Amazon Deforestation continued
Just wanted to bump this topic again. After reading John’s comments on the amazon deforestation post I thought I should google around because other then knowing deforestation is a bad thing, I’m pretty much in the dark.
Looks like John was right, the amazon is being clear cut for more then just telephone pole export. This mongabay.com link says the leading cause from 2000-2005 was cattle, with 1% being commercial agriculture. But it looks like soybeans might be the current culprit. No more brazilian edamame for me and no more KFC?
6 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Interesting, I hadn’t heard about the soybean thing. I usually have such mixed feelings about stuff like this. I think the deforestation is likely to have long term impacts in many areas. I read through a bunch of stuff on the greenpeace site and found a lot of corporation bashing, asking for money, and ranting about the tragedy of deforestation, all of which may be valid concerns, but not one word about mitigation. What is greenpeace doing to develop alternative/sustainable industries for Brazillians to work in? I mean ones large enough scale to have a real impact, not just indigenous basket weaving exports. How many gp members have uprooted and moved long term to Brazil to start businesses in those alternatives? What are the people in and around the Amazon saying they would like to do as an alternatve to the deforestation/ag development that is going on? Where is the discussion of impacts of getting Cargill, or whomever to stop buying amazon soy? Does Brazil’s economy deserve to sink to assuage the guilt/rage of a few activists? Are these new soy farms corporate owned, or small family owned by people who sell under contract to the ag corps?
You know. I mean other than parachuting into some farmers soy field with a shame on you slogan on your ‘chute and annoying a few patrons at some chicken joint in London, what are they accomplishing? It looks to me like nothing other than maintaining a level of donations high enough to keep the directors and employees of GP, Intl. steady paychecks.
But what the hell do I know?
John,
Green Peace does crazy shit. But why do you feel like you are qualified to critique how they run their organization? Do you have a degree in in some kind of social science that would give you insight into how to best influence people?
I think they are maniacs and don’t always agree with their tactics but you have to give them credit in terms of bringing these kinds of issues to the people. And isn’t that a start?
Obviously most people don’t even know that the Amazon is being clear cut for agricultural reasons. With their tactics they might get on the news and their message gets into the main stream. And that is at least a start.
Why put the burden to save the world on green peace though? What are you doing with your time? Why don’t you go save the world and come up with some solid solutions to bring wealth and prosperity to Brazil without destroying the planet?
No offense meant, just playing devils advocate.
>No offense meant, just playing devils advocate.
No offense taken. Boring Fridays can be fun.
>Green Peace does crazy shit. But why do you feel
>like you are qualified to critique how they run
>their organization?
I have absolutely no qualifications to criticize them. What qualifications are needed? What exactly are Greenpeace’s qualifications to criticize Brazilian farmers or Ag policy? Was the guy in the chicken suit in London a respected Amazonian researcher, or was he just parroting the party line? Maybe he had done a careful review of the literature in the science journals and come to the conclusion that the chicken suit was THE answer.
>Do you have a degree in in some kind of social
>science that would give you insight into how
>to best influence people?
IMO, social science degrees don’t qualify one to do very much, but maybe that’s because mine is in another area. I should try to be less snarky.
>I think they are maniacs and don’t always agree with
>their tactics but you have to give them credit
>in terms of bringing these kinds of issues
>to the people. And isn’t that a start?
Perhaps my concern is tactics. I don’t see how annoying people brings you any support except among fellow travelers. There is probably some tipping point there though, vis. civil rights, etc. But I see what they do as singing to the choir, designed to get people who already think like them to pony up the cash to maintain the organization first, and consider the problem second. This, of course, is a function of almost all organizations (see Pournelle’s Iron Law).
>Obviously most people don’t even know that the Amazon
>is being clear cut for agricultural reasons.
> With their tactics they might get on the
> news and their message gets into the main stream.
> And that is at least a start.
I don’t obviously know what most people think, but ‘I’ think that assumptions about what people do or don’t know is a big part of the issue -ie: “How could any reasonable, correct thinking person come to any conclusions but mine?” I’m usually charitable enough to give people the benefit of the doubt, at least when I’m having a good day. For what its worth an informal poll of 5 people at my office didn’t produce anyone who did NOT know it was a problem, but none could say it was particularly high on their issues list. If I cared enough, my challenge at that moment would be to give them alternatives to positively impact the situation. But that is a small sample size in a particular socio-economic group. What would my results be if I ran the poll at KFC? Should I assume I know the answer to that?
>Why put the burden to save the world on green peace
>though?
I put the burden on them, because they asked for it. Anyone can point out problems. I’m doing it here. Its easy! The hard part is finding workable answers. Don’t ask for my money until you have a workable plan to address the issues. No plan visible on GP’s Site, unless it is to go rant at corporations.
>What are you doing with your time? Why don’t
>you go save the world and come up with some
> solid solutions to bring wealth and
>prosperity to Brazil without destroying the planet?
I AM using my time as I see fit. That certainly doesn’t make me immune from criticism. If I come up with any insights to solve the problem, I’ll pass them along to greenpeace. Maybe the fix would cross over well to Paraguay, the country of my birth, also. Would Greenpeace use them, or would a solution detract from their message of “The World is in Danger, Send us Money”? I don’t find them anymore trustworthy than say, our own government.
Besides, I saved the world in November of ‘81.
What did you do in Nov. 81?
It looks like my faulty memory thought ‘81, but that was the notification and not long after Sadat was capped, not the deployment, so I didn’t save the world until March of ‘82:
http://www.iaw.on.ca/~awoolley/mfotale2.html
Interesting. I was born in March of 1981.