the indigenous leaders to ask them not to retaliate before government security forces arrive,” said Rodrigues.Controversial investigationsFUNAI, Brazil’s indigenous affairs agency, said in a statement that its officials are on the ground investigating both cases, along with agents from the Federal Police and the Special Police Operations Battalion (BOPE) of the Military Police of Amapá.According to FUNAI, a federal and state task force has been created to investigate indigenous conflicts in the region. However, the Federal Police’s latest report said that “there is no indication, so far, of the presence of armed group(s) in the area.” FUNAI noted that a detailed report will be forthcoming.Far-right President Jair Bolsonaro, who had not commented on the killing and invasion until Monday morning, told the Folha de São Paulo newspaper then that “there is no strong evidence” that the indigenous leader was murdered: “I will seek to unravel the case and show the truth about that,” Bolsonaro said.However, in a previous statement, FUNAI had said that the presence of invaders “is real and that tension… in the region is high” and asked the Wajãpi not to approach the non-indigenous invaders in order to avoid exacerbating the conflict.In its latest statement, Apina said that when police teams arrived at the Mariry and Yvytotõ villages, there were no invaders present, just their traces. “The police marked the points [using] GPS and took pictures…. [but] the police said they could not look for the invaders in the forest,” Apina reported, adding that the police then returned to Amapá’s capital, Macapá.Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro at a ceremony in Brasília. Image by Brazil’s Presidency via Flickr Commons (CC BY 2.0).Growing pressure to develop indigenous reservesThe violence in Amapá came as president Jair Bolsonaro continues pressing for the legalization of mining and agribusiness operations within protected indigenous reserves.On July 27, Bolsonaro said he plans to appoint his son, Eduardo Bolsonaro, as Brazil’s US ambassador so that he can attract investment from the United States to explore for minerals in indigenous territories. Last week, during a visit to Manaus, the president reasserted his goal of legalizing mining, despite the contamination and deforestation damage it has done to several indigenous reserves, including the territories of the Yanomami (in Roraima and Amazonas states), the Munduruku (in Pará), and the Cinta-larga people (in Rondônia).Kleber Karipuna, a representative of the National Articulation of the Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB), asserted a direct correlation between the invasion and the policies of the federal government. “The conflicts we see are related to everything this government has been doing in terms of indigenous rights, both in words and in action. When it encourages the population to bear guns, for example, it also encourages confrontation and the killing of indigenous people.”According to anthropologist Bruno Caporrino, who worked as an advisor in a research program with the Wajãpi people from 2009 to 2016, the indigenous group had been monitoring the presence of miners inside their territory, but up to now the incursions were occasional and discrete. In his view, the recent crimes may point to an alarming new trend whereby the invaders aim to send the following message: “From now on, this is how we are going to operate. With the endorsement of the State.”Banner image: Wajãpi indigenous people report invasion of gold miners in the Wajãpi reserve in the Brazilian state of Amapá. Image courtesy of the Amazon Cooperation Network (Rede de Cooperação Amazônica.)FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.center_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredlast_img read more

Posted in njlmtazq

first_imgArticle published by Rhett Butler Commentary, Conservation, Deforestation, Editorials, Environment, Environmental Politics, Forests, Green, Rainforest Destruction, Rainforests, Remote Sensing, Satellite Imagery, Tropical Forests In response to rising international criticism over a surge in forest clearing since the beginning of the year, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and officials in his administration have recently stepped up attacks on scientists at the country’s National Space Research Institute (INPE) for continuing to report transparently on deforestation in the Amazon.The expectation among civil society groups is that the Bolsonaro administration will soon stop releasing or start manipulating INPE’s deforestation data. But if Bolsonaro thinks that approach will pacify critics, he is gravely misleading himself: Bolsonaro will not be able to hide what’s happening in the Amazon from the rest of the world.From Planet’s constellation of satellites to NASA’s Landsat to the European Space Agency (ESA)’s Sentinel-1, today there are many eyes in the sky looking down at the Amazon.This post is a commentary. The views expressed are those of the author, not necessarily Mongabay. In response to rising international criticism over a surge in forest clearing since the beginning of the year, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and officials in his administration have recently stepped up attacks on scientists at the country’s National Space Research Institute (INPE) for continuing to report transparently on deforestation in the Amazon. On Friday, the administration sacked Ricardo Galvão, the head of INPE, and demanded the right to review deforestation data before it is released to the public. The administration has pointedly claimed, without evidence, that INPE is overstating the extent of destruction in the Amazon.The expectation among civil society groups is that the Bolsonaro administration will soon stop releasing or start manipulating INPE’s deforestation data. But if Bolsonaro thinks that approach will pacify critics, he is gravely misleading himself: Bolsonaro will not be able to hide what’s happening in the Amazon from the rest of the world.While INPE’s forest monitoring system is considered world-class and provides a 30-year baseline for tracking deforestation trends in the Amazon, it is not the only option when it comes to monitoring the Amazon. For example, the Brazilian NGO Imazon has long provided its own Amazon deforestation tracking system that offers a second set of numbers that serve as a check on official data. MapaBiomas, a multi-institutional initiative, analyzes data from multiple sources to shed light on the Amazon, while Global Forest Watch, a platform run by World Resources Institute, aggregates data from a range of institutions to track forest cover trends in the Brazilian Amazon and beyond. From Planet’s constellation of satellites to NASA’s Landsat to the European Space Agency (ESA)’s Sentinel-1, today there are many eyes in the sky looking down at the Amazon.The administration’s actions will therefore not blind the world to the environmental catastrophe currently underway in Earth’s largest rainforest. Instead, it will likely catalyze greater international condemnation of its policies and Brazilian companies. There are already signs of backlash: the European Union is reportedly reconsidering a landmark trade deal over rising deforestation. Bolsonaro’s sidelining of some of Brazil’s best scientists may thus ultimately undercut Brazilian business. Google Earth satellite image showing a forest fragment in a deforested landscape in Rondonia, Brazil.But beyond the immediate implications for Brazil’s reputation, if deforestation continues to accelerate in the Amazon, it could undermine the very ecosystem services that sustain Brazilian farmers and city dwellers alike. Scientists warn that should deforestation reach a critical threshold, the Amazon rainforest could tip toward a drier savanna ecosystem. That could shift the moisture conveyor belt that currently drives rainfall across southern South America northward, depriving metropolises like Sao Paulo and Rio, as well as the continent’s agricultural bread-basket, of the water on which they depend and leaving Brazil as the mercy of devastating droughts. That scenario can’t be good for the Brazilian economy in the long-run.Head image: Google Earth satellite image showing a deforestation, legal forest reserves, and agriculture in Rondonia, Brazil.center_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredlast_img read more

Posted in icxggaqr

first_imgIn February 2018, a greater one-horned rhino wandered from India’s Orang National Park into the nearby Burachapori-Laokhowa Wildlife Sanctuary.In September 2018, officials lost track of the rhino. In June 2019, the rhino’s buried remains, and a bullet, were discovered close to a guard camp in Burachapori-Laokhowa.Officials in Burachapori-Laokhowa did not officially report the rhino missing until the matter was leaked to the press more than a month later.Suspicion has been cast, variously, on forest staff, illegal settlers and illegal fishers. ASSAM, India — On Feb. 5, 2018, rangers at Orang National Park in the northeast Indian state of Assam received multiple phone calls from villagers reporting sightings of a stray rhino.Dawdling and lounging on one of the numerous islands in the Brahmaputra River, the rhino had traveled about 10 kilometers (6 miles) from the safety of the park, which harbors 102 greater one-horned rhinoceroses (Rhinoceros unicornis).It isn’t uncommon for rhinos to stray out of the protected habitats in Assam. A study in one sanctuary, Pobitora, found that as many as 40 percent of the rhinos there wandered in and out of the sanctuary’s borders on a daily basis. Monitoring these animals, and if necessary corralling them back to safety, is a regular part of the state forest department’s job.This particular case, however, would come to a bad end for both the rhino and the wildlife department. Eight months after the rhino first wandered out of Orang, rangers completely lost track of her — a lapse forest officials only publicly acknowledged after it was leaked to the media. She wasn’t seen again until June 2019, when her skeleton was unearthed in the vicinity of a forest guard encampment, leaving forest officials facing uncomfortable questions about what exactly happened to the animal, and why officials had suppressed and distorted information about her disappearance.A group of forest officials including Kaziranga National Park director P Shivkumar (second from left), Orang National Park administrator Ramesh Kumar Gogoi (third from left) and honorary wildlife warden Saurav Borkataky (fourth from left), were part of the vigil on the wandering rhino on the night 6 Feb, 2018. Image courtesy of Saurav Borkataky.A wandering rhinoIt all started ordinarily enough, recalls Ramesh Kumar Gogoi, the divisional forest officer of Mangaldai wildlife division and administrator of Orang National Park. Just past noon on Feb. 5, 2018, his office began fielding calls about a stray rhino from villagers near Singri, a cluster of picturesque hills squatting by the Brahmaputra River. Gogoi and his team leapt into action, he says: There had been several previous cases of rhinos being poached when they strayed out of the park to the char, or islands and sandbars, which dot the river, so they immediately rushed to try to bring the animal back to the park.Their attempts proved futile. For three days the rhino, a female sub-adult, moved from one char to another along the Brahmaputra. Finally, on Feb. 8, she made her way to the relative safety of another protected area, Burachapori-Laokhowa Wildlife Sanctuary, which sits on the river’s southern bank.“It was quite a spectacle,” Gogoi says. “Thousands of villagers gathered to see the rhino as she wandered in these char areas.”An ideal rhino habitat, Burachapori-Laokhowa WLS in the early 1980s harbored more than 70 rhinos, but all were wiped out by poachers during the political unrest of the Assam Agitation. In 2016, two rhinos, a mother and her daughter, were translocated to the sanctuary from Kaziranga National Park as part of the Indian Rhino Vision 2020 (IRV 2020) program, but both animals died within months, reportedly due to natural causes.So the newly arrived rhino became the sole, unchallenged representative of her tribe in Burachapori-Laokhowa.And she thrived.“The rhino was observed to be in a great health and was often seen wallowing in the marshes and pits that dot the Burachapori-Laokhowa landscape,” says Samarjit Ojah, a private citizen committed to conservation appointed by the government as an honorary wildlife warden of the Assam state forest department.Nearly eight months after her arrival in Burachapori-Laokhowa, the rhino disappeared.From that point forward, the official record of the rhino is scant. On the night of Sept. 24, she was seen trying to move outside of the sanctuary, according to an official report filed Nov. 3, 2018. The report, seen by Mongabay, notes that forest guards managed to keep her inside the sanctuary that night, but never saw her again and had no clues as to her whereabouts.Five days after that report was filed — roughly six weeks after the last known sighting of the rhino — sanctuary authorities officially informed their colleagues and superiors that the rhino was gone. On Nov. 8, Jitendra Kumar, then the divisional forest officer of Nagaon wildlife division, under whose jurisdiction Burachapori-Laokhowa sanctuary falls, sent a letter to Assam’s principal chief conservator of forests for wildlife, the chief wildlife warden, and the Orang park authorities. Kumar wrote that sanctuary officials had on Oct. 26 spotted “approximately 20 to 25 days older footprints” of the rhino on a char called Daora Tapu. The island is along the same route the rhino had followed when traveling out of Orang National Park. On the basis of these footprints, Kumar concluded that the rhino had crossed the Brahmaputra and returned to Orang, her former home.However, Orang authorities said they had no reason to believe the rhino had, in fact, returned. Divisional forest officer Gogoi, in his official response to Kumar’s report, wrote that his office “had no information or evidence of the re-entry of the rhino in Orang National Park.” In the letter, he noted that when the rhino strayed out of Orang in February 2018, it generated so much attention that a magistrate had to be brought in to control the rowdy crowds that gathered to see it. By contrast, during the animal’s supposed return to Orang along the same route, there wasn’t a single eyewitness, or any other signs of the rhino’s passage apart from a single set of footprints allegedly found by Burachapori-Laokhowa officials.Nonetheless, the official theory put forth by wildlife officials held that the rhino was safely back in Orang.This explanation was upended on June 24, 2019, when the rhino’s buried remains were unearthed, along with a bullet. Acting on a tip, India’s wildlife crime investigating agency, the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB), along with officials from the Nagaon wildlife division and Orang National Park, located the burial site inside Burachapori-Laokhowa WLS, near the Polashtoli forest guard camp.“It’s clear that the rhino fell victim to poachers as we recovered a used bullet near the skeletal remains. The footprints mentioned in my predecessor Kumar’s report must have been old footprints or that of another rhino,” says Ranjith Ram, the current divisional forest officer at Nagaon wildlife division.Poaching remains the biggest threat to rhinos in India: Kaziranga National Park, which hosts two-thirds of the greater one-horned rhinos left on Earth, saw nearly 100 rhinos poached from 2013 to 2018. And the present case is by no means the first time a rhino was shot very close to a guard post. In 2015, for example, a rhino was shot and buried close to a guard camp in Kaziranga National Park, an incident that resulted in the arrest of four forest guards.The rhino in question. After wandering out of Orang National Park, this female sub-adult eventually met her demise in the Burachapori-Laokhowa wildlife sanctuary.  Image courtesy of Saurav Borkataky.The disappearance of the rhino was hushed upThat the rhino was poached close to a forest guard camp was not the only fact that reflected poorly on the forest department. There were other aspects too, including tardy and inconsistent reporting.The last confirmed sighting of the rhino was on the night of Sept. 24, 2018, but news of the rhino’s disappearance was kept quiet for more than a month until the matter was leaked to the press.  On Oct. 27, 2018, the popular Assamese-language daily Dainik Agradoot ran an article, citing anonymous sources, reporting that the sole rhino in Burachapori-Laokhowa had gone missing and that forest officials in the sanctuary were keeping the matter under wraps.According to Arup Kalita, the journalist who wrote the article, the information came from a whistle-blower within the forest department who insisted his identity be protected. “Once the news was out, the Burachapori-Laokhowa authorities ringed me up informing that they have been conducting intensive search operations to track down the rhino,” Kalita told Mongabay. “Four days later, on October 31, they informed me that they had been able to locate footprints of the rhino on a char close to Orang National Park and the rhino had safely returned to its former home.”Kalita filed a story for the same newspaper on Nov. 1, 2018, reporting the development. “In my mind, however, I was suspicious,” he says. “Was it a mere coincidence that they’d found the elusive rhino’s footprints immediately after the story was out?”The publication of the articles in the local media was followed by an apparent flurry of activity in late October. But it was only on Nov. 8 that Kumar, the divisional forest officer in charge of Burachapori-Laokhowa, sent his official letter informing Assam’s principal chief conservator of forests and the authorities at Orang National Park that they’d lost track of the animal.Not only did this letter come after the Dainik Agradoot articles brought the matter to public attention, it also came 13 days after forest officials said they had found rhino footprints on a river island near Orang — thereby causing the loss of crucial time for Orang authorities to check whether animal had really returned to the park.“Had they been serious, they’d have immediately informed the Orang authorities,” says Saurav Borkataky, an honorary wildlife warden of the Assam state forest department at Tezpur. “The apparently deliberate delay in reporting raises questions on the roles of the forest officials in Burachapori-Laokhowa,” adds Borkataky, who was part of the team keeping constant vigil on the rhino when she first strayed out of Orang National Park in February 2018.When local media revealed that the rhino’s disappearance had gone unreported for more than a month, and later that her skeletal remains were found close to a forest guard camp, it raised suspicion in some quarters that officials may have somehow been complicit in the rhino’s death.“Why would they hush up the matter for so long if they’ve no hidden interest in it?” asks Tezpur-based environmental activist Dilip Nath.Though it may sound like speculation, concern about forest officials’ involvement in wildlife crime has been echoed by no less than the office of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. A recently released report on the management of India’s tiger reserves put a spotlight on an alleged forest official-rhino poacher nexus in Kaziranga National Park, which is also a tiger reserve. “The poaching of three rhinos on 2 and 4 November 2017 took place in the night, barely 200 m from Tunikati anti-poaching camp, in Burhapahar range, Kaziranga Tiger Reserve,” notes the report, prepared by the Wildlife Institute of India and the National Tiger Conservation Authority on behalf of the government and released by Modi on July 29. It notes that with 178 anti-poaching camps in a 911-square-kilometer (352-square-mile) reserve, each post is responsible for patrolling just 5 square kilometers (1.9 square miles). “Given the resources at the command of the personnel it should not be difficult to guard the area effectively,” the report reads. “Such poaching so close to the camp leads to a suspicion of the involvement of officials.”There have also been previous instances where forest guards faced charges in cases of rhino poaching. In addition to the 2015 case that saw four current or former forest guards arrested in Kaziranga, a forest guard in Orang National Park was arrested in 2015 for his alleged involvement in a rhino poaching incident, though he was later acquitted.Even high-ranking officials such divisional forest officers have been convicted of wildlife crimes and corruption. In 2016, police seized illegally hoarded tiger skin, deer skin, ivory and other wildlife products in the house of a divisional forest officer who had been caught accepting bribes.One-horned rhinos roaming in Kaziranga National Park. Photo by Udayan Dasgupta for Mongabay.A controversial photograph and other inconsistenciesThe location of the rhino’s body and the tardy reporting by Burachapori-Laokhowa WLS are not the only red flags critics point to.Many are skeptical about the authenticity of the rhino footprints the Burachapori-Laokhowa officials claimed to have spotted on the char close to Orang National Park. The report submitted by Kumar says the footprints were 20 to 25 days old when they were spotted on Oct. 26, 2018. But is it really possible that rhino footprints can remain intact for that long on the loose, sandy soil of a char during the month of October, which sees considerable rainfall in Assam? “Usually, it’s very unlikely. A single strong downpour washes away the surface soil on these char islands,” says honorary warden Borkataky.More questions have been raised by a photograph included with Kumar’s report as evidence that a team of forest officials and civil administrators verified the footprints two days after they were first found.The report states that “on 28/10/18 K.S. Dekaraja, AFS ACF, Sri Samarjit Ojha (honorary wildlife warden) along with Shri K Sharma, ACS, ADC, Circle Officer, Tezpur visited the same area and confirmed the same.” While there is no mention of the photograph in the report itself, it was obtained by activist Dilip Nath through India’s Right to Information Act.Although Shri K. Sharma is named in the report as a witness, he does not actually appear in the group photograph. Instead, a different person with the exact same title—“ACS, ADC, Sonitpur” (meaning Assam Civil Service, Assistant District Commissioner, Sonitpur) can be seen, namely Nabajyoti Ojha.When Mongabay spoke to K. Sharma, named in the report as having verified the rhino footprints, he denied visiting the spot, or having any knowledge of the incident.Honorary wildlife warden Sri Samarjit Ojah, who does appear in the photo and was part of the team, says they were in the area on Oct. 28 for a land survey that was in no way connected to the search for the missing rhino. According to Ojah, Ali Hussain (who also appears in the photo), the Burachapori Laokhowa forest official who according to Kumar’s report had spotted the footprints two days before, was accompanying the team and insisted they also visit the spot where the rhino footprints were found. “The photograph taken on the spot was just a personal memento and not meant to be used as an evidence for an official report,” Ojah says.Nabajyoti Ojha, currently an administrator in Mangaldai district (who appears in the photograph but is not mentioned in the report), also told Mongabay he was unaware that the photograph was being used by Kumar as official evidence. Like Samarjit, he said the purpose of their visit was a land survey unconnected to the case of the missing rhino.Both told Mongabay that they were in no position to verify and “confirm” that those were rhino footprints. “I’m neither an Asian rhino expert, nor a forest official. How would I verify rhino footmarks?” Ojha asks.Moreover, in the official letter Kumar sent on Nov. 8 to his superiors informing them about the rhino’s disappearance and possible return to Orang, the date on which the pachyderm went missing was stated as “25/11/2018” — 17 days into the future. While this appears to be a clerical error and can be discounted as a mistake, activist Nath says, “Coming from a senior forest official this demonstrates a lack of care and seriousness towards the matter, if not anything else.”Jitendra Kumar, currently a divisional forest officer at Guwahati Wildlife Division, did not respond to multiple requests for comment by phone and in writing.Orang National Park, located in northern Assam is home to around 100 rhinos. Until the wandering rhino’s remains were unearthed, the official theory held that she had made her way back to her original home in Orang. Image by Bikash Kumar Bhattacharya for Mongabay.More theories about the rhino’s deathForest officials are not the only group being viewed with suspicion after the discovery of the rhino’s remains. There are two additional theories afloat: One implicates illegal settlers, and the other illegal fishermen operating inside the sanctuary.Since the 1950s, Assam has lost 4,270 square kilometers (1,822 square miles) of land to erosion, more than 7 percent of the state’s total area. This partially explains why more than 22 percent of the state’s forest areas are under encroachment.In the Burachapori-Laokhowa sanctuary, some 32.5 square kilometers (12.5 square miles) are under encroachment. Most of these encroachers are flood refugees, former char dwellers ravaged by flood, says Abu Bakkar Siddique, who lives in Juria Kaliadinga, a village on the fringes of the sanctuary. “The mighty Brahmaputra erodes away massive tracts of land and submerges numerous char islands every year, as well as creating some new sandbars along its course. Many of these people rendered landless by erosion have encroached upon forestland.”Both the authorities and the settlers recognize that there are illegal settlements, says Siddique. “However, as the government has failed to rehabilitate these flood-ravaged people, there is a tacit understanding: the settlers will be allowed to continue to live in the area they’re occupying as the land has already converted into agricultural fields and there’s no forest cover on it, but there should be no further encroachment. And the people respected it.”When Jitendra Kumar took charge of the sanctuary as a divisional forest officer, he said he had “plans to reclaim and reforest these encroached lands” and gave the go-ahead for an eviction drive in January this year. The move led to a standoff between the forest officers and the illegal settlers, with the latter attacking Kumar and other forest officials.Because Kumar initiated the eviction drive, strong resentment brewed against him among illegal encroachers, says Ali Hussain, the Burachapori-Laokhowa forest staffer who supposedly spotted the footprints of the missing rhino. “Therefore, some angry settlers, with the help of hired guns, may have conspired in killing the rhino near a forest camp to smear Kumar and the forest department.”However, Siddique and other villagers in encroached settlements Mongabay spoke with denied this allegation as “an utter nonsense and entirely baseless.”The other theory points to the illegal fishermen operating inside the sanctuary.Dilwar Hussain, a member of the local conservation nonprofit Laokhowa Burachapori Biodiversity Conservation Society, says there has been rampant illegal fishing in the numerous beels, or water bodies, inside the sanctuary. “Before the Burachapori-Laokhowa forest was accorded the status of a WLS in 1995, the government used to sell fishing licenses to fish in the waterbodies. However, it became illegal after the forest was accorded protected status. But fishing in the sanctuary’s numerous waterbodies never really ceased,” says Hussain, whose own father once held a license to fish in Burachapori-Laokhowa.Fishing in and around the protected area is a vital source of livelihood for a huge number of people near the wildlife sanctuary, says Siddique. “There are two types of fisher: small, subsistence fishers and commercial fishers who go for relatively big-scale fishing. While the authorities generally don’t take much issue with the first type, they remain vigilant on the second type. When the rhino arrived in the area, it was the commercial fishers whose activities were perturbed and came to a halt. Therefore, some forest officials are propounding the theory that some of these fishermen might have ganged up with poachers to weed out the obstacle — the rhino.”In this 2016 image, forest officials are seen seizing fishing nets and equipment in Roumari beel inside Burachapori-Laokhowa WLS. Image courtesy of Laokhowa Burhachapori Conservation Society.Ongoing investigationAmid this speculation, the Assam state forest department and the WCCB are conducting a joint investigation into the rhino’s disappearance and subsequent death. Mongabay has learned that so far investigators have identified three figures of interest, all from the nearby village of Phutaljhar. Investigators, who are now questioning them, refuse to divulge further information about the case, but local sources allege the three men have records of involvement in past wildlife crimes, including illegal fishing inside the sanctuary.Meanwhile, wildlife activists and residents Mongabay spoke to demand what they call “a free and fair investigation” into the actions of the forest officials.Without a transparent and impartial investigation, honorary wildlife warden Borkataky and activist Nath say they fear the entire episode could inflame existing tensions between residents and forest officials. Historically, people on the fringes of what is now the Burachapori-Laokhowa sanctuary depended heavily on fishing in local beels. Losing access to these bodies of water and other resources that now fall within the protected area put already impoverished people under further strain, and led to widespread resentment.On top of that, public distrust of forest officials is widespread in Assam. High-profile cases of corruption among rangers and forest officials are well known among the locals.An investigation that appears to probe only local groups like fishers and settlers while ignoring the possibility of official corruption could deepen this distrust and aggravate community-conservation conflict, they say. “Therefore, the matter needs to be handled cautiously so that those who are responsible for the rhino’s death are brought to book and at the same time the community relations aren’t negatively affected,” Borkataky says.“A single blot can overshadow the unrelenting hard work of hundreds of rangers working day in and day out to protect the rhino in the state’s four protected rhino habitats,” Nath says. “That’s why we are demanding a fair investigation that is unencumbered by the baggage of politics.”FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page. Animals, Biodiversity, Conservation, Environment, Featured, Mammals, One-horned Rhinos, Poaching, Protected Areas, Rhinos, Wildlife, Wildlife Trade, Wildlife Trafficking Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredcenter_img Article published by Isabel Estermanlast_img read more

Posted in gntmurcj

first_imgArticle published by Genevieve Belmaker According to the report’s primary author, forested areas in Colombia that are less than 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) away from illicit crops are most likely areas to be deforested.Deforestation linked to armed conflict and coca cultivation was most prevalent in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, La Macarena, and San Lucas mountains, and in the regions of Tumaco and Catatumbo.All areas impacted in Colombia are those with high biodiversity and conservation value. Many of the world’s armed conflicts occur in areas with high biodiversity, according to a 2009 study published in Biological Conservation. The study found that more than 80 percent of such conflicts occurred in biodiversity hotspots, yet their impact on flora and fauna have rarely been studied since.Colombia is home to so many species that it is considered “megadiverse,” and it has also experienced relatively high levels of armed conflict. A new study published in Biological Conservation analyzed the relationship between armed conflict and deforestation in Colombia between 2000 and 2015. The study also involved 17 other related variables, including the distribution of coca crops, the plant from which cocaine is produced.One of the study’s main conclusions was that “[d]eforestation was positively associated with armed conflict intensity and proximity to illegal coca plantations,” especially in the Colombian Amazon. Higher amounts of deforestation were also associated with proximity to mining concessions, oil wells, and road networks.These maps published in the study show deforested areas, with red indicating more deforestation than green. Image courtesy of Negret et al., 2019.The effects of armed conflictPablo José Negret, a Colombian biologist at the University of Queensland in Australia, was the lead author of the study. “It has been speculated that there is a relationship between armed conflict and deforestation, but it had never been analyzed statistically. We showed that with more armed conflict comes more deforestation. Additionally, we analyzed coca crops, which had been done before. Researcher Liliana Dávalos has done lots of work with that topic,” Negret told Mongabay.Rather than ranking which of the 17 variables had the most impact on Colombia’s deforestation, Negret and the other researchers focused on determining the relationship between the variables and the deforestation patterns. The study involved researchers from the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and the Alexander von Humboldt Biological Resources Research Institute (IAVH) in Colombia.The 17 variables used in the study included elevation, slope, biotic region, soil erosion, department, population, the number of armed conflicts in the area, and whether the area was part of a national park, indigenous reserve, or Afro-Colombian collective land. The rest of the variables involved measuring the distance to the nearest previously deforested area, navigable river, paved road, unpaved road, coca plantation, mining concession, and exploited oil well.“For example, we found that forested areas fewer than 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) away from illicit crops have a higher probability of being deforested than those that are farther away. Additionally, forests fewer than 50 kilometers (31 miles) away from a road have a higher probability of being deforested,” Negret said.The Colombian Amazon after the land was deforested and set on fire. Image courtesy of the Foundation for Conservation and Sustainable Development (FCDS).The study found that when all 17 variables are considered, the deforestation in Colombia is mainly concentrated in the foothills of the Amazon and in the Andes region. However, when only the presence of armed conflict and coca crops is considered, the greatest amounts of deforestation are within the Amazon and some parts of Chocó department. “This makes sense because coca is an illegal crop, so people plant it in areas that are difficult to access, but this ends up affecting well-preserved primary forests,” Negret said.Martine Maron, a professor from the University of Queensland and co-author of the study, said the relationship between armed conflict and deforestation is complex.The authors say they hope this study will help generate more efficient and appropriate actions to save the Colombian forests that are at a high risk of disappearing in the short or medium term.The regions most affectedAccording to the study, deforestation linked to armed conflict and coca cultivation was most prevalent in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, La Macarena, and San Lucas mountains, and in the regions of Tumaco and Catatumbo. These are “all areas of high biodiversity and conservation importance.”In regions like La Macarena, where the now-disbanded Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) historically had influence and partial control, deforestation has increased since the signing of a peace agreement in 2016 between the rebels and the Colombian government. The authors of the study say this increase is likely caused by a lack of governance in the area since the FARC’s exit. “Strengthening of governance and local institutions in those areas is therefore urgent to stop forest loss,” the authors write in the study.Deforestation in the northeastern Colombian Amazon. Image courtesy of the Foundation for Conservation and Sustainable Development (FCDS).Coca cultivation and armed conflict are related because coca crops function as an important source of income for many illegal armed groups, increasing their ability to operate. These groups often cut down trees to create more space to cultivate coca, and more trees cut down means more income.Negret offered a potential solution in response to the study’s findings. “We analyzed the effects of the protected areas, indigenous reservations, and Afro-Colombian territories, and we found that these places have the most significant impact in relation to preventing deforestation. It would be good to generate conservation projects with these communities,” Negret said.The study suggested that national parks are generally effective in preventing deforestation, “even in areas of high deforestation pressure.” However, the parks that act as a corridor between the Amazon, the Orinoquía natural region, and the Andes are being deforested due to land grabbing and extensive livestock practices. A recent report by the Foundation for Conservation and Sustainable Development (FCDS) found that between April 2018 and March 2019, the Sierra de la Macarena Natural National Park lost more than 3,000 hectares (7,400 acres) of forest. The authors said that “the creation of protected areas in regions of high deforestation pressure is clearly necessary.”The loss of primary forest in four protected areas between 2015 and 2018. Image courtesy of Hansen/UMD/Google/USGS/NASA/RUNAP.Negret speculated that the cultivation of illegal crops “is the only profitable option that exists there. It is all connected to the lack of governance, and the government needs to look for alternatives to break these cycles.”Finally, the study called for more precise information regarding the armed conflict issue in Colombia, since it is fundamental for understanding its impact on deforestation and biodiversity loss.Citations:Negret, P. J., Sonter, L., Watson, J. E., Possingham, H. P., Jones, K. R., Suarez, C., … Maron, M. (2019). Emerging evidence that armed conflict and coca cultivation influence deforestation patterns. Biological Conservation, 108176. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.07.021Hanson, T., Brooks, T. M., Da Fonseca, G. A. B., Hoffmann, M., Lamoreux, J. F., Machlis, G., … Pilgrim, J. D. (2009). Warfare in biodiversity hotspots. Conservation Biology, 23(3), 578-587. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01166.xBanner image of burned land and roads in the middle of the Amazon, courtesy of the Foundation for Conservation and Sustainable Development (FCDS). Conflict, Featured, Forests, Governance, Government, Land Conflict, Rainforests, Resource Conflict, Tropical Forests, War center_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredlast_img read more

Posted in gntmurcj

first_imgArticle published by Xavier Bartaburu JBS, Marfrig and Frigol, among the world’s biggest meat producers, have been buying cattle from ranches associated with illegal deforestation and slave labor, an investigation by Repórter Brasil has found.The ranches in question are located in southern Pará state, the epicenter of the fires currently ravaging the Amazon, providing further evidence of the link between deforestation for cattle pasture and forest fires.The three companies say the information that would have flagged the ranches as problematic were not publicly available at the time they made their purchase, and point to their commitments to not source from ranches linked to environmental crimes.But a lack of animal traceability allows ranchers to use legalized farms to conceal sales of cattle raised in illegal areas through false declarations of origin, in a practice known as “cattle washing.” This story was produced via a co-publishing partnership between Mongabay and Repórter Brasil and can be read in Portuguese here.Brazilian meatpacking giants JBS, Marfrig and Frigol bought cattle from ranches associated with illegal practices, including deforestation and slave labor, an investigation by Repórter Brasil has found.The ranches in question are located in Brazil’s Pará state, the epicenter of the ongoing fires ravaging the Amazon, providing further evidence of the link between deforestation for cattle pasture and burning.In February, Marfrig, the world’s second-biggest beef producer, received cattle at its slaughterhouse in Tucumã, Pará, from the ranch of Adriano José de Mattos, Repórter Brasil discovered from control documents. Frigol, another major player in the industry, also purchased cattle from Mattos between March and July this year.But in January this year, 26 days before Marfrig’s purchase, inspectors from IBAMA, the Brazilian environmental agency, found cattle from Mattos’s ranch grazing in a 106-hectare (262-acre) illegally deforested area inside the Triunfo do Xingu Environmental Protection Area (EPA). The site had already been embargoed three years earlier for illegal deforestation. According to the inspectors, Mattos’s Limeira Ranch, located 3 kilometers (1.9 miles) away, served as the operational base for encroaching into the area.Marfrig told Repórter Brasil that information about the charges and embargoes against Mattos had not yet been made publicly available at the time of its purchase. “We depend on information from IBAMA’s website. This should happen in real time,” said Paulo Pianez, the company’s sustainability director. Marfrig says it is committed to zero deforestation in the Amazon, to monitoring all suppliers via satellite, and to not purchasing cattle from areas embargoed for environmental crimes (see Marfrig’s full statement).But according to the IBAMA website, the embargo against Mattos was entered into the public list of embargoed areas on Jan. 29 — before Marfrig’s purchase. Repórter Brasil contacted IBAMA for comment about Marfrig’s statement, but received no response as of the time this article was published. Frigol, in turn, told reporters that it adopts “all necessary controls to prevent any purchase of animals that are not in conformity with standards from being slaughtered in its industrial plants” and that there are no illegalities in its purchase of cattle from Adriano Mattos (see Frigol’s full statement). Mattos could not be reached for comment.The Triunfo do Xingu EPA was the conservation unit with the largest number of forest fires this year. The two municipalities that it straddles, São Félix do Xingu and Altamira, rank first and third in the number of fires respectively. São Félix do Xingu is also home to the largest cattle population in Brazil, at 2.2 million heads, according to 2017 data from the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE).Fire is commonly used to clear land for cattle pasture, which is the biggest cause of deforestation in the Amazon. “Those are forest burnings to make pastures,” said Pará Governor Helder Barbalho about the recent fires in his state. Nine out of 10 fires in agribusiness areas occur on cattle pastures, according to a Greenpeace analysis of data from Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE).Fire in the state of Pará. Image by Agencia Pará/Press Release.‘Dirty list’JBS, the world’s largest meatpacking company, also operates in the southeastern Amazonian region that includes the Triunfo do Xingu EPA. One of its cattle suppliers there is José Ronan Martins da Cunha, who was fined by IBAMA in April this year for destroying 50 hectares (124 acres) of native vegetation within the conservation area. He was also charged with preventing the natural regeneration of the forest in an area previously embargoed for illegal deforestation.In July 2019, JBS’s unit in Tucumã purchased cattle from Cunha. Repórter Brasil found that the animals came from a property, the Barro Branco Ranch, located outside the EPA. What makes the purchase problematic, however, is that, in 2016, a Ministry of Labor inspection charged Cunha with using slave labor at his JK Farm in São Félix do Xingu. That landed him on the federal government’s “dirty list” of slave labor — a public registry that names and shames employers engaged in any form of forced or indentured labor. They remain on the list for two years and are removed if there is no recurrence of slave labor.Several companies, including JBS, have publicly pledged not to source from producers on the “dirty list.” Cunha was on the registry until April 2019, which means the JBS purchases found by Repórter Brasil occurred after he had been removed from the list.Reached for comment, JBS said it does not buy animals from farms involved in deforestation or invasion of indigenous lands, embargoed by IBAMA, or using child labor or slavery-like conditions. The company also said that “it maintains one of the largest private monitoring systems for suppliers in the world, which covers about 450,000 km² by analyzing satellite images of the properties.”Rangers engaged in illegal deforestation sell their cattle to other ranchers who specialize in the final pre-slaughter fattening, thus obscuring the provenance of the cattle purchased by the major meatpackers. Image by Marcio Isensee e Sá/Repórter Brasil.Lack of controlJBS and Marfrig are the world’s two biggest meat producers. In addition to dozens of slaughterhouses in Brazil, they also have plants in North America, Europe and Australia. Their global expansion gained momentum during administrations led by the Workers’ Party, through multimillion-dollar loans provided by the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES). The Brazilian government is one of the main shareholders in both companies.Frigol, in turn, is Brazil’s fourth-largest meatpacking company, with slaughterhouses in the states of Pará, Goiás and São Paulo. The company says it exports to more than 60 countries.All three companies say they have adopted policies to ensure their purchases are free of so-called pirate cattle — livestock from areas that have been illegally deforested. However, there are challenges to achieving this goal. Lack of animal traceability allows ranchers to use legalized farms to conceal sales of cattle raised in illegal areas through false declarations of origin, a practice is known as “cattle washing.”In addition, ranchers who deforest can sell their cattle to other ranchers who specialize in the final pre-slaughter fattening. Meatpacking companies do not have effective mechanisms in place to ascertain where such producers have purchased their animals. In the state of Pará, JBS and Frigol have signed an agreement with federal prosecutors pledging to observe a series of criteria to avoid cattle from areas with illegal deforestation, slave labor, invasions of public lands or traditional communities. The latest audit on the deal, published by the prosecutors, found evidence of irregularities in 19 percent of JBS’s purchases and 31 percent of Frigol’s. Marfrig did not sign the agreement and therefore did not undergo such an audit. The company, however, said that other external audits ensure its practices conform with its sustainability commitments.Banner image: An analysis by Greenpeace based on data from INPE, Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, found that nine out of 10 fires in agribusiness areas occurred on cattle pastures. Image by Marcio Isensee e Sá/Repórter Brasil.  Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredcenter_img Agriculture, Amazon, Amazon Agriculture, Carbon Emissions, Cattle Ranching, Certification, Conservation, Deforestation, Environment, Forestry, Forests, Green, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Rainforests, Remote Sensing, Rhett Butler, Saving Rainforests, Saving The Amazon, Sustainable Development, Sustainable Forest Management last_img read more

Posted in vlpnbmjn

first_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsored Article published by Hans Nicholas Jong Banner image: A worker takes a chainsaw to an oil palm on an illegal plantation in Tenggulun, Indonesia. Image by Junaidi Hanafiah for Mongabay. Editor’s note: The reporter traveled to Brussels as a guest of Milieudefensie. Milieudefensie does not have any editorial influence on this or any other story Mongabay produces.FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page. Biodiesel, Bioenergy, Biofuels, Carbon Emissions, Climate, Climate Change, Deforestation, Drivers Of Deforestation, Environment, Forest Loss, Forests, Global Trade, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Oil Palm, Palm Oil, Palm Oil And Biodiversity, Plantations, Rainforest Deforestation, Threats To Rainforests, Trade, Tropical Deforestation, Tropical Forests A European member of parliament says the bloc isn’t concerned about threats by Indonesia and Malaysia to file a trade complaint over an EU policy to phase out palm oil-based biofuels by 2030.The two Southeast Asian countries supply 85 percent of the world’s palm oil, and have denounced the EU policy as discriminatory.The EU has justified its decision on the environmental impact of palm oil production, notably the large-scale deforestation to clear land for palm plantations.Concerns have also been raised that Indonesia’s response of boosting its domestic production of palm-based biodiesel, which a minister calls “green fuel,” could actually result in a net increase in carbon emissions. BRUSSELS — The European Parliament will proceed with phasing out palm oil-based biofuel by 2030 despite threats of retaliatory action by Indonesia and Malaysia, the world’s biggest producers of the ubiquitous vegetable oil.The policy was adopted earlier this year to curb the use of crops that cause deforestation in transportation fuel, over concerns that their production contributes to global carbon emissions and thus exacerbates climate change. But both Indonesia and Malaysia have warned of restricting European imports and other trade reprisals should the phase-out go ahead.Bas Eickhout, a Dutch member of the European Parliament, said he’s not worried that Indonesia and Malaysia will take their grievances to the World Trade Organization (WTO).“To be very honest, bring it on on WTO,” he told reporters at the European Parliament in Brussels. “We have very clear environmental concerns, very clear environmental reasons why we say this [palm oil-based biodiesel] can’t be labeled as renewable.”Eickhout said he’s confident the WTO would rule in favor of the EU’s meticulously planned palm biofuel phase-out.“I think if that goes through, Europe will not back track,” he said. “This is a great policy, and the only thing that can challenge it is of course WTO. But as I said, it’s so nuanced draft that we expect WTO will say that it’s allowed in WTO. You are allowed to do specific policies for environmental reasons. We expect WTO will let that happen.”Eickhout said the policy was aimed at preventing unsustainable palm oil from being labeled as a renewable energy source.“We came to the conclusion that the current palm oil isn’t sustainable,” he said. “So what we’re saying is that palm oil can’t be used to comply as a renewable energy. Still palm oil can be imported, can be used for other purposes, but if you import it for renewable energy, it wouldn’t be counted.”A portrait photo of Bas Eickhout, a member of the European Parliament from the Netherlands. Image courtesy of Jeroensteeman/Wikimedia Commons.Nuanced policyEickhout said research showed that current palm oil production wasn’t fully sustainable yet because it still caused a lot of deforestation for palm plantations.“Palm oil is having a huge impact on deforestation, it’s playing a big role,” he said, emphasizing that this was a scientific fact. For a product with such a significant environmental impact, he said, “it’s not good to label that as renewable energy. That doesn’t make any sense.”To ensure that only unsustainable palm oil is phased out from the European biofuel market, the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive II (RED II) exempts smallholders who produce palm oil in a sustainable way, Eickhout said. By incentivizing these producers, he said, “we can promote the sustainable versions.”Eickhout said the nuances of the policy were often overlooked in the debate, leading critics to label the EU policy as a ban on palm oil.“Let me be very clear … there is no ban,” he said. “There is a spin of the government that there is a ban.”EU member states will still be able to import and use palm oil-based biodiesel, but it will no longer be considered a renewable fuel, hence won’t be for the attendant subsidies. The process will also be gradual. Member states’ maximum share of palm oil-based biodiesel that can be counted toward EU renewable transport targets for national governments (and thus eligible for subsidies) will be capped at 2019 levels until 2023. After that, it will be progressively phased out of renewable targets to zero percent by 2030.A filling station selling biodiesel. Photo by Robert Couse-Baker/flickr.Other marketsIndonesia and Malaysia, which together supply about 85 percent of the world’s palm oil, say they will jointly challenge the EU policy through the WTO’s dispute settlement body and other avenues, calling the decision a form of discrimination.An Indonesian government official recently said they planned to file their complaint with the WTO as soon as early November.“The Indonesian government must prepare to face RED II since this rule will have a negative impact on the palm oil industry in Indonesia,” Sondang Anggraini, the head of trade advocacy at the Indonesian Ministry of Trade, said as quoted by the Antara news agency. “It is important for us to explore further the preparation and legal position of Indonesia in facing the implementation phase of the EU-RED II.”As it braces for the phase-out in the EU, its second-biggest market, Indonesia is looking to expand palm oil exports elsewhere, including China, its third-largest market. (India is the biggest buyer of Indonesian palm oil.)Indonesia is also pushing for increased domestic consumption of biodiesel that contains palm oil. The so-called B20 fuel (a ratio of 20 percent palm biofuel to 80 percent diesel) is targeted for nationwide distribution through fuel stations operated by the state-owned oil company.The government aims to increase the content of palm oil in biodiesel to 30 percent by early 2020, and to 50 percent by the end of 2020. It targets all biodiesel sold in the country in three years’ time to be fully palm biofuel, or B100 — one of the most ambitious biofuel transition programs in the world.Indonesia also aims to steer more production of palm oil into aviation fuel, tapping demand from travelers for lower flight carbon footprints. The U.N.’s International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO) has proposed increasing the use of biofuels for passenger planes, aiming for half of jet fuel to come from biofuels by 2050.Indonesia’s environment minister, Siti Nurbaya Bakar, said in an op-ed in the Kompas daily that the country was building refineries to produce “green fuel from living and organic materials to reduce fossil fuel.”Cleared forest for oil palm plantation in Rawa Singkil Wildlife Reserve. Image by Junaidi Hanafiah/Mongabay-Indonesia.Call for cooperationEickhout said he was aware that the EU’s phase-out plan could push Indonesia and Malaysia to seek out other markets China and boost their domestic uses of palm oil. Nevertheless, he said, preventing deforestation and producing palm oil sustainably are in the best interests of everyone.Indonesia and Malaysia are among the countries that signed up to the Paris climate agreement, he noted, which commits them to “tackle all the impacts of climate change.”“Deforestation is an important contributor to climate change,” Eickhout said. “I think it’s in all of our best interest to prevent deforestation.”He added it was important to ensure that palm oil producers’ expected pivot away from the EU market wouldn’t lead to further deforestation or undermine the climate agenda.“We hope of course with this [phase out], we are getting into a dialogue,” he said. “How can we make sure that that will be done without deforestation? But of course only through dialogue, we can make sure that other countries are following that road [Paris Agreement] as well. That’s what we’re trying to pursue. And we are not having the idea to police the world, that’s not the point.”He also acknowledged efforts by Indonesia and Malaysia to address environmental concerns over the production of palm oil and improve its global reputation.Indonesian President Widodo last year declared a moratorium on the issuance of new permits for oil palm plantations, while Malaysia is mulling a cap on the country’s total palm oil estate at 60,000 square kilometers (23,200 square miles), an area just 2.5 percent larger than currently planted.“What we see is there are now policies, changes in policies are putting in place,” Eickhout said. “I think that’s a good development. But we still have to look at the fact that there’s still a huge deforestation for palm oil purposes.”He cited the spate of forest fires currently raging across large swaths of Indonesia, in what’s become the worst fire and haze season since 2015. Much of the fires were started to clear land for plantations, primarily oil palms. The recurring nature of the problem, Eickhout said, showed the vulnerability of Southeast Asia’s forests and the importance of sustainable forest management.“And it also shows bad management and climate change together are really piling up and making these things happen,” he said. “Not only in Indonesia. We have the same discussion in Brazil, but also in Europe. Now we’re even seeing forest fires in the north.”He called on Indonesia and Malaysia to work together with the EU, rather than fighting it.“We need to make sure Indonesia and in Malaysia realize that instead of fighting this, it’s better to join and make sure that we are making our production more sustainable,” he said. “And that’s the only thing that we want to achieve.”Smoke rises from an oil palm plantation on a peatland in Sumatra. Image by Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay.Increased emissions Achieving more sustainable production of palm oil will require proper land-use plan, according to Brendan Mackey, the director of Griffith University’s Climate Change Response Program.“Because our land is a finite resource, we have to use it very effectively,” he told Mongabay. “We can no longer waste the land we have. We have to make the best use of it. And that’s difficult because there are many different uses, and valid uses of the land.”With the expansion of palm oil plantations being one of the primary drivers of deforestation in Indonesia, there’s a possibility that the government’s biodiesel mandate would require palm oil producers to expand across more land and clear more rainforests.“Growing plants for biofuel is good, but not if it’s at the expense of other things, [such as] primary forests, [and] growing food,” said Mackey, who is also the coordinating lead author of the sixth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).Clearing forests for biofuel will release far more carbon into the atmosphere than would be reduced by replacing fossil fuels. This net increase in emissions would negate the climate purpose of switching to biodiesel.The B100 program, for instance, could lead to an increase in palm oil demand to 56.98 million tons annually by 2025, which in turn would encourage the clearing of 72,000 square kilometers (27,800 square miles) if land if plantation productivity stays the same, according to a study by the World Resources Institute (WRI).Another study, by the Indonesia-based think tank Traction Energy Asia, found that carbon emissions from the production of crude palm oil (CPO) for use in biodiesel in Indonesia are higher than from conventional diesel.“You will just emit the carbon that’s stored in the forests to the atmosphere,” Mackey said. “It will take a long time for forests to really grow and store that carbon. So if you burn the forests for biofuel, you’re not doing any good at all, because it takes a long time, many, many decades, to repay the carbon that’s emitted from the forests.”last_img read more

Posted in xawlvtwz

first_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsored Community Forests, Forests, Hunting, National Parks, Rainforest Mining, Rainforests, Saving Rainforests, Tropical Forests After the 2017 death of a forest ranger during a riot in a key national park, Liberian officials and conservation groups changed their community relations approach. Now they are working together to establish the park’s borders.Sapo National Park is one of the most important protected forests in West Africa.The park has a troubled past of illicit mining, hunting, and conflict between communities and conservation efforts.Now, the Liberian government is trying to work collaboratively with those communities to establish the boundaries of the park after a contested 2003 expansion. In eastern Liberia, efforts are underway to formally demarcate the boundaries of Sapo National Park, the largest tract of protected rainforest in the country and one of the most important in West Africa. Sapo is home to one of the most diverse ecosystems of plant and animal life in the world, including the threatened African forest elephant and the elusive pygmy hippopotamus.Conservation groups and Liberian government officials hope that by including rural Liberian farming communities in the demarcation, they will be able to cut down on illicit hunting and other illegal activities inside the park.More than 40% of Africa’s remaining upper Guinean tropical rainforest lies in Liberia. Sapo was first established as a park in 1983, home to towering ekki (red ironwood) trees that loom 30 meters (100 feet) tall or higher within a biodiversity hotspot that contains nearly a thousand bird and mammal species. The park was later expanded from 1,308 to 1,804 square kilometers (505 to 697 square miles) by the Liberian legislature in 2003, an increase of 37 percent.But that expansion has been controversial, with communities living adjacent to the park saying they weren’t consulted about the law that created it, which was passed just months after Liberia’s civil war ended. Tension between some of those communities and the agencies tasked with managing the park have been a recurring feature of Sapo’s recent history.Liberian tropical forest. Image via USAIDAfter the war, Sapo was infamously occupied by armed former combatants attracted by the prospect of quick cash from illegal gold mining and the bushmeat trade, requiring a U.N.-led operation to clear it out in 2005. But by 2017, mining and hunting camps had once again sprung up inside the park. During a patrol inside the park in April that year, one park ranger was killed and others were badly beaten by an angry mob that allegedly included members of nearby communities.In the wake of the incident, seven suspects from those communities were jailed, but later released in order to de-escalate tensions in the area. Officials from Liberia’s Forestry Development Authority (FDA) and conservation groups say the ranger’s death marked a turning point in the relationship between local communities and the park’s managers.“The confusion that led to the rioting was discussed in a big meeting, and community representatives asked the FDA to do better engagement with communities,” said Evangeline Swope, who heads the agency’s protected areas division.Like in other protected parks in Africa, poverty in the communities that surround Sapo is a threat to the park and its wildlife. Hunting and mining provide desperately needed income for members of communities located near the park, many of whom trace their histories to long before the Liberian state existed. Post-war sensitivities in Liberia mean that FDA rangers are not equipped with firearms, unlike their counterparts in many other parks on the continent. Tensions surrounding policing inside the park can be dangerous for those rangers.A chimpanzee in Liberia. Photo by Cameron Zohoori/Flickr.According to Annika Hillers, country director of the Liberian branch of the Wild Chimpanzee Foundation (WCF), after the 2017 clash there was a shift in how the FDA and its partners approached communities near the park. She said these changes were based on feedback shared in a large meeting held to address the ranger’s murder. In that meeting, which she attended along with senior government officials and other conservation organizations, community representatives expressed a desire to be incorporated into the management of Sapo.“One request was to set up ‘community watch teams’ where community members would control access points to the national park and block other community members who want to bring food to the miners,” Hillers said.Members of these community watch teams are now spread out across 10 key access points into the park and are paid $50 per month to help prevent hunting and mining. According to the FDA, as of late 2018 Sapo has been free of mining and hunting camps. Hillers says that research commissioned by WCF indicates that the inclusion of community members in the administrative structure of the park has paid off.“Generally, the perception was quite positive,” she said. “It had changed since the conflict, because people felt that they are much more involved and that FDA and partners are making much more of an effort for consultation and collaboration.”But she adds that the teams have not entirely stopped poaching inside Sapo. In January 2019, the corpses of four forest elephants were discovered. One community member was subsequently arrested and later released due to lack of evidence. The incident highlighted the difficulty of maintaining the park’s integrity in the midst of low government capacity and widespread poverty.“The community members knew about it, rangers knew about it, the community watch teams knew about it, but nobody actually revealed it,” Hillers said.Still, Swope of the FDA says improved relations between the FDA and communities in recent years have paved the way for the long-overdue boundary demarcation to take place.She acknowledges those boundaries were drawn up unilaterally by the national government, but says for the most part they are located miles away from any physical settlements. In December, Swope and other FDA officials visited the region and held a series of meetings to sketch out how the demarcation process will look like and what role community representatives will play.The initial “flagging” phase of that process commenced this month.“Communities are aware that hunting inside the park is illegal,” Swope said. “They always claim they don’t know the exact boundary line, so that’s why the flagging will take some community members to the park with technicians from the FDA to identify the sites jointly. After that the physical demarcation will take place.”Banner image: A forest elephant in Gabon. Photo by Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay.Editor’s Note: This story has been updated to reflect that the perpetrators of the January 2019 poaching were never identified by authorities. Ashoka Mukpo is a freelance journalist with expertise in international development policy, human rights, and environmental issues. His work has been featured in Al-Jazeera, Vice News, The Nation, The Guardian, and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter at @unkyoka.FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.center_img Article published by Genevieve Belmakerlast_img read more

Posted in ucaajwge