Deforestation is the logging and/or burning of trees in the forested area. There are several reasons for doing so: trees or derived charcoal can be sold as a commodity and used by humans, while cleared land is used as pasture, plantations of commodities and human settlement. The removal of trees without sufficient reforestation has resulted in damage to habitat, biodiversity loss and aridity. Deforested regions often degrade into wasteland.
Disregard or ignorance of intrinsic value, lack of ascribed value, lax forest management and deficient environmental law are some of the factors that allow deforestation to occur on a large scale. In many countries, deforestation is an ongoing issue that is causing extinction, changes to climatic conditions, desertification, and displacement of indigenous people.
However, among countries with a per capita GDP of at least $4,600, net deforestation rates have ceased to increase.[1][2]
sourcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Friday, June 5, 2009
CAUSES OF ANTHROPOGENIC DEFORESTATION
There are many root causes of deforestation, including corruption of government institutions,[3][4] the inequitable distribution of wealth and power,[5] population growth[6] and overpopulation,[7][8] and urbanization.[9] Globalization is often viewed as another root cause of deforestation,[10][11] though there are cases in which the impacts of globalization (new flows of labor, capital, commodities, and ideas) have promoted localized forest recovery.[12]
In 2000 the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) found that "the role of population dynamics in a local setting may vary from decisive to negligible," and that deforestation can result from "a combination of population pressure and stagnating economic, social and technological conditions."[6]
According to British environmentalist Norman Myers, 5% of deforestation is due to cattle ranching, 19% due to over-heavy logging, 22% due to the growing sector of palm oil plantations, and 54% due to slash-and-burn farming.[13]
The degradation of forest ecosystems has also been traced to economic incentives that make forest conversion appear more profitable than forest conservation.[14] Many important forest functions have no markets, and hence, no economic value that is readily apparent to the forests' owners or the communities that rely on forests for their well-being.[14] From the perspective of the developing world, the benefits of forest as carbon sinks or biodiversity reserves go primarily to richer developed nations and there is insufficient compensation for these services.
In 2000 the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) found that "the role of population dynamics in a local setting may vary from decisive to negligible," and that deforestation can result from "a combination of population pressure and stagnating economic, social and technological conditions."[6]
According to British environmentalist Norman Myers, 5% of deforestation is due to cattle ranching, 19% due to over-heavy logging, 22% due to the growing sector of palm oil plantations, and 54% due to slash-and-burn farming.[13]
The degradation of forest ecosystems has also been traced to economic incentives that make forest conversion appear more profitable than forest conservation.[14] Many important forest functions have no markets, and hence, no economic value that is readily apparent to the forests' owners or the communities that rely on forests for their well-being.[14] From the perspective of the developing world, the benefits of forest as carbon sinks or biodiversity reserves go primarily to richer developed nations and there is insufficient compensation for these services.
ATMOSPHERIC
Deforestation is ongoing and is shaping climate and geography.[19][20][21][22]
Deforestation is a contributor to global climate change,[23][24] and is often cited as one of the major causes of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Tropical deforestation is responsible for approximately 20% of world greenhouse gas emissions.[25] According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change deforestation, mainly in tropical areas, account for up to one-third of total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions.[26] Trees and other plants remove carbon (in the form of carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere during the process of photosynthesis and release it back into the atmosphere during normal respiration. Only when actively growing can a tree or forest remove carbon over an annual or longer timeframe. Both the decay and burning of wood releases much of this stored carbon back to the atmosphere. In order for forests to take up carbon, the wood must be harvested and turned into long-lived products and trees must be re-planted.[27] Deforestation may cause carbon stores held in soil to be released. Forests are stores of carbon and can be either sinks or sources depending upon environmental circumstances. Mature forests alternate between being net sinks and net sources of carbon dioxide (see carbon dioxide sink and carbon cycle).
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
Deforestation is a contributor to global climate change,[23][24] and is often cited as one of the major causes of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Tropical deforestation is responsible for approximately 20% of world greenhouse gas emissions.[25] According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change deforestation, mainly in tropical areas, account for up to one-third of total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions.[26] Trees and other plants remove carbon (in the form of carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere during the process of photosynthesis and release it back into the atmosphere during normal respiration. Only when actively growing can a tree or forest remove carbon over an annual or longer timeframe. Both the decay and burning of wood releases much of this stored carbon back to the atmosphere. In order for forests to take up carbon, the wood must be harvested and turned into long-lived products and trees must be re-planted.[27] Deforestation may cause carbon stores held in soil to be released. Forests are stores of carbon and can be either sinks or sources depending upon environmental circumstances. Mature forests alternate between being net sinks and net sources of carbon dioxide (see carbon dioxide sink and carbon cycle).
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
HYDROLOGICAL
The water cycle is also affected by deforestation. Trees extract groundwater through their roots and release it into the atmosphere. When part of a forest is removed, the trees no longer evaporate away this water, resulting in a much drier climate. Deforestation reduces the content of water in the soil and groundwater as well as atmospheric moisture.[32] Deforestation reduces soil cohesion, so that erosion, flooding and landslides ensue.[33][34] Forests enhance the recharge of aquifers in some locales, however, forests are a major source of aquifer depletion on most locales.[35]
Shrinking forest cover lessens the landscape's capacity to intercept, retain and transpire precipitation. Instead of trapping precipitation, which then percolates to groundwater systems, deforested areas become sources of surface water runoff, which moves much faster than subsurface flows. That quicker transport of surface water can translate into flash flooding and more localized floods than would occur with the forest cover. Deforestation also contributes to decreased evapotranspiration, which lessens atmospheric moisture which in some cases affects precipitation levels down wind from the deforested area, as water is not recycled to downwind forests
SOURCEThe water cycle is also affected by deforestation. Trees extract groundwater through their roots and release it into the atmosphere. When part of a forest is removed, the trees no longer evaporate away this water, resulting in a much drier climate. Deforestation reduces the content of water in the soil and groundwater as well as atmospheric moisture.[32] Deforestation reduces soil cohesion, so that erosion, flooding and landslides ensue.[33][34] Forests enhance the recharge of aquifers in some locales, however, forests are a major source of aquifer depletion on most locales.[35]
Shrinking forest cover lessens the landscape's capacity to intercept, retain and transpire precipitation. Instead of trapping precipitation, which then percolates to groundwater systems, deforested areas become sources of surface water runoff, which moves much faster than subsurface flows. That quicker transport of surface water can translate into flash flooding and more localized floods than would occur with the forest cover. Deforestation also contributes to decreased evapotranspiration, which lessens atmospheric moisture which in some cases affects precipitation levels down wind from the deforested area, as water is not recycled to downwind fores
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
Shrinking forest cover lessens the landscape's capacity to intercept, retain and transpire precipitation. Instead of trapping precipitation, which then percolates to groundwater systems, deforested areas become sources of surface water runoff, which moves much faster than subsurface flows. That quicker transport of surface water can translate into flash flooding and more localized floods than would occur with the forest cover. Deforestation also contributes to decreased evapotranspiration, which lessens atmospheric moisture which in some cases affects precipitation levels down wind from the deforested area, as water is not recycled to downwind forests
SOURCEThe water cycle is also affected by deforestation. Trees extract groundwater through their roots and release it into the atmosphere. When part of a forest is removed, the trees no longer evaporate away this water, resulting in a much drier climate. Deforestation reduces the content of water in the soil and groundwater as well as atmospheric moisture.[32] Deforestation reduces soil cohesion, so that erosion, flooding and landslides ensue.[33][34] Forests enhance the recharge of aquifers in some locales, however, forests are a major source of aquifer depletion on most locales.[35]
Shrinking forest cover lessens the landscape's capacity to intercept, retain and transpire precipitation. Instead of trapping precipitation, which then percolates to groundwater systems, deforested areas become sources of surface water runoff, which moves much faster than subsurface flows. That quicker transport of surface water can translate into flash flooding and more localized floods than would occur with the forest cover. Deforestation also contributes to decreased evapotranspiration, which lessens atmospheric moisture which in some cases affects precipitation levels down wind from the deforested area, as water is not recycled to downwind fores
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
SOIL
Undisturbed forest has very low rates of soil loss, approximately 2 metric tons per square kilometre (6 short tons per square mile).[citation needed] Deforestation generally increases rates of soil erosion, by increasing the amount of runoff and reducing the protection of the soil from tree litter. This can be an advantage in excessively leached tropical rain forest soils. Forestry operations themselves also increase erosion through the development of roads and the use of mechanized equipment.
China's Loess Plateau was cleared of forest millennia ago. Since then it has been eroding, creating dramatic incised valleys, and providing the sediment that gives the Yellow River its yellow color and that causes the flooding of the river in the lower reaches (hence the river's nickname 'China's sorrow'
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
China's Loess Plateau was cleared of forest millennia ago. Since then it has been eroding, creating dramatic incised valleys, and providing the sediment that gives the Yellow River its yellow color and that causes the flooding of the river in the lower reaches (hence the river's nickname 'China's sorrow'
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
ECOLOGICAL REASONS
Deforestation results in declines in biodiversity.[38] The removal or destruction of areas of forest cover has resulted in a degraded environment with reduced biodiversity.[39] Forests support biodiversity, providing habitat for wildlife;[40] moreover, forests foster medicinal conservation.[41] With forest biotopes being irreplaceable source of new drugs (such as taxol), deforestation can destroy genetic variations (such as crop resistance) irretrievably.[42]
Since the tropical rainforests are the most diverse ecosystems on Earth[43][44] and about 80% of the world's known biodiversity could be found in tropical rainforests,[45][46] removal or destruction of significant areas of forest cover has resulted in a degraded[47] environment with reduced biodiversity.[48]
Scientific understanding of the process of extinction is insufficient to accurately make predictions about the impact of deforestation on biodiversity.[49] Most predictions of forestry related biodiversity loss are based on species-area models, with an underlying assumption that as forest are declines species diversity will decline similarly.[50] However, many such models have been proven to be wrong and loss of habitat does not necessarily lead to large scale loss of species.[51] Species-area models are known to overpredict the number of species known to be threatened in areas where actual deforestation is ongoing, and greatly overpredict the number of threatened species that are widespread.[52]SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
Since the tropical rainforests are the most diverse ecosystems on Earth[43][44] and about 80% of the world's known biodiversity could be found in tropical rainforests,[45][46] removal or destruction of significant areas of forest cover has resulted in a degraded[47] environment with reduced biodiversity.[48]
Scientific understanding of the process of extinction is insufficient to accurately make predictions about the impact of deforestation on biodiversity.[49] Most predictions of forestry related biodiversity loss are based on species-area models, with an underlying assumption that as forest are declines species diversity will decline similarly.[50] However, many such models have been proven to be wrong and loss of habitat does not necessarily lead to large scale loss of species.[51] Species-area models are known to overpredict the number of species known to be threatened in areas where actual deforestation is ongoing, and greatly overpredict the number of threatened species that are widespread.[52]SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
China: Facing two evils -deforestation and monoculture tree plantations
The entrance of China into the global capitalist market with the ensuing accelerated expansion of its economy has been marked by a growing hunger for timber. 
The path to industrialization first swallowed the country’s forests. Rampant logging led to the irretrievable loss of China’s natural wealth: accelerated desertification, decline of biodiversity and loss of forests up to the point that there is almost no old-growth left in China. The case of Yichun serves to illustrate the issue. The Guardian’s correspondent Jonathan Watts, reports (1) that in “Yichun, a north-eastern city in Heilongjiang province close to the frozen river border with Siberia, the forests were once so dense that the area was known as the Great Northern Wilderness. But more than fifty years of unsustainable logging have taken their toll. Yichun was classified last year (2008) as one of China's 12 ‘resource-depleted cities.’ ‘We are in a situation where we have no wood to cut. None of the forests are mature enough,’ Dong Zhiyong, former vice-minister in the forestry administration said.”
With the soil exposed to erosion fierce sandstorms have lashed the country while deforestation –especially in the upper reaches of river systems-- has contributed to devastating floods that caused thousands of deaths and millions of displaced people.
In 1998, a sweeping logging ban was established. However, wood consumption still increased, now at the expense of the forests of neighbouring countries (e.g. Burma, Cambodia, Russia) as well as of far away countries such as those in Western Africa, among other.
The need for papermaking resources added to wood demand and as result China launched in 2000 a Fast-growing and High-yielding Timber Plantations Program. The program –part of a wider set of six key programs- was to be established in 18 eastern and southwestern provinces and by 2012 the government aims to have planted an area of 44 million hectares (see WRM Bulletin Nº 85). This has implied land tenure reforms shifting from state-run or collectively owned land to land privatization in a country where farmer population is 1 billion out of a population of 1.5 billion.
The path to industrialization first swallowed the country’s forests. Rampant logging led to the irretrievable loss of China’s natural wealth: accelerated desertification, decline of biodiversity and loss of forests up to the point that there is almost no old-growth left in China. The case of Yichun serves to illustrate the issue. The Guardian’s correspondent Jonathan Watts, reports (1) that in “Yichun, a north-eastern city in Heilongjiang province close to the frozen river border with Siberia, the forests were once so dense that the area was known as the Great Northern Wilderness. But more than fifty years of unsustainable logging have taken their toll. Yichun was classified last year (2008) as one of China's 12 ‘resource-depleted cities.’ ‘We are in a situation where we have no wood to cut. None of the forests are mature enough,’ Dong Zhiyong, former vice-minister in the forestry administration said.”
With the soil exposed to erosion fierce sandstorms have lashed the country while deforestation –especially in the upper reaches of river systems-- has contributed to devastating floods that caused thousands of deaths and millions of displaced people.
In 1998, a sweeping logging ban was established. However, wood consumption still increased, now at the expense of the forests of neighbouring countries (e.g. Burma, Cambodia, Russia) as well as of far away countries such as those in Western Africa, among other.
The need for papermaking resources added to wood demand and as result China launched in 2000 a Fast-growing and High-yielding Timber Plantations Program. The program –part of a wider set of six key programs- was to be established in 18 eastern and southwestern provinces and by 2012 the government aims to have planted an area of 44 million hectares (see WRM Bulletin Nº 85). This has implied land tenure reforms shifting from state-run or collectively owned land to land privatization in a country where farmer population is 1 billion out of a population of 1.5 billion.
SOURCEhttp://www.wrm.org.uy/bulletin/141/China.html
Direct Causes of Deforestation
- Agriculture and Cattle-RaisingDams and
- Megaprojects
- Fires
- Logging
- Mangroves
- Shrimp FarmingMiningOil and
- GasPlantations
sourcehttp://www.wrm.org.uy/deforestation/index.html
PLANTATION
A plantation is a large farm or estate, usually in a tropical or subtropical country, where crops that are not consumed for food are grown for sale in distant markets, rather than for local 
consumption. Such crops include cotton, coffee, tobacco, sugar cane, sisal, and various oil seeds and rubber trees. Farms that produce alfalfa, Lespedeza, clover, and other forage crops are usually not called plantations. The term "plantation" has usually not included large orchards, but has included the planting of trees for lumber. A plantation is always a monoculture over a large area and does not include extensive naturally occurring stands of plants that have economic value. The use of the term is governed by the linguistic conventions of natural language and does not have the rigorous consistency of formal language.
One of the earliest examples of a plantation was the latifundia. In antiquity, these produced large quantities of wine and olive oil for export. Because of its large size, a plantation takes advantage of economy of scale. Protectionist policies and natural comparative advantage have contributed to determining where plantations have been located. Plantation agriculture grew rapidly with the increase in international trade and the development of a worldwide economy that followed the expansion of European colonial empires. Like every
economic activity, it has changed over time. Earlier forms of plantation
agriculture were associated with large disparities of wealth and income, foreign ownership and political influence, exploitative social systems such as indentured labor, and in the extreme case, slavery. The history of the environmental, social and economic issues relating to plantation agriculture are covered in articles that focus on those subjects.
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation
consumption. Such crops include cotton, coffee, tobacco, sugar cane, sisal, and various oil seeds and rubber trees. Farms that produce alfalfa, Lespedeza, clover, and other forage crops are usually not called plantations. The term "plantation" has usually not included large orchards, but has included the planting of trees for lumber. A plantation is always a monoculture over a large area and does not include extensive naturally occurring stands of plants that have economic value. The use of the term is governed by the linguistic conventions of natural language and does not have the rigorous consistency of formal language.One of the earliest examples of a plantation was the latifundia. In antiquity, these produced large quantities of wine and olive oil for export. Because of its large size, a plantation takes advantage of economy of scale. Protectionist policies and natural comparative advantage have contributed to determining where plantations have been located. Plantation agriculture grew rapidly with the increase in international trade and the development of a worldwide economy that followed the expansion of European colonial empires. Like every
economic activity, it has changed over time. Earlier forms of plantation
agriculture were associated with large disparities of wealth and income, foreign ownership and political influence, exploitative social systems such as indentured labor, and in the extreme case, slavery. The history of the environmental, social and economic issues relating to plantation agriculture are covered in articles that focus on those subjects.
SOURCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation
Seeing the Future from High Above Greenland
Last week, I flew over the coast of Greenland at 800 kph.
As the northern sun glinted off the aluminum of the wing, I watched the ice floes -- at first rare white specks on the Prussian blue sea -- grow gradually more numerous until they ran in great streaks of broken ice where the waves were pushing them together. Gradually they grew closer together still, and more studded with icebergs, until in the distance I could see enormous sheets of ice, glowing white and blending on the horizon into clouds and fog. And then, rising steeply up, the mountains of Greenland, masses of ice and snow and dark brown rock. It was like watching a documentary on global warming in reverse.
Except it wasn't. That footage won't run backwards. I have no idea if massive expanses of broken ice at that location are the norm or unusual at this time of year. But we do know that climate change is driving us towards an ice-free world, more quickly than we expected, and by flying home from Portugal, I was helping fuel that great planetary melting.
As symbols, it doesn't get much better than that: rocketing across the sky in an aluminum tube, nibbling on a "seasonal salad" and casually admiring the way the melting floes below resemble the drifts of apple blossoms covering the sidewalk near my house earlier this spring, while going over my notes from the two conferences I spoken at over the last week on climate change, the sustainability crisis, and how big business can respond.
We are all chained to a paradox: in order to change these things, we must to transform our economy into one capable of thriving within a one planet footprint; we have to continue to use more and more of the very tools which are eroding our planet's atmosphere, ocean and living systems in the first place. No one's hands are clean here.
To pretend otherwise is silly. We absolutely all should do what we can to shrink our own footprints. But much of the damage we do is done by others in our names, and is intricately connected to being able to work in an effective way. I've made clear my ambiguous feelings about flying before (feelings which grow less ambiguous the more I fly, regardless of how many offsets I buy), but the reality is that I am certain that my personal share of the CO2 left floating in the contrails behind me is a good investment when weighed against the opportunity to share worldchanging ideas with audiences capable of creating real change. It's not ideal, but we can't afford the self-deception of false purity.
SOURCEhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006750.html
As the northern sun glinted off the aluminum of the wing, I watched the ice floes -- at first rare white specks on the Prussian blue sea -- grow gradually more numerous until they ran in great streaks of broken ice where the waves were pushing them together. Gradually they grew closer together still, and more studded with icebergs, until in the distance I could see enormous sheets of ice, glowing white and blending on the horizon into clouds and fog. And then, rising steeply up, the mountains of Greenland, masses of ice and snow and dark brown rock. It was like watching a documentary on global warming in reverse.
Except it wasn't. That footage won't run backwards. I have no idea if massive expanses of broken ice at that location are the norm or unusual at this time of year. But we do know that climate change is driving us towards an ice-free world, more quickly than we expected, and by flying home from Portugal, I was helping fuel that great planetary melting.
As symbols, it doesn't get much better than that: rocketing across the sky in an aluminum tube, nibbling on a "seasonal salad" and casually admiring the way the melting floes below resemble the drifts of apple blossoms covering the sidewalk near my house earlier this spring, while going over my notes from the two conferences I spoken at over the last week on climate change, the sustainability crisis, and how big business can respond.
We are all chained to a paradox: in order to change these things, we must to transform our economy into one capable of thriving within a one planet footprint; we have to continue to use more and more of the very tools which are eroding our planet's atmosphere, ocean and living systems in the first place. No one's hands are clean here.
To pretend otherwise is silly. We absolutely all should do what we can to shrink our own footprints. But much of the damage we do is done by others in our names, and is intricately connected to being able to work in an effective way. I've made clear my ambiguous feelings about flying before (feelings which grow less ambiguous the more I fly, regardless of how many offsets I buy), but the reality is that I am certain that my personal share of the CO2 left floating in the contrails behind me is a good investment when weighed against the opportunity to share worldchanging ideas with audiences capable of creating real change. It's not ideal, but we can't afford the self-deception of false purity.
SOURCEhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006750.html
WHAT IS THE DUTY OF EVERY CITIZEN TO PROTECT THE GREEN LIFE
IT IS THE DUTY OF EVERY CITIZEN TO PROTECT THE GREEN LIFE .
THIS PROSPECT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED AS ONE OF OUR CITIZENS DUTIES IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
THERE SHOULD ALWAYS BE A SYMBIOTIC RELATION BETWEEN PLANTS AND HUMANS
NOW A DAYSAs symbols, it doesn't get much better than that: rocketing across the sky in an aluminum tube, nibbling on a "seasonal salad" and casually admiring the way the melting floes below resemble the drifts of apple blossoms covering the sidewalk near my house earlier this spring, while going over my notes from the two conferences I spoken at over the last week on climate change, the sustainability crisis, and how big business can respond.
We are all chained to a paradox: in order to change these things, we must to transform our economy into one capable of thriving within a one planet footprint; we have to continue to use more and more of the very tools which are eroding our planet's atmosphere, ocean and living systems in the first place. No one's hands are clean here. THIS RELATION IS OFTEN
IMBALANCED WHICH IS SO DISASTER
SOURCEhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006750.html
THIS PROSPECT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED AS ONE OF OUR CITIZENS DUTIES IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
THERE SHOULD ALWAYS BE A SYMBIOTIC RELATION BETWEEN PLANTS AND HUMANS
NOW A DAYSAs symbols, it doesn't get much better than that: rocketing across the sky in an aluminum tube, nibbling on a "seasonal salad" and casually admiring the way the melting floes below resemble the drifts of apple blossoms covering the sidewalk near my house earlier this spring, while going over my notes from the two conferences I spoken at over the last week on climate change, the sustainability crisis, and how big business can respond.
We are all chained to a paradox: in order to change these things, we must to transform our economy into one capable of thriving within a one planet footprint; we have to continue to use more and more of the very tools which are eroding our planet's atmosphere, ocean and living systems in the first place. No one's hands are clean here. THIS RELATION IS OFTEN
IMBALANCED WHICH IS SO DISASTER
SOURCEhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006750.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
