Author: Daniela Rey, ClientEarth

Aerial view of the Amazon Rainforest, near Manaus, the capital of the Brazilian state of Amazonas. Pic by Neil Palmer (CIAT).

Recent reports indicate that deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon is not slowing down. In fact, it has jumped almost six-fold in the March-April period of this year, according to satellite images taken by the National Institute of Space Research. One factor which is contributing to this rise is the increasing demand for agricultural land to grow soy, cotton and other products – and new policies may propel this demand even further.

Brazil’s Congress voted Tuesday on proposed changes to Brazil’s Forestry Code. This Code was enacted in 1934 and amended in 1965 to help protect native Brazilian forests by limiting the amount of land a farmer can deforest. Regulations currently require landowners in Brazil to maintain 80% of their land as forest but the proposed changes will effectively allow more land to be converted for agricultural purposes.

The point of contention raised in recent reports was whether the current law impeded Brazil’s economic development and therefore needed to change. Environmentalists felt that changing the Forest Code to allow more land to be used for agriculture would be a disaster for Brazil’s rainforest ecosystems, while industries argued the changes were crucial to the country’s economy.

Deforestation and degradation in the Brazilian Amazon increasingly reflect market demands and private sector profitability, combined with a policy arena that, although averse to continued forest clearing, actively promotes activities that are among its principle driving forces.

Current government measures undertaken to reduce deforestation continue to be undermined by contradictory policies, particularly those within the agribusiness and mining sectors. The amendments to the Forest Code would exacerbate this trend.

The bill mandates that native vegetation must be conserved on private rural and farm properties, via creation of so-called Permanent Protection Areas to preserve “fragile” hillside and riverside areas, and legal reserves where native vegetation may not be touched. However, some small landowners will be exempt from the legal reserve requirement, according to the text of the bill. In addition, existing cultivation of some products including grapes, apples and coffee will continue to be allowed in areas designated as Permanent Protection Areas.

These exemptions recognize the current illicit practices that are driving deforestation, and which currently violate the Forest Code, but are not enforced.  Over the years, the vast majority of fines for illegal deforestation, when issued, have simply not been paid, despite recent increases in the value of those fines. The bill provides an amnesty for these illicit practices, and may encourage further deforestation in Brazil.

Moreover, the amendments to the Forest Code may have an important negative effect on Brazil’s capacity to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD), an international policy approach developed under the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Brazil is also a key actor in the Interim REDD+ Partnership, currently chairing it with France.

Brazil’s main challenge in mitigating climate change is deforestation, which is responsible for up to 75% of Brazil’s CO2 emissions. Brazil has adopted a target for the reduction of deforestation of 80% in the Amazon and of 40% in Cerrado by 2020.

Thus far, the proposed changes to the Code have been approved in the lower house and will now proceed to the Senate for discussion and voting.

Daniela Rey blogs for ClientEarth, an organisation of activist lawyers committed to securing a healthy planet.

This article originally appeared in two parts. To see the articles in their original form, see article 1, and article 2.

Canada's wetlands. (Image by: Chad Delany, Pew)

Canada’s boreal forest is in the news again this week with a study released yesterday by the Pew Environment Group. But while the Pew study argues that the preservation of the forest remains a top global priority, the Canadian timber industry may see a spike in demand for wood from Japan when it begins the rebuilding process following the devastating earthquake and tsunami that hit March 11.

The Pew study, A Forest of Blue: Canada’s Boreal Forest, the World’s Waterkeeper, focuses on the water dimensions of Canada’s boreal forest, which the Pew Environment Group (PEG) says has received little research attention in the past. In the 76-page paper, Pew highlights the essential ecosystem services that the vast forest provides for both the Canadian and international communities: a “vital bulwark” against biodiversity loss and global warming; 25% of the world’s wetlands, which, when combined with peatlands, store more than 147 billion tonnes of carbon; and a key freshwater contributor to Arctic sea ice through river flow. They estimate that these services are worth $700 billion annually. Canada’s boreal forest represents 54% of the world’s remaining boreal regions, with the only other in Russia.

What makes the boreal forest so essential, the report argues, is its “free-flowing and unfragmented nature.” Its critical role in regulating the global climate comes from cooling caused by the photosynthesis period and heating caused by evapotranspiration, as well as by its contributions to Arctic sea ice from the way it decreases the salinity of the water, allowing it to freeze more quickly. In addition to the Arctic, the Pacific and Atlantic oceans both receive massive amounts of freshwater flow from Canada’s boreal.

The study acknowledges the work currently done by the Canadian government at all levels, and by both local and international organizations, outlined in the Boreal Forest Conservation Framework, to protect the forest, pointing out that more than 12% has already been strictly protected.

Yet the PEG points out that much more needs to be done to protect the 1.4 billion acre boreal ecosystem. Among its recommendations is the need to protect the entire Mackenzie River watershed, which alone covers 20% of Canada’s land mass, and to complete the implementation of the Mackenzie Basin Agreement, which links land-use and water policies to preserve the watershed.

The report also warns of increased industrial pressures in the boreal forest, estimating that 728,000 km² (180 million acres) has been affected by the forestry, mining, oil and gas extraction, and hydropower sectors, and noting that major policy reforms are needed to conserve the forest’s vast water resources. These include reforms to both hydopower and mining policy. Provincial advances, such as Ontario’s new Mining Act, which aims to reduce mining’s environmental footprint and was passed with industry support, should be used as a model for other mining reforms, including those currently underway in British Columbia and Quebec.

PEG’s warnings highlight the ongoing challenge that policymakers and environmental groups face on a regular basis to avoid development in favor of conservation. But in certain dire situations, such pressures are difficult, and perhaps even immoral, to avoid.

The widespread and horrific damage caused by the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, for example, is a case in point. The natural disaster has washed away complete towns and infrastructure, including paper mills and other related businesses. With a devastating death toll (at time of writing) at almost 4,000, a missing toll at more than 15,000, and an estimated half a million people homeless and in temporary shelters where evacuees are surviving on little food and no water or elecriticity, the possibilities for public health problems are likely to increase, and raw materials will be urgently needed for temporary shelter. While those materials may come from China or Australia – despite damage done to Australian suppliers in Japan – news reports say will likely also come from Canada, which has strong relations with Japan, particularly in British Columbia. A report by Canada’s Globe and Mail says that Canadian and Japanese producers have been working together since the Kobe earthquake in 1995 on new products such as engineered wood that is designed to withstand greater earthquake impacts than cement, and that Canada will work to assist the Japanese with housing in both the short and long-term.

While it’s unclear what the Japanese demand will entail in the months ahead in terms of actual felled trees, there is one thing that we can be certain of in this time of crisis: the need for strong conservation in Canada’s boreal forest and the need for timber around the world – whether during periods of unusual crisis or on a more day-to-day basis – will continue their ongoing, challenging balance between serving humanity’s immediate and long-term needs.

Photo courtesy Flickr/dodo_anji

“In bureaucratic system obedience to power and self-goals have pushed self-consciousness and uprightness into darkness.”

These words, written by a forest department official in his retirement letter were in response to the mining controversy that has brought the state of Haryana under scrutiny for indiscriminate mining policies. Following a stern report by the Central Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court, the state of Haryana (which neighbours Punjab), has finally stepped up towards stopping the unsustainable mining in the Aravalli range. The Supreme court has ordered a ban on all mining activities in the region.

But is this a little too late? Despite the lapse of a seven year lease that had ravaged the range, and a Supreme Court labelling the area as a prohibited mining zone, the Haryana government proceeded to auction two quarries in the area earlier this month.  The Forest Survey of India made satellite imagery available to the public that clearly documents the land change:  water bodies in the area have dried up and the region is suffering severe droughts.  According to this article, local people have said that not only have nearby lakes dried up in the space of three months but also that large scale sand mining was taking place, “damaging the water retention capacity” leaving few traces of the lake and “truck marks all around”. There are clearly bureaucratic loopholes aplenty, allowing the culpability to bounce from the irrigation department to fisheries to mining. The unchecked mining also played an important role in decreasing the ground water level.

The mining groups argue that the high demand for construction is forcing them to look beyond the outer limits of the national capital and to mine indiscriminately, bringing to the fore once again the often used argument of the perceived conflictual nature of development and environmental sustainability in India.

The Centre for Science and Environment recently released a  report detailing the “environmental and social footprints of mining in India”. In it, it highlights the sheer lack of regulation in mining that has spawned a booming illegal trade, adversely affecting the environment and not allowing for any recourse to legal aid by the people who work in the mines or live in the surrounding areas.  The states tend to turn a blind eye because of the profits and the overall ‘development’ that ensues.

Unsustainable mining practices are rampant all over India. Parts of Karnataka that have witnessed unsustainable mining now suffer from a host of problems: from a lack of access to water, to unsafe and illegal labour conditions, health problems, environmental devastation and pollution. Orissa is another good example. The already palpable pressure on land will only get more severe, and although the government has brought out a national biodiversity plan which lays out best practice guidelines, Indian authorities need to really take control of biodiversity conservation and land change, step up initiatives to protect the natural habitat, and soon. A sustainable approach would of course require addressing the issues mentioned before: the problems of EIAs , inclusion of participatory methods, introduction of regulation and importantly better accountability of those in public service and positions of power.