Mike Grodem (edison): A Different Look at Deforestation

13. September 2009 by student.

A big issue today is the idea of global warming and all of it’s possible side effects. Along with this issue is an equally large discussion about how to minimize our carbon footprint in various ways such as renewable energy, responsible use of resources, and maintaining the planet’s forests (which largely contribute to the filtering of greenhouse gasses).  In particular, the Amazon rainforest is a carbon sink (reduces carbon in the atmosphere) for about 2 billion tons of CO2 per year. This shows that the Amazon is an incredible resource in the battle for climate control, however, from May 2000 to August 2006, the country of Brazil lost nearly 150,000 square kilometers of Amazon - that’s an area larger than Greece. At this rate we will destroy one of our greatest assets in no time and push the planet that much closer to the tipping-point. Most people know about this issue and advocate saving the rainforest, but there is an aspect that many may not consider.

Imagine for a moment that you are a farmer with a family. You are a cattle rancher that has never done anything but work with cattle since you were a small boy. As of right now your farm is just barely scraping by, but you could increase your yield by 50% if you expand your land by 40 acres. This is a simple enough task that requires a purchase of the land by loan and then clearing it and spreading prairie grass seed. After this initial work the land will require little maintenance and eventually will pay for itself in extra profit. Most importantly though, it will insure that you and your family will by provided for and not have to live hand to mouth.

Now imagine that you’re a twenty year old man who is the provider for his mother and younger siblings as well as for his new wife. Employment prospects are thin and even the available jobs do not pay enough to provide adequate supplies for your family. The best job in town is with a foreign logging company that pays twice the local wages and ensures constant work. It’s hard work for long hours, but the money not only pays for the necessities, but also allows for some extra to be saved up. The job is ideal and the best one could hope to get.

I hope that these two situations illustrate my point well enough. The Amazon and forests like it are crucial for our battle against greenhouse gasses, and the deforestation of these areas needs to be addressed, but the matter isn’t as easy as simply stopping. We’re trying to get people to stop cutting down these forests by telling them that there will be consequences in ten years, while they are in a position to face consequences of inaction as soon as next week. Many of the deforestation is done by many small farmers working to feed their families, or by men working for larger corporations to do the same. This isn’t a matter of carbon footprints and greenhouse gasses to them, it’s a matter of food on the table and a roof to live under. There is a demand in the world for beef and lumber, and these men will supply these things regardless of forest protection laws, not out of a sense of malice, but because it’s how they can support themselves. I don’t feel that I’m equipped to suggest an alternative way to stop deforestation, but I’d like to submit this to you as an example of how “just don’t let them chop” as a policy just isn’t going to work in this situation.

Source: www.Mongabay.com

Posted in Social Problems | 1 Comment »