Dear all, again, I am forwarding you a letter from Joe Domask ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) regarding the Brazilian Amazon E-mail Campaign. regards, asep s. suntana c-7, lead Indonesia ===================== ----- Original Message ----- From: Domask, Joe To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Cc: 'asuntana' Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2000 8:10 PM Subject: FYI- Brazilian Amazon Email Campaign For your information, This was my response to an earlier email (sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] among othe places) about the Brazilian Amazon about to be cut in half. Regards, Joe -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All, This email about the Brazilian Amazon and the fact that it is about to be cut in half has been circulating a bit lately. However, the facts are distorted and even blatantly false. Its hyped up and misleading. Ultimately, this type of distorted campaign effort backfires. You need to be honest with the people when trying to promote conservation. I am replying not so much to Asep (who forwarded this) as to the originator of this email and others who are likely to receive it. Regarding the facts: 1. The Brazilian Congress did not vote on this. It was never let out of the Congressional committee. Thanks to efforts by many NGOs in Brazil (WWF-Brazil, ISA, GTA, FOE, Imaflora, etc.) who have been working on this issue and have achieved provisionary success (see, for example, http://www.socioambiental.org/website/noticias/english/brazil/20001705.html), though the battle is not over. 2. The law, if passed, would not reduce the forest by 50% (as the email states it would). It would change private land policies, legally permitting them to clear 50% of their land instead of only 20% or 30% (depending on the region). In my humble opinion, the actual law itself would not dramatically change rates of deforestation, especially not in the amount of 50% of the forest being wiped out. The laws in the Amazon on land issues are by and large disregarded anyway. There are larger forces at play (broader economic policies and incentives and state development programs) than this high profile forestry code. 3. Land clearing in the Amazon is not primarily done for timber, but for other purposes. And when it cleared for timber, the products are for Brazil's domestic market. Most of it is done by domestic companies. (Friend of the Earth recent report, "Hitting the Target," clearly illustrates this). 4. It is incorrect to say that "the soil in the amazon forest is useless without the forest itself." This may be true for a large part of the Amazon region, but the Amazon is tremendously diverse, and for many parts of the region the soil has proven to be useful and even sustainable for years (especially for soy production in parts of the southwestern Amazon). Not that this is good for the forest -- its not. All this said, I am definitely in favor (and devote much of my professional and personal time to) protecting the Amazon from destruction, but sometimes these misleading emotional (and simplified) appeals backfire. Regards, Joe --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
