GoGreenNation news

Are rainforests doomed? Not necessarily.

News Feed

Thursday, April 4, 2024

Serranía de Chiribiquete, a mountainous region in the Colombian Amazon. New data from the World Resources Institute and the University of Maryland reveals forest loss declined last year in Colombia, among other countries. | Guillermo Legaria/AFP via Getty Images In a grim new analysis of tropical forests, there are a few important glimmers of hope. Last year, the planet lost 9.2 million acres of its tropical forest, an area a bit larger than the entire state of Maryland, according to new data from environmental group World Resources Institute (WRI) and the University of Maryland. That’s like losing about 10 soccer fields of forest per minute — for an entire year. Obviously, that sounds bad. It is bad. For decades on end, the world has watched its rainforests disappear and give way to giant farms and cattle ranches that feed the public’s desire for meat and other food products. Roughly one-third of the world’s tropical forests are now gone. And that loss has fueled both the extinction crisis and climate change; the carbon stored in trees often gets released back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide after they’re cut down, helping warm the planet. Yet against this backdrop of destruction, there are a few different, more hopeful stories. The WRI analysis shows that, in a few regions, including Columbia and Brazil, deforestation declined dramatically last year or remained lower than it once was. In other words, more trees were left standing, compared to previous years. This is not only good news but it reveals something critical: With the right laws and good governance, countries can keep their tropical forests intact. Losing the planet’s rainforests is not inevitable. Where forests were destroyed last year The new analysis, based on an enormous amount of satellite imagery, found that the tropics lost slightly less forest in 2023, compared to 2022. You can see the recent dip in the chart below. It shows forest loss over the last two decades, nearly all of which is human-caused. But the amount of destruction is still substantial, Mikaela Weisse, director of WRI’s Global Forest Watch project, said in a call with reporters last week. “The overall tropical rates of primary forest loss remained stubbornly consistent with past years,” Weisse said. “All of that forest loss resulted in 2.4 gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions,” she added, which is equivalent to almost half of all the greenhouse gas emissions in the US. The WRI analysis focuses on the tropics, because that is where the vast majority of global deforestation — the deliberate clearing of trees — takes place. Yet it also includes some broader statistics of global change, which show that there was a massive spike in forest loss worldwide last year compared to 2022 due to the record-breaking wildfires in Canada. Just three countries account for the bulk of the recent destruction in the tropics: Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Bolivia. That’s partly because they’ve got a lot to lose. Brazil, for example, is home to nearly a third of the world’s tropical forests, whereas the lion’s share of the Congo Basin rainforest — the second largest in the world — is in DRC. In most cases, topping the charts for destroying forests is as bad as it seems. In the DRC, for example, consistently high rates of forest loss are eroding the planet’s “last major carbon sink,” Elizabeth Goldman, a researcher at Global Forest Watch, said on the press call, “meaning that forest absorbs more carbon than it emits.” The problems here are especially challenging to solve. Many people clear patches of the forest with fire to grow food for their families, not to profit. A troubling situation is also occurring in Bolivia, where deforestation continues to surge. 2023 was the country’s third year in a row of record-breaking destruction, the analysis found — part of a decade-long trend of increasing loss, fueled by agriculture. (Colonies of Mennonites, a religious group, are behind much of this recent deforestation.) In Brazil and a handful of other countries, meanwhile, the high rate of forest loss masks what is actually a somewhat hopeful story. Bucking the trend: Brazil, Columbia, Indonesia Although Brazil lost nearly 3 million acres of tropical forest last year — much of which vanished from the Amazon — 2023 was actually a relatively good year. The country lost about a third less primary forest compared to 2022, a drop you can clearly see in the chart below, reaching the lowest level of loss since 2015. It’s a tale of two presidents: Jair Bolsonaro and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, better known as Lula. An icon of the left and a leader of Brazil’s Workers Party, Lula first governed between 2003 and 2011, a period that saw a massive drop in deforestation, at least partly due to his pro-environmental agenda. Then Bolsonaro came into power. The right-wing leader stripped enforcement measures, cut spending for science and environmental agencies, and fired environmental experts, among other activities largely in support of the agribusiness industry. Forests were flattened. Now, Lula is back, after again winning office for a term that started early last year. He’s promised to curtail deforestation, including by stepping up enforcement and tracking criminal activity. And so far, it seems he’s having some success, according to WRI and the Brazilian government. “We have the opportunity again of being a champion on climate, and Lula has promised to do that,” Ana Paula Vargas, Brazil program director at Amazon Watch, an environmental advocacy group, told me last summer. There’s more good news from Colombia, where destruction has similarly softened. Last year, the country’s rate of forest loss dropped in half, according to WRI, after several years of extreme deforestation — largely due to the region’s changing, complicated politics. Finally, there’s Indonesia, where there’s also a reason to be hopeful. Home to one of the world’s most diverse and carbon-rich tropical forests, complete with orangutans and tigers and the world’s largest flower, forest loss in Indonesia remains well below its peak of forest loss in the early 2010s (although the country did see a spike in deforestation last year, per the WRI analysis). Diego Giudice/Bloomberg via Getty Images A tractor applies pesticides to a soybean field in eastern Bolivia. For much of the last few decades, Indonesia has cleared forests to plant near rows of oil palm trees — the crops that produce palm oil, now among the most common oils worldwide. It’s used in everything from baby shampoo to ice cream. The industry has been incredibly destructive, to wildlife, local communities, and, really, the entire planet (the stability of which depends on keeping carbon in the ground). But about 10 years ago, the story began to change. Environmental activists launched campaigns against the most harmful palm oil companies. Indonesia’s government put stricter policies in place. Groups like WRI and TheTreeMap, a data organization, started monitoring deforestation more closely from space, making destruction harder to hide. And as a result, the industry — though still far from perfect — started cleaning itself up. “I don’t want to sit here and say that the palm oil industry has suddenly become shiny green and sustainable, but it’s mostly stopped deforestation,” Glenn Hurowitz, the founder and CEO of Mighty Earth, an environmental advocacy group, told me last year. To be clear, countries like Brazil, Colombia, and Indonesia are still clearing their forests by the thousands of acres. It remains a problem that world leaders should not ignore. But the stories here also suggest that a different future for these ecosystems, among the most important in the world, is possible. Forests can be protected. Laws — and the enforcement of them — can root out harmful activities. Activism can actually transform an entire industry. Yes, what’s happening in places like Brazil and Colombia is just a speck of hope in a world of destruction, but it’s an important reminder that the fate of the world’s tropical forests is in our control.

In a grim new analysis of tropical forests, there are a few important glimmers of hope.

Last year, the planet lost 9.2 million acres of its tropical forest, an area a bit larger than the entire state of Maryland, according to new data from environmental group World Resources Institute (WRI) and the University of Maryland. That’s like losing about 10 soccer fields of forest per minute — for an entire year.

Obviously, that sounds bad. It is bad.

For decades on end, the world has watched its rainforests disappear and give way to giant farms and cattle ranches that feed the public’s desire for meat and other food products. Roughly one-third of the world’s tropical forests are now gone. And that loss has fueled both the extinction crisis and climate change; the carbon stored in trees often gets released back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide after they’re cut down, helping warm the planet.

Yet against this backdrop of destruction, there are a few different, more hopeful stories. The WRI analysis shows that, in a few regions, including Columbia and Brazil, deforestation declined dramatically last year or remained lower than it once was. In other words, more trees were left standing, compared to previous years. This is not only good news but it reveals something critical: With the right laws and good governance, countries can keep their tropical forests intact. Losing the planet’s rainforests is not inevitable.

Where forests were destroyed last year

The new analysis, based on an enormous amount of satellite imagery, found that the tropics lost slightly less forest in 2023, compared to 2022. You can see the recent dip in the chart below. It shows forest loss over the last two decades, nearly all of which is human-caused.

But the amount of destruction is still substantial, Mikaela Weisse, director of WRI’s Global Forest Watch project, said in a call with reporters last week. “The overall tropical rates of primary forest loss remained stubbornly consistent with past years,” Weisse said. “All of that forest loss resulted in 2.4 gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions,” she added, which is equivalent to almost half of all the greenhouse gas emissions in the US.

The WRI analysis focuses on the tropics, because that is where the vast majority of global deforestation — the deliberate clearing of trees — takes place. Yet it also includes some broader statistics of global change, which show that there was a massive spike in forest loss worldwide last year compared to 2022 due to the record-breaking wildfires in Canada.

Just three countries account for the bulk of the recent destruction in the tropics: Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Bolivia. That’s partly because they’ve got a lot to lose. Brazil, for example, is home to nearly a third of the world’s tropical forests, whereas the lion’s share of the Congo Basin rainforest — the second largest in the world — is in DRC.

In most cases, topping the charts for destroying forests is as bad as it seems. In the DRC, for example, consistently high rates of forest loss are eroding the planet’s “last major carbon sink,” Elizabeth Goldman, a researcher at Global Forest Watch, said on the press call, “meaning that forest absorbs more carbon than it emits.” The problems here are especially challenging to solve. Many people clear patches of the forest with fire to grow food for their families, not to profit.

A troubling situation is also occurring in Bolivia, where deforestation continues to surge. 2023 was the country’s third year in a row of record-breaking destruction, the analysis found — part of a decade-long trend of increasing loss, fueled by agriculture. (Colonies of Mennonites, a religious group, are behind much of this recent deforestation.)

In Brazil and a handful of other countries, meanwhile, the high rate of forest loss masks what is actually a somewhat hopeful story.

Bucking the trend: Brazil, Columbia, Indonesia

Although Brazil lost nearly 3 million acres of tropical forest last year — much of which vanished from the Amazon — 2023 was actually a relatively good year. The country lost about a third less primary forest compared to 2022, a drop you can clearly see in the chart below, reaching the lowest level of loss since 2015.

It’s a tale of two presidents: Jair Bolsonaro and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, better known as Lula.

An icon of the left and a leader of Brazil’s Workers Party, Lula first governed between 2003 and 2011, a period that saw a massive drop in deforestation, at least partly due to his pro-environmental agenda. Then Bolsonaro came into power. The right-wing leader stripped enforcement measures, cut spending for science and environmental agencies, and fired environmental experts, among other activities largely in support of the agribusiness industry. Forests were flattened.

Now, Lula is back, after again winning office for a term that started early last year. He’s promised to curtail deforestation, including by stepping up enforcement and tracking criminal activity. And so far, it seems he’s having some success, according to WRI and the Brazilian government. “We have the opportunity again of being a champion on climate, and Lula has promised to do that,” Ana Paula Vargas, Brazil program director at Amazon Watch, an environmental advocacy group, told me last summer.

There’s more good news from Colombia, where destruction has similarly softened. Last year, the country’s rate of forest loss dropped in half, according to WRI, after several years of extreme deforestation — largely due to the region’s changing, complicated politics.

Finally, there’s Indonesia, where there’s also a reason to be hopeful. Home to one of the world’s most diverse and carbon-rich tropical forests, complete with orangutans and tigers and the world’s largest flower, forest loss in Indonesia remains well below its peak of forest loss in the early 2010s (although the country did see a spike in deforestation last year, per the WRI analysis).

A tractor applies pesticides to a soybean field in eastern Bolivia.

For much of the last few decades, Indonesia has cleared forests to plant near rows of oil palm trees — the crops that produce palm oil, now among the most common oils worldwide. It’s used in everything from baby shampoo to ice cream. The industry has been incredibly destructive, to wildlife, local communities, and, really, the entire planet (the stability of which depends on keeping carbon in the ground).

But about 10 years ago, the story began to change. Environmental activists launched campaigns against the most harmful palm oil companies. Indonesia’s government put stricter policies in place. Groups like WRI and TheTreeMap, a data organization, started monitoring deforestation more closely from space, making destruction harder to hide. And as a result, the industry — though still far from perfect — started cleaning itself up.

“I don’t want to sit here and say that the palm oil industry has suddenly become shiny green and sustainable, but it’s mostly stopped deforestation,” Glenn Hurowitz, the founder and CEO of Mighty Earth, an environmental advocacy group, told me last year.

To be clear, countries like Brazil, Colombia, and Indonesia are still clearing their forests by the thousands of acres. It remains a problem that world leaders should not ignore. But the stories here also suggest that a different future for these ecosystems, among the most important in the world, is possible. Forests can be protected. Laws — and the enforcement of them — can root out harmful activities. Activism can actually transform an entire industry.

Yes, what’s happening in places like Brazil and Colombia is just a speck of hope in a world of destruction, but it’s an important reminder that the fate of the world’s tropical forests is in our control.

Read the full story here.

Photos courtesy of

Related News

Biden administration axes controversial climate plan for old growth forests

Forest advocates said the National Old Growth Amendment allowed too much logging, while the timber industry called it too restrictive

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between BPR and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization. After spending more than two years drafting a plan to manage and protect the nation’s old-growth forests as they endure the ravages of climate change, the Biden administration has abruptly abandoned the effort. That decision by the U.S. Forest Service to shelve the National Old Growth Amendment ends, for now, any goal of creating a cohesive federal approach to managing the oldest trees on the 193 million acres of land it manages nationwide. Such steps will instead be taken at the local level, agency chief Randy Moore said. “There is strong support for, and an expectation of us, to continue to conserve these forests based on the best available scientific information,” he wrote in a letter sent Tuesday to regional foresters and forest directors announcing the move. “There was also feedback that there are important place-based differences that we will need to understand in order to conserve old growth forests so they are resilient and can persist into the future, using key place-based best available scientific information based on ecological conditions on the ground.” President Biden launched a wide-ranging effort to bolster climate resilience in the nation’s forests in an executive order he issued on Earth Day in April, 2022. In complying with the order, the Forest Service sought to bring consistency to the protection of mature and old-growth trees in the 154 forests, 20 grasslands, and other lands it manages. Such a change was warranted because the agency defines “old growth” differently in each region of the country depending on the characteristics of the local forest, but generally speaking they are at least 100 years old. Much of the nation’s remaining ancient forests are found in places like Alaska, where some of the trees in the Tongass National Forest are more than 800 years old, and California. In the East, much old-growth is concentrated in the Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia and North Carolina. All told, old-growth forests cover about 24 million acres of the land the Forest Service manages, while mature forests cover about 67 million. The plan would have limited logging in old-growth forests with some exceptions allowed to reduce fire risk. The Forest Service spent months gathering public comment for the proposal, which the Associated Press said was to be finalized any day now. Many scientists and advocates worried the amendment would have codified loopholes that allow logging in old-growth forests. On the other side, Republican legislators, who according to the AP introduced legislation to block any rule, and timber industry representatives argued that logging is critical to many state economies and they deserved more input into, and control over, forest management. Such criticism contributed to the decision to scuttle the plan, the AP reported. Ron Daines, the Republican senator from Montana, issued a statement calling the Forest Service decision “a victory for commonsense local management of our forests” and said “Montana’s old growth forests are already protected by each individual forest plan, so this proposal would have simply delayed work to protect them from wildfire, which is the number one threat facing our old growth forests.” Read Next Wildfires are coming to the Southeast. Can landowners mitigate the risk in time? Kate Morgan Political disagreements over old growth conservation are not new. Jim Furnish, a former deputy director of the Forest Service who retired in 2002, said that the Forest Service has become more responsive to calls for old growth protection over the years. In the 1950s and ’60s, “they typically looked at old growth for us as the place to get the maximum quantity of wood for the highest value,” Furnish said. The debate over conservation of the spotted owl, and the 2001 Roadless Rule, helped paved the way for more dedicated protection of virgin forest, and the creation of “new” old growth through the conservation of mature second-growth forests. Ultimately, Furnish said, the Forest Service’s failure to move quickly after Biden issued his executive order doomed the amendment. Under the Congressional Review Act, which allows lawmakers to review and potentially overturn regulations issued by federal agencies, the new Republican-controlled Congress could have killed any new regulation within 60 days, precluding any future efforts to adopt such an amendment. Will Harlan, the Southeast director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said the plan’s death may be for the best, as old-growth protection can continue at the local level under current regulations while leaving room for future protections. “Probably for the next few years it’s going to be a project-by-project fight, wherever the Forest Service chooses a logging project,” he said. “Advocates and conservation groups are going to be looking closely at any old growth that might be in those projects and fighting to protect them.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Biden administration axes controversial climate plan for old growth forests on Jan 9, 2025.

Forests

Climate

Mountains

Biden administration jettisons effort to protect old-growth forests

The Biden administration is dropping its efforts to issue a policy to protect old-growth forests — though the president previously touted protecting such forests as an important component of his climate agenda. In a statement late Tuesday, Forest Service Chief Randy Moore announced that the agency did not plan to move forward with proposed protections for old trees. The Forest Service also published a letter Moore wrote to regional officials. That letter cited “place-based differences that we will need to understand in order to conserve old growth forests.” Earlier this year, the administration proposed to restrict the cutting of old-growth trees. It said at the time that it intended to formally decide whether to finalize the proposal in January. Studies have shown that old-growth trees store significant amounts of carbon dioxide — making their protection important for fighting climate change. In 2022, Biden issued an Earth Day executive order aimed at protecting old-growth forests. “Our forests are our planet’s lungs. They literally are recycling and cycling CO2 out of the atmosphere. That’s what they do,” he said during a speech at the time. However, with the transition to the second Trump administration looming, even some environmental advocates say halting the effort may have been a savvy move. Alex Craven, a senior campaign representative for the Sierra Club, noted that a congressional repeal could prevent future Democratic administrations from pursuing a substantially similar rule in the future. “I think that the smartest course of action is — based on the way things landed—... to not lose what's been learned from this process, to not lose the fact that we need to formalize some protection, but to not try to force that right now,” Craven said. Biden’s proposal to protect the forests had garnered pushback from Republicans and the timber industry. In his letter, Moore indicated that over the past few years, "the learning and insights we have gained will help us to better steward old growth forests into the future."

Forests

Climate

In 2025, let’s make it game on – not game over – for our precious natural world

Amidst habitat destruction and ecological grief, let’s make a New Year’s resolution for nature — to care for beetles and butterflies, rainforests and reefs, ourselves, and future generations.

Jakub Maculewicz/ShutterstockIt’s just past midnight in the cool, ancient forests of Tasmania. We’ve spent a long day and night surveying endangered Tasmanian devils. All around, small animals scurry through bushes. A devil calls in the darkness. Microbats swoop and swirl as a spotted-tailed quoll slips through the shadows. Working here is spine-tingling and electric. Weeks later, we’re in a moonlit forest in Victoria. It was logged a few years earlier and burnt by bushfire a few decades before that. The old trees are gone. So too are the quolls, bats and moths that once dwelled in their hollows. Invasive blackberry chokes what remains. The silence is deafening, and devastating. In our work as field biologists, we often desperately wish we saw a place before it was cleared, logged, burnt or overtaken by invasive species. Other times, we hold back tears as we read about the latest environmental catastrophe, overwhelmed by anger and frustration. Perhaps you know this feeling of grief? The new year is a chance to reflect on the past and consider future possibilities. Perhaps we’ll sign up to the gym, spend more time with family, or – perish the thought – finally get to the dentist. But let us also set a New Year’s resolution for nature. Let’s make a personal pledge to care for beetles and butterflies, rainforests and reefs, for ourselves, and for future generations. Because now, more than ever — when the natural world seems to be on the precipice — it’s not too late to be a catalyst for positive change. A trail of destruction Our work brings us up close to the beauty of nature. We trek through deserts, stumble through forests and trudge over snowy mountains to study and conserve Australia’s unique wildlife. But we must also confront devastating destruction. The underlying purpose of our work – trying to save species before it is too late – is almost always heartbreaking. It is a race we cannot always win. Since Europeans arrived in Australia, much of the country has become severely degraded. Around 40% of our forests and 99% of grasslands have been cut down and cleared, and much of what remains is under threat. Thousands of ecological communities, plants and animal species are threatened with extinction. And it seems the news only gets worse. The global average temperature for the past decade is the warmest on record, about 1.2°C above the pre-industrial average. Severe bushfires are more and more likely. Yet Australia’s federal government recently approved four coalmine expansions. Australia remains a global logging and deforestation hotspot. We have the world’s worst record for mammal extinctions and lead the world in arresting climate and environment protesters. To top it off, a recent study estimated more than 9,000 native Australian animals, mostly invertebrates, have gone extinct since European arrival. That’s between one and three species every week. Many will never be formally listed, named or known. Is this how the world ends – not with a bang, but with a silent invertebrate apocalypse? More than 9,000 native Australian animals, mostly invertebrates, have gone extinct since European arrival. Pictured: the Kangaroo Island forester moth, which was badly affected by the Black Summer fires. David A. Young This destruction provokes ecological grief The degradation of our environment affects more than distant plants and animals. It resonates deeply with many humans, too. Ecological grief is an emotional response to environmental degradation and climate change, damaging our mental health and wellbeing. It can manifest as sadness, anxiety, despair or helplessness. Or it might bring a profound sense of guilt that we all, directly or indirectly, contribute to the problems facing the natural world. Academic research on ecological grief is growing rapidly, but the concept has been around for decades. In 1949, American writer and philosopher Aldo Leopold – widely considered the father of wildlife ecology and modern conservation – eloquently wrote in his book A Sand County Almanac that: One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds. Much of the damage inflicted on land is quite invisible to laymen. An ecologist must either harden his shell and make believe that the consequences of science are none of his business, or he must be the doctor who sees the marks of death in a community that believes itself well and does not want to be told otherwise. Ecological grief is certainly a heavy burden. But it can also be a catalyst for change. Turning grief into action So how do we unlock the transformative potential of ecological grief? In our experience, it first helps to share our experience with colleagues, friends and family. It’s important to know others have similar feelings and that we are not alone. Next, remember that it is not too late to act – passivity is the enemy of positive change. It’s vital to value and protect what remains, and restore what we can. Taking action doesn’t just help nature, it’s also a powerful way to combat feelings of helplessness and grief. It might involve helping local wildlife, supporting environmental causes, reducing meat consumption, or – perhaps most importantly – lobbying political representatives to demand change. Lastly, for environmental professionals such as us, celebrating wins – no matter how small – can help buoy us to fight another day. We are encouraged by our proud memories of helping return the mainland eastern barred bandicoot to the wild. The species was declared extinct on mainland Australia in 2013. After more than three decades of conservation action, it was taken off the “extinct in the wild list” in 2021, a first for an Australian threatened species. Our work to support mountain pygmy-possum populations after the Black Summer fires helped to ease our grief at the loss of so many forests, as did seeing the end of native forest logging in Victoria a year ago. So, for our New Year’s resolution, let’s harness our ecological grief to bring about positive change. Let’s renew the fight to return those lost voices, and protect our remaining ancient ecosystems. We can, and must, do better – because so much depends on it. And maybe, just maybe, we’ll finally get to the dentist. Darcy Watchorn works for Zoos Victoria, a not-for-profit zoo-based conservation organisation. He is a member of the Ecological Society of Australia, the Australian Mammal Society, and the Society for Conservation Biology.Marissa Parrott works for Zoos Victoria, a not-for-profit zoo-based conservation organisation. She is the Vice President of the Australian Mammal Society and is a member of multiple national and state threatened species Recovery Teams, and IUCN Specialist Groups. She receives no additional payment or funding from outside Zoos Victoria for any work related to threatened species.

Forests

Nature

Business

Drought, Fires and Deforestation Battered Amazon Rainforest in 2024

The Amazon rainforest staggered through another difficult year in 2024

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — 2024 was a brutal year for the Amazon rainforest, with rampant wildfires and extreme drought ravaging large parts of a biome that’s a critical counterweight to climate change.A warming climate fed drought that in turn fed the worst year for fires since 2005. And those fires contributed to deforestation, with authorities suspecting some fires were set to more easily clear land to run cattle. The Amazon is twice the size of India and sprawls across eight countries and one territory, storing vast amounts of carbon dioxide that would otherwise warm the planet. It has about 20% of the world’s fresh water and astounding biodiversity, including 16,000 known tree species. But governments have historically viewed it as an area to be exploited, with little regard for sustainability or the rights of its Indigenous peoples, and experts say exploitation by individuals and organized crime is rising at alarming rates.“The fires and drought experienced in 2024 across the Amazon rainforest could be ominous indicators that we are reaching the long-feared ecological tipping point,” said Andrew Miller, advocacy director at Amazon Watch, an organization that works to protect the rainforest. “Humanity’s window of opportunity to reverse this trend is shrinking, but still open.” There were some bright spots. The level of Amazonian forest loss fell in both Brazil and Colombia. And nations gathered for the annual United Nations conference on biodiversity agreed to give Indigenous peoples more say in nature conservation decisions.“If the Amazon rainforest is to avoid the tipping point, Indigenous people will have been a determinant factor," Miller said. Wildfires and extreme drought Forest loss in Brazil’s Amazon — home to the largest swath of this rainforest — dropped 30.6% compared to the previous year, the lowest level of destruction in nine years. The improvement under leftist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva contrasted with deforestation that hit a 15-year high under Lula's predecessor, far-right leader Jair Bolsonaro, who prioritized agribusiness expansion over forest protection and weakened environmental agencies.In July, Colombia reported historic lows in deforestation in 2023, driven by a drop in environmental destruction. The country's environment minister Susana Muhamad warned that 2024's figures may not be as promising as a significant rise in deforestation had already been recorded by July due to dry weather caused by El Nino, a weather phenomenon that warms the central Pacific. Illegal economies continue to drive deforestation in the Andean nation. “It’s impossible to overlook the threat posed by organized crime and the economies they control to Amazon conservation,” said Bram Ebus, a consultant for Crisis Group in Latin America. “Illegal gold mining is expanding rapidly, driven by soaring global prices, and the revenues of illicit economies often surpass state budgets allocated to combat them.” In Brazil, large swaths of the rainforest were draped in smoke in August from fires raging across the Amazon, Cerrado savannah, Pantanal wetland and the state of Sao Paulo. Fires are traditionally used for deforestation and for managing pastures, and those man-made blazes were largely responsible for igniting the wildfires.Cesar Ipenza, an environmental lawyer who lives in the heart of the Peruvian Amazon, said he believes people are becoming increasingly aware of the Amazon's fundamental role “for the survival of society as a whole." But, like Miller, he worries about a “point of no return of Amazon destruction.”It was the worst year for Amazon fires since 2005, according to nonprofit Rainforest Foundation US. Between January and October, an area larger than the state of Iowa — 37.42 million acres, or about 15.1 million hectares of Brazil’s Amazon — burned. Bolivia had a record number of fires in the first ten months of the year. “Forest fires have become a constant, especially in the summer months and require particular attention from the authorities who don't how to deal with or respond to them,” Ipenza said. Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Guyana also saw a surge in fires this year. Indigenous voices and rights made headway in 2024 The United Nations conference on biodiversity — this year known as COP16 — was hosted by Colombia. The meetings put the Amazon in the spotlight and a historic agreement was made to give Indigenous groups more of a voice on nature conservation decisions, a development that builds on a growing movement to recognize Indigenous people's role in protecting land and combating climate change.Both Ebus and Miller saw promise in the appointment of Martin von Hildebrand as the new secretary general for the Amazon Treaty Cooperation Organization, announced during COP16.“As an expert on Amazon communities, he will need to align governments for joint conservation efforts. If the political will is there, international backers will step forward to finance new strategies to protect the world’s largest tropical rainforest,” Ebus said. Ebus said Amazon countries need to cooperate more, whether in law enforcement, deploying joint emergency teams to combat forest fires, or providing health care in remote Amazon borderlands. But they need help from the wider world, he said.“The well-being of the Amazon is a shared global responsibility, as consumer demand worldwide fuels the trade in commodities that finance violence and environmental destruction,” he said. Next year marks a critical moment for the Amazon, as Belém do Pará in northern Brazil hosts the first United Nations COP in the region that will focus on climate.“Leaders from Amazon countries have a chance to showcase strategies and demand tangible support," Ebus said.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Forests

Business

CO2

‘Bad deal for taxpayers’: huge losses from NSW forest logging, reports reveal

Former MP astonished that taxpayers are ‘literally paying’ to cut down forests sustaining koalas and greater gliders and providing clean drinking waterGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastTwo reports revealing the extent of financial losses from native forest logging in New South Wales raise questions about the economic viability of the industry.The state government’s forestry corporation “consistently made a loss” by paying contractors more for harvesting and haulage than it earned from delivery of timber to sawmills, a NSW Independent Pricing and Review Tribunal (Ipart) report found.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email Continue reading...

Two reports revealing the extent of financial losses from native forest logging in New South Wales raise questions about the economic viability of the industry.The state government’s forestry corporation “consistently made a loss” by paying contractors more for harvesting and haulage than it earned from delivery of timber to sawmills, a NSW Independent Pricing and Review Tribunal (Ipart) report found.“[Forestry Corporation of NSW’s] delivery charge does not fully recover its native timber harvesting and haulage costs, including contract and administration costs, and has not done so for at least the last 10 years,” the report said.The tribunal recommended the state government review the long-term feasibility of native timber harvesting, noting the majority of wood supply agreements were due for renewal in 2028. It also suggested ways to improve cost recovery.Ipart’s findings followed the release of the state forestry corporation’s 2023-24 annual report, which disclosed a $29m loss for its native hardwood forest division in the past year, and losses totalling $72m since 2020-21.The corporation’s annual report said poor financial returns were linked to “operational challenges” and external factors such as extreme weather, regulatory changes such as protections for koalas and greater gliders, and legal injunctions by community groups.Graham Phelan, an economist with Frontier Economics who analysed NSW forestry’s financial status in 2023, said the Ipart report was a timely and valuable contribution in the context of nature policy and forestry reform in NSW which would encourage evidence-based decision-making.Phelan said public native forestry struggled financially, offering “poor returns to taxpayers at best”. “The government should look at the economic costs and benefits of the native forestry business in NSW and consider whether community welfare is served by continuing this practice.”Poor financial performance and environmental costs were among a “myriad of reasons” why governments in Victoria and Western Australia had decided to end native timber harvesting in their states, he said.There were also benefits associated with leaving native forests standing, such as carbon sequestration, erosion control, flood mitigation and tourism, Phelan added. For example, a Victorian government report valued those benefits at up to $12bn, compared with about $89m if harvested for timber and firewood.Public native forestry was a small segment of the NSW forestry sector, he said, alongside a much larger non-native softwood plantation business that served construction and cardboard markets.According to Ipart’s report, about 9% of timber harvested in Australia was native hardwood, and NSW was the second-largest producer of native timber logs after Tasmania.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionA forestry corporation spokesperson said the organisation managed nearly 2m hectares of public native forests on behalf of the NSW government, harvesting about 1% annually. Timber revenue “subsidised” management activities such as firefighting, pests, weeds, conservation and road access, which were only partly government funded.The corporation would undertake Ipart’s recommendations that related to managing prices and costs, the spokesperson said.Ipart’s review of native timber harvesting and haulage costs from 2019 to 2022 was yet to be published but has been provided to the NSW treasurer, Daniel Mookhey, and was released to the ABC under freedom of information laws.Guardian Australia has asked the NSW government for a response to Ipart’s findings.Justin Field from Forest Alliance NSW, a coalition of environmental and conservation groups, said native forestry was a “bad deal for taxpayers”.Field, formerly a member of the NSW legislative council, said it was astonishing that taxpayers were “literally paying” to cut down forests that sustained koalas and greater gliders and provided clean water for drinking.“This is just another piece of evidence to show that native forest logging in New South Wales is economically unviable. We know that it’s ecologically unsustainable, and we know that the forestry corporation has been losing money on its hardwood division for the last decade.”The report provided an opportunity for the state government to end native forest logging and shift towards an industry based on 100% sustainable plantations, he said.

Forests

Government

Water

Suggested Viewing

Foresters

Some teenagers kidnap a kid in the forest and take him to their boss in a cottage.

Forests

Fiction

Youth

Where Do They All Go?

Join us on an quiet trip into the woods and see all the sites, big and small, that you may not have noticed before. There are critters, birds, deer, trees, and great bodies of water that will capture your eye for you to gaze upon. But be forewarned, some day these great sites may disappear in place for something more modern. So enjoy what time you have to gaze on such sites, it may be your last.

Land Use

Experimental

Forests

Juskatla

Juskatla weaves together perspectives of the people who live on the islands of Haida Gwaii—an archipelago on Canada’s Northwest coast, and the ancestral territories of the Haida Nation. From industrial loggers who harvest trees from ancient forests, to Sphenia Jones, a Haida matriarch who bears an intimate knowledge of her People’s territories, Juskatla meditates on the divergent ways of being that shape the islands and its people.

Forests

Indigenous

Culture

El Monte (The Woodland)

In Sierra Maestra, Cuba, José Manuel explains to his granddaughter Malena his world view through deep knowledge of natures' mysteries. Plants and people have great resemblances and must respect each other. José Manuel hopes that Malena inherits the knowledge that he obtained from the father and she becomes a great mountain tree.

Forests

Nature

Family

The Story of a Forest

In 2004, a generation of activists arose in South Florida, carrying the passion of direct action groups like Earth First. and the deep analysis of the global justice movement that had swept the country in the preceding years. These activists sought local issues that exemplified the threats of corporate globalization. They stumbled upon a plan from biotech industry giants acting in collusion with the administration of then-Governor Jeb Bush to clear a vast swath of land in the Northeast Everglades of Florida to accommodate The Scripps Biotech Research Institute - And it was on. Over the next ten years, endless county zoning meetings were counter-balanced by dozens of civil disobedience arrests and a near-constant flow of news headlines about the battle: lawsuits, scandal, corruption, tree sits, endangered species, pranks, blockades, and a roller coaster of incremental victories followed by devastating losses for years on end. THE STORY OF A FOREST captures it all in a 1/2 hour documentary about the Palm Beach County Environmental Coalition (PBCEC) and Everglades Earth First!'s (EEF!) ten-plus year campaign to stop the Scripps Biotech development, with a focus on protecting biodiversity in the Briger forest and the Florida wetlands.

Activism

Forests

Business

Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

GoGreenNation news