The river-delineated border between western Brazil's Acre province (upper left), and northwestern Bolivia's Pando Department (lower right). Photograph: ASTER/Terra/NASA



Brazil is at risk of scoring an economic own goal if it continues clearing Amazon forest for herding and soya production, according to a new study that has potential implications for global food security.

In recent decades, the conversion of vast tracts of the Amazon into pastures and farm fields has boosted the national economy and played a major role in meeting rising world demand for beef and grain, particularly soyabeans – for which Brazil overtook the US this year as the number one supplier.

But researchers say the economic and agricultural gains are in danger of slipping into reverse because the loss of forest is reducing rainfall, raising temperatures and causing other malign feedbacks on the regional climate.

"The more agriculture expands in the Amazon, the less productive it will become … In this situation, we all lose," warns the paper by Brazilian and US scientists that is published on Friday in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

Based on existing trends of deforestation, loss of carbon sequestration and related feedbacks on rainfall, temperature and biomass, the researchers project a 34% fall in pasture productivity and a 28% decline in soyabean yields by 2050.

"We now have a very strong economic argument (against deforestation of the Amazon), in addition to the environmental ones," said one of the authors, Marcos Heil Costa at Federal University of Viçosa. He said the findings would be presented to the Brazilian government.

In the past eight years, Brazil has slowed the pace of forest clearance by 80%, but roughly 6,000 sq km – an area bigger than Bahrain – is still converted every year.

The global climate change impacts of the canopy loss have been widely studied, but the new paper focuses more on the regional implications of a diminished ecosystem and all the services it provides, particularly to farmers.

"We expected to see some kind of compensation or off put, but it was a surprise to us that high levels of deforestation could be a no-win scenario – the loss of environmental services provided by the deforestation may not be offset by an increase in agriculture production," noted the lead author of the study, Leydimere Oliveira, in a statement. "There may be a limit for expansion of agriculture in Amazonia. Below this limit, there are not important economic consequences of this expansion. Beyond this limit, the feedbacks that we demonstrated start to introduce significant losses in the agriculture production."

Exactly where that limit lies will be the subject of further study, but the prospect of more forest clearance resulting in less food should alarm policymakers. But the researchers said there were alternatives – including more efficient and sustainable use of previously cleared land – that needed to be pursued with greater urgency.

"The consequences for global food security are, at first thought, worrisome. However, many scientists, including myself, believe it is possible to increase agriculture productivity in the Amazon (and in Brazil in general) through increases in productivity, without increasing planted area or additional deforestation," said Costa. "Demonstrating how this can be done and actually implementing it is the biggest challenge of agricultural science in Brazil for the next 40 years."


728x90

여기는 인도네시아의 한 열대우림. Sinar Mas 그룹이 소유한 제지회사의 벌목장이랍니다. 이래서 종이를 함부로 쓰거나 책을 거시기하기가 싫다는...



벌목장에 가까이 가서 보면 이렇답니다. 신이여, 저들은 아무 죄가 없나이다... ㅜㅜ




원래는 이런 평화롭고 아름다운 숲이라지요.




멋지다...




다들 아시다시피 인도네시아의 열대우림에는 '숲의 사람' 오랑우탄이 삽니다. 숲이 파괴되면 이 '사람'들은 어디로 가지요? 




또한 벌목장 근처는 수마트라 호랑이의 서식지이기도 합니다. 숲이 파괴되면 이들은 어디로 가지요? 조선 호랑아~! 너는 어딨냐~!




하지만 벌목장은 계속 운영되고 있습니다. 하루 쉬면 돈이 얼마인데...




벌목한 나무는 이렇게 제지공장에서 종이로 만들어집니다. 멋지다.




열대우림의 파괴가 '숲의 사람'이나 호랑이 같은 동물에게만 영향을 미치는 게 아닙니다. 그곳에서 동식물과 함께 살던 원주민들의 삶마저 뒤흔들고 있습니다. 




인도네시아의 환경단체와 그린피스가 이러한 열대우림의 파괴를 막고자 싸우고 있다는군요. 보존과 개발, 결코 양립할 수 없는 가치일까요?




시애틀 추장의 연설은 여전히 큰 울림을 줍니다. "우리는 안다. 모든 것은 한 가족을 묶는 피처럼 연결되어 있다는 것을." 

http://t.co/e2RqqVhF 



참고로, 2010년 FAO에서 발표한 세계의 숲 지도를 보세요. 여기서 더 사라지지 않기를... http://t.co/kC4Tphmp



728x90

'농담 > 雜다한 글' 카테고리의 다른 글

견종법에 대한 논문을 읽고...  (0) 2013.03.06
공동체 경제, 무엇이 문제인가  (0) 2013.02.25
뱅어  (0) 2013.02.09
까마귀의 군무  (0) 2013.02.04
밀양 설봉 돼지국밥  (0) 2013.02.02




Gross forest loss in tropical countries, 2000-2005 according to Harris et al (2012).




A study published last month in the journalSciencecame up with new estimates of tropical forest loss between 2000 and 2005. The research — led by Nancy Harris of Winrock International and also involving scientists from Applied GeoSolutions, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the University of Maryland — was based on analysis of remote sensing data calibrated with field studies.

Like other assessments, the study found Brazil and Indonesia lost the greatest extent of forest during the period. But some of their data differed substantially from the default source of forest data, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. For example, according to Harris and colleagues, Indonesia's gross forest loss was twice as high as estimated by FAO, while India's was one million hectares higher. But Myanmar and Tanzania had substantially lower loss under the methodology used in theSciencepaper.

Countries with the highest gross forest loss between 2000 and 2005 according to the new study and earlier work by the FAO. Click image to enlarge.


The objective of the study was to quantify emissions from deforestation. Harris and colleagues estimated gross carbon emissions from deforestation at 810 million metric tons (with a 90 percent confidence interval of 0.57-1.22 billion tons) per year from 2000-2005, significantly below earlier calculations. Brazil and Indonesia accounted for 55 percent of gross emissions from tropical deforestation during the study period, while dry forests accounted for 40 percent of tropical forest loss but amounted to only 17 percent of emissions.

The study did not look at carbon emissions from logging or other forms of forest degradation, including peatlands drainage and burning. The authors noted another study found emissions from these sources amounted to 272 million tons per year in the study period, adding roughly a third more to their results. The research also did not account for forest recovery in the tropics, nor land use change in temperate regions.


Gross forest loss in tropical countries, 2000-2005 according to Harris et al (2012).

The researchers say the next phase of their analysis will look at the 2006-2010 period.

For more on the study, including other charts and maps, seeDeforestation accounts for 10 percent of global carbon emissions, argues new study.


Data table
Note: this table only includes mean and median estimates from the study. For the full results, download thesupplemental online materials[PDF].

Forest Area 2000Gross Forest Cover LossForest Carbon Stock DensityEmissions from Deforestation
(Median estimate)(Mean estimate)(Median estimate)
Country(Million ha)ha/yrtons/haM tC/yr
Brazil4583,292,000116340
Indonesia107701,000155105
Argentina49437,0002410
Paraguay21242,000279
Malaysia22233,00017941
India42206,00010418
DR Congo167203,00012823
Mozambique34196,000429
Myanmar33186,00015529
Tanzania23149,000457
Mexico46140,000488
Colombia63137,00013814
Thailand17134,00012616
Zambia29134,000437
Bolivia61129,0009011
Angola49126,000476
Zimbabwe9119,000305
Venezuela49115,0001349
South Africa1399,000284
Sudan1795,000454
Laos1685,00016415
Nigeria1281,000834
Ethiopia1668,000534
Chile1767,000526
CAR3665,000664
Cambodia958,0001278
Peru6857,0001587
Vietnam1455,0001278
Cameroon2654,0001427
Madagascar1652,000703
Guatemala650,000925
Nicaragua550,0001136
PNG3150,0001527
Botswana448,000191
Philippines1040,0001186
Cote d’Ivoire839,000853
Kenya439,000542
Ecuador1337,0001494
Chad537,000311
Ghana530,000942
Caribbean728,000462
Mali328,000441
Guinea927,000572
Rep. of Congo2326,0001603
Gabon1924,0001644
Uganda523,000651
Somalia120,000341
Uruguay319,000281
Honduras617,000771
Namibia117,00016-
Nepal516,0001032
Sierra Leone316,000831
Liberia714,0001472
Senegal214,00026-
Guyana1613,0001611
Costa Rica312,0001051
Panama312,0001151
Benin212,00029-
Malawi210,00040-
Belize19,0001051
Bangladesh27,000941
Sri Lanka37,000941
Suriname126,0001611
Togo16,00049-
Bhutan24,0001521
Burundi13,00064-
Equatorial Guinea23,0001601
Lesotho13,00019-
El Salvador12,00049-
French Guiana72,000160-
Guinea-Bissau12,00037-
Swaziland12,00032-



CITATION: Nancy L. Harris, Sandra Brown, Stephen C. Hagen, Sassan S. Saatchi, Silvia Petrova, William Salas, Matthew C. Hansen, Peter V. Potapov, and Alexander Lotsch. Baseline Map of Carbon Emissions from Deforestation in Tropical Regions. Science 22 June 2012: Vol. 336 no. 6088 pp. 1573-1576 DOI: 10.1126/science.1217962


Read more:http://news.mongabay.com/2012/0729-chart-tropical-forest-loss.html#ixzz229B5lZg3


728x90




Industrial logging in primary tropical forests that is both sustainable and profitable is impossible, argues a new study inBioscience, which finds that the ecology of tropical hardwoods makes logging with truly sustainable practices not only impractical, but completely unprofitable. Given this, the researchers recommend industrial logging subsidies be dropped from the UN's Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) program. The study, which adds to the growing debate about the role of logging in tropical forests, countersrecent researchmaking the case that well-managed logging could provide a "middle way" between conservation and outright conversion of forests to monocultures or pasture.


"We are facing a global biodiversity and a climate change crisis and we cannot afford to continue to lose primary tropical forests—they are central to resolving both crises," authors Barbara Zimmerman with the International Conservation Fund for Canada and Cyril Kormos, Vice President for policy with the WILD Foundation, told mongabay.com. "Despite decades of trying to log sustainably, the rate of deforestation has barely dipped over the last 20 years, from 15 million hectares per year to 13 million hectares per year—and these are low estimates. Industrial logging has shown no capacity to keep forests standing. on the contrary, logging is usually the first step towards total clearing to make way for agricultural use."

The study found that just three rounds of logging in tropical forests resulted in the near-extinction of target trees in all major rainforest zones—South and Central America, Central Africa, and Southeast Asia—resulting not only in ecological disturbance but economic fallout.

Ecological and economic barriers

Deforestation for palm oil in Sabah, Malaysia. Often logged forests are then converted to plantations or pastures. Photo by Rhett A. Butler.


The very ecology of tropical rainforests—their rich biodiversity, unparalleled variety, and hugely complex interconnections between species—makes them particularly susceptible to disturbance. Targeting only a few key tree species in the forest, loggers quickly plunder these species while leaving the rest standing, rapidly changing the overall structure of the ecosystem. In this way, loggers undercut the very ecological system that allows their favored trees to replenish.

"Virtually all currently high-value timber species, are exceptionally long lived and slow growing, occur at low adult density, undergo high rates of seed and seedling mortality, sustain very sparse regeneration at the stand level, and rely on animal diversity for reproduction, all of which point to the conclusion that tropical trees probably need very large continuous areas of ecologically intact forest if they are to maintain viable population sizes," Zimmerman and Kormos write in their paper.

The particular ecology of these trees has resulted in most logging companies simply entering a primary forest, cutting all high-value species, and then leaving it to colonizers or razing everything for cattle pasture or monoculture plantations (such as pulp and paper, rubber, or palm oil).

"Logging in the tropics follows the same economic model as is evident in most of the world’s ocean fisheries," Zimmerman and Kormos write. "The most-valuable species are selectively harvested first, and when they are depleted, the next-most-valuable set is taken, until the forests are mined completely of their timber."

Boom and bust. Sawlog and veneer-log production for the Solomon Islands and five key South-East Asian nations (derived from FAOSTAT, 2011). Courtesy ofShearman et al 2012.



While initial logging can be quite profitable, later harvests bring in less-and-less money: fewer target trees can be found and the regenerative process for such species is compromised overall. Eventually industrial logging kills itself, leaving an economic vacuum that in accessible areas is often filled by conversion to pasture land, oil palm estates, industrial agriculture or timber plantations.

Some scientists have argued that the solution to this problem is to inject sustainable forest management practices into logging companies in the tropics. According to these sustainability proponents, this would ensure harvests over the long-term while protecting overall forest health.

Impact of various disturbance regimes on biodiversity in tropical forests. Chart based on Gibson et. al 2011. Photo by Rhett Butler. Click to enlarge

But according to their paper, even so-called reduced-impact logging—which is currently the exception rather than the norm in the tropics—considerably changes a forest's ecology. With many of the forest's vital seed and crop trees cut, Kormos and Zimmerman point out that "low-impact" logging leaves 20-50 percent of the canopy open, when "even small openings in the canopy (5-10 percent) can have significant impacts on the moisture content in the forest and increase risk of fire." Debris left on the forest floor quickly dries out, creating perfect fodder for fire. Unlike temperate forests, fires in primary rainforests are almost unheard of, but low-impact logging creates a new set of ecological conditions that leave the forest vulnerable to heat, wind, and, yes, fire.

"We now know that under the present sustainable forestry management guidelines, tropical forests left to regenerate naturally will be composed largely of light-wooded tree species of no to low commercial value, whereas dense-wood, high-value timber species will experience severe population declines," Kormos and Zimmerman write, noting that current guidelines are far too lax to keep forests intact.






True sustainability is not impossible to achieve, write Zimmerman and Kormos, but guidelines would need to be considerably toughened. Forestry companies would need to cut only every 60 years or more, harvest less than five trees per hectare, leave smaller logging gaps in the canopy, avoid cutting young trees, and use siliviculture techniques to plant new seedlings, among other considerations.

Giant rainforest tree in Sumatra. Photo by Rhett A. Butler.


"The key to a forest’s ability to recover most of its original attributes after selective logging is low harvest intensity," they write.

But, there is a reason why there are no industrial loggers in the tropics putting such stringent rules in place.

"The problem with implementing this kind of protocol is that it would substantially diminish harvestable timber volume while further increasing management and training costs, which would make the timber operation economically unviable," Zimmerman and Kormos told mongabay.com.

It's no wonder then that logging companies generally cut-and-run, a practice which has resulted in loggers moving from one untouched tropical forest to the next, always looking for the short-term gain. For example, after logging out most of the forests in Borneo, loggers moved into places like Sumatra. Now that Sumatra has been devastated—with many of its forests turned into monoculture plantations—industrial logging went to New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. Primary rainforest is vanishing worldwide.

Logging not a "middle way"

Zimmerman and Kormos’ paper is one among several that debates, sometimes heatedly, the role of logging in protecting or destroying tropical forests. For example, a paper inConservation Lettersrecently came to a very different conclusion than Zimmerman and Kormos, describing well-managed logging as a middle way between conservation and outright destruction of tropical forests for agriculture or ranching.

"Selectively logged tropical forests, especially if they are logged gently and with care, retain most of their biodiversity and continue to provide ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration and hydrological functions," lead author of that study, Francis Putz with the University of Florida told mongabay.com in May.

Raw logs waiting for transport in Guyana. Photo by Jeremy Hance.

Putz's paper did not argue that logging had no impact, but rather that any impact from logging was far preferable than clearing a forest entirely. While Kormos and Zimmerman agree with this point, they see a different remedy.

"There is no question that industrial logging is better than cattle pastures or oil palm or other plantations—but the fact that industrial logging is better than total forest conversion doesn’t mean we should subsidize it," Zimmerman and Kormos told mongabay.com. "Subsidies should be directed towards activities that maximize carbon, biodiversity and social benefits."

They also say some of the paper's findings are problematic. "The article includes introduced species in the biodiversity totals, and the biodiversity surveys cited were all done soon after logging and before a second harvest, so there would be an expectation that there would still be biodiversity left in the short term—the question is what happens to biodiversity in the medium term, in particular after a second harvest? In addition, the article states that a logged forest retains 76% of its carbon. But 24% of a forest's carbon is a very substantial amount of carbon emissions—it could take several decades just to recapture that carbon, whereas we need to be maximizing forest carbon right now."

Even more importantly, perhaps, is that economic problems remain, dooming many logged forests to total clearance.

"The 'middle way' does not make logging sustainable. The Putz et al article clearly acknowledges that the middle way does not achieve sustained timber yields. As a result, it does nothing to change the fundamental dynamic, which is that logging usually precedes conversion to higher value agriculture use. So the 'middle way' could actually make things worse—accelerating forest conversion," Zimmerman and Kormos say.

REDD-out



Aerial view of logging roads in Malaysian Borneo. Photos by Rhett A. Butler.

Given the problems of balancing the ecology and economics of logging in tropical forests, Zimmerman and Kormos argue that the UN program, REDD+, should discontinue a component that would give money to industrial logging companies to manage rainforests for their carbon.

"REDD+ should not be used to subsidize industrial logging. The biodiversity and climate change crises are rapidly getting worse, and keeping primary forests intact is an essential part of the response to both crises. REDD funding should be reserved for activities that keep primary forests intact, such as community management and protected areas" Zimmernam and Kormos say. They note that REDD+, which is meant to pay countries to preserve forests as carbon reservoirs, would undercut its main goal, since even well-managed logging concessions lose significant carbon when trees are felled, especially large, old trees. In addition, logged forests are at significant risk of total carbon loss as a result of fire or conversion to agricultural use.

Still, Zimmerman and Kormos, say logging can occur in tropical forests, only it should not be small operations run by local communities, and not the industrial logging that dominates the trade today.

"Community logging works when it is implemented at non-industrial scales by communities that have a vested interest in being good stewards of their land," they say. The key here is that local communities govern their own forests, which takes away the cut-and-run problem. In addition, such programs must be supported by the national government. This is where REDD+ could really make a difference.

"The most important reason that these successful local-scale sustainable forestry management models have not been scaled up to secure the world’s remaining tropical forests is a lack of funding—-a situation that REDD+ investment might correct," the authors note.


Zimmerman and Kormos say they would support a global moratorium on industrial logging in primary forests, an idea that has been floated in some environmental circles. Smaller-scale moratoriums are not unprecedented. Indonesia is currently attempting to implement a national moratorium, albeit the scheme is facing many difficulties and criticism both from environmentalists and industry. In addition, in 2002, the Democratic Republic of Congo instituted a moratorium on any new logging concessions being granted or renewed, although this moratorium has also suffered from widespread breaches. But if loggers are not to enter the world's last primary tropical rainforests—those, at least, currently unprotected by parks—drastic changes would need to be made in forest governance, which currently favors big industrial logging conglomerates over local communities with a long-term stake in the health of their forest.

Gabon. Photo by Rhett A. Butler.



CITATIONS:
  • Barbara Zimmerman and Cyril Kormos. Prospects for Sustainable Logging in Tropical Forests. BioScience 62: 479–487. doi:10.1525/bio.2012.62.5.9.
  • Francis E. Putz, Pieter A. Zuidema, Timothy Synnott, Marielos Peña-Claros, Michelle A. Pinard, Douglas Sheil, Jerome K. Vanclay, Plinio Sist, Sylvie Gourlet-Fleury, Bronson Griscom, John Palmer and Roderick Zagt. Sustaining conservation values in selectively logged tropical forests: The attained and the attainable. Conservation Letters. 2012. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00242.x.


  • Read more:http://news.mongabay.com/2012/0718-hance-sustainable-logging.html#ixzz216tdl2L9



    728x90

    One of the indigenous Ayoreo who live in the Chaco forest. About 10 percent of the area has been cleared in recent years by ranchers, amid a rising global demand for beef. More Photos »


    FILADELFIA, Paraguay — The Chaco thorn forest, a domain with 118-degree temperatures so forbidding that Paraguayans call it their “green hell,” covers an expanse about the size of Poland. Hunter-gatherers still live in its vast mazes of quebracho trees.

    Multimedia
    World Twitter Logo.

    Connect With Us on Twitter

    Follow@nytimesworldfor international breaking news and headlines.

    Twitter List: Reporters and Editors

    The New York Times

    Paraguay's Chaco forest lies in the Gran Chaco plain, which spans several nations. More Photos »

    But while the Chaco forest has remained hostile to most human endeavors for centuries, and jaguars, maned wolves and swarms of biting insects still inhabit its thickets, the region’s defiance may finally be coming to an end.

    Huge tracts of the Chaco are being razed in a scramble into one of South America’s most remote corners by cattle ranchers from Brazil, Paraguay’s giant neighbor, and German-speaking Mennonites, descendants of colonists who arrived here nearly a century ago and work as farmers and ranchers.

    So much land is being bulldozed and so many trees are being burned that the sky sometimes turns “twilight gray” at daytime, said Lucas Bessire, an American anthropologist who works here. “One wakes with the taste of ashes and a thin film of white on the tongue,” he said.

    At least 1.2 million acres of the Chaco have been deforested in the last two years, according to satellite analyses byGuyra, an environmental group in Asunción, the capital. Ranchers making way for their vast herds of cattle have cleared roughly 10 percent of the Chaco forest in the last five years, Guyra said. That is reflected in surging beef exports.

    “Paraguay already has the sad distinction of being a deforestation champion,” said José Luis Casaccia, a prosecutor and former environment minister, referring tothe large clearing in recent decades of Atlantic forests in eastern Paraguay for soybean farms; little more than 10 percent of the original forests remain.

    “If we continue with this insanity,” Mr. Casaccia said, “nearly all of the Chaco’s forests could be destroyed within 30 years.”

    The rush is already transforming small Mennonite settlements on the Chaco frontier into boomtowns. The Mennonites, whose Protestant Anabaptist faith coalesced in Europe in the 16th century, founded settlements here in the 1920s. Towns with names like Neuland, Friedensfeld and Neu-Halbstadt dot the map.

    Buoyed by their newfound prosperity, the Mennonite communities here differ from those in other parts of Latin America, like the settlements in eastern Bolivia where many Mennonites still drive horse-drawn buggies and wear traditional clothing.

    In Filadelfia, Mennonite teenagers barrel down roads outside town in new Nissan pickup trucks. Banks advertise loans for cattle traders. Gas stations sell chewing tobacco and beers like Coors Light. An annual rodeo lures visitors from across Paraguay.

    Patrick Friesen, communications manager for a Mennonite cooperative in Filadelfia, said property prices had surged fivefold in recent years. “A plot of land in town costs more than in downtown Asunción,” said Mr. Friesen, attributing the boom partly to surging global demand for beef.

    “Eighty-five percent of our beef is exported, to places including South Africa, Russia and Gabon,” he said. Citing concerns in some countries over foot-and-mouth disease, which Paraguay detected in its cattle herd in 2011, he continued, “We are currently focused on some of the less-demanding markets.”

    Paraguay’s Chaco forest lies in the Gran Chaco plain, spread across several nations. Scientists fear that the expansion of cattle ranching could wipe out what is a beguiling frontier for the discovery of new species. The Chaco is still relatively unexplored. The largest living species of peccary, piglike mammals, was revealed to science here in the 1970s. In some areas, biologists have recently glimpsed guanacos, a camelid similar to the llama.

    More alarming, the land rush is also intensifying the upheaval among the Chaco’s indigenous peoples, who number in the thousands and have been grappling for decades with forays by foreign missionaries, the rising clout of the Mennonites and infighting among different tribes.

    One group of hunter-gatherers, the Ayoreo, is under particular stress from the changes. In 2004, 17 Ayoreo speakers, from a subgroup who call themselves the Totobiegosode, or “people from the place where the collared peccaries ate our gardens,” made contact with outsiders for the first time.

    In Chaidi, a village near Filadelfia, they described being hounded for years by bulldozers encroaching on their lands. The Ayoreo word for bulldozer, “eapajocacade,” means “attackers of the world.”

    “They were destroying our forests, generating problems for us,” one Totobiegosode man, Esoi Chiquenoi, who believed he was in his 40s, said through an interpreter. As a result, he and others in his group, who in photographs taken in 2004 were wearing loincloths, abruptly abandoned their way of life.

    Mr. Chiquenoi and others in Chaidi have spoken of Totobiegosode relatives who remain in the forest and continue to live in the traditional ways, making them possibly the last uncontacted tribe in South America outside the Amazon. Their numbers are estimated to be around 20 or more. Some researchers speculate whether they are actually uncontacted or merely hidden, as they live amid the vast cattle ranches created around them.

    Noah Friedman-Rudovsky for The New York Times

    The hut where Esoi Chiquenoi, one of the Ayoreo displaced in the land rush, now lives. More Photos »

    Multimedia
    World Twitter Logo.

    Connect With Us on Twitter

    Follow@nytimesworldfor international breaking news and headlines.

    Twitter List: Reporters and Editors

    Noah Friedman-Rudovsky for The New York Times

    A choir at a Mennonite church in Loma Plata, which has seen a boom as land prices shoot up. More Photos »

    Noah Friedman-Rudovsky for The New York Times

    A cowboy herds cattle on the Chaco highway. More Photos »

    Noah Friedman-Rudovsky for The New York Times

    José Luis Casaccia, center, an environmental prosecutor, leads a raid against an illegal team clearing land.More Photos »

    A March report by the Paraguayan Indigenous Institute confirmed their existence on land controlled by River Plate, a Brazilian ranching company, citing evidence of footprints and holes dug to capture turtles for food.

    As the Mennonite communities come under scrutiny for the deforestation, they acknowledge that big sections of the forest around them are being removed. But they deny that they are to blame, contending that they abide by Paraguayan law, which requires landowners to keep a quarter of Chaco properties forested.

    “What the Brazilians do, acquiring land with their strong currency and deep pockets, is something else,” said Franklin Klassen, a member of the city council in Loma Plata, a Mennonite town.

    Across Paraguay, Brazil’s economic sway is impossible to ignore, symbolized by an estimated 300,000 Brasiguayos, as the relatively prosperous Brazilian immigrants and their descendants are called, who have played a role in expanding industrial agriculture and ranching in Paraguay.

    Tension already simmers over the growth of Brazilian landholdings. Tranquilo Favero, a Brazilian soybean farmer and rancher who is one of Paraguay’s richest men, enraged many Paraguayans when he said in remarks published in February that landless peasants had to be treated “like a swindler’s woman, who only obeys when beaten with a stick.

    Mr. Casaccia, the prosecutor, said that Mr. Favero alone controls an estimated 615,000 acres of land in the Chaco, in addition to huge tracts in eastern Paraguay. Neither Mr. Favero nor directors at his company in Asunción responded to requests for comment.

    Still, other Brazilian ranchers confirmed that they have aggressively expanded their holdings in the Chaco, effectively contributing to the deforestation.

    Nelson Cintra, a rancher from the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso do Sul, said he and his brother were among the first Brazilians to put down stakes in the Chaco, acquiring about 86,000 acres in Alto Paraguay, near the Brazilian border, in 1997.

    “Environmentalists complain about deforestation, but the world has billions of mouths to feed,” said Mr. Cintra, mayor of Porto Murtinho, a Brazilian border town. “There are now 1 million heads of cattle in Alto Paraguay, whereas 15 years ago there were just 50,000,” he said.

    On Filadelfia’s outskirts, the transformation of the Chaco from a vast, untamed wilderness into a ranching bastion already seems irreversible. About 80 Ayoreo live in squalor in one spot on the side of the highway, sleeping under plastic bags draped from trees.

    Sometimes ranchers in pickups stop to hire the Ayoreo men as laborers, paying them about $10 a day. But such work is sporadic. on most days, the Ayoreo lean on a fence, sipping a tea made from yerba maté leaves, watching trucks barrel past carrying cattle that grazed where peccaries once roamed.

    “We’ll never live in the forest again,” said Arturo Chiquenoi, 28, an Ayoreo man who works occasionally as a ranch hand. “That life is finished.”

    728x90

    + Recent posts