Urbanization Has Left the Amazon Burning 93
pigrabbitbear writes "Farming, logging, and strip mining has long altered much of the Amazon rainforest, with slash-and-burn land-clearing techniques turning large portions of the forest into patchworks of pastures, second-growth forest, and degraded land. Now, rural people are increasingly moving to booming Amazonian cities; paradoxically, the land they're leaving behind is being ravaged by wildfires. A new paper published in PNAS shows that in the Peruvian Amazon, land use changes and depopulation have let large wildfires fly through converted land. It puts a damper on those optimistic that the urbanization of the Amazon may allow parts of the forest to recover, by centralizing populated areas and leaving old converted land to be slowly gobbled up by the encroaching forest."
Most folks don't understand... (Score:5, Insightful)
Amazonian soils are poor. The wealth is in the trees and the plants and animals that live there. Slash and burn and the soil is depleted in just a few years, and there is nothing left for trees to come back to. Add wildfires, erosion, desertification, and accelerating habitat loss and without a concerted effort BY PEOPLE to put things back complete with planting saplings and fertilizing, there isn't much hope for reforestation. The good news is that there are a growing number of displaced aboriginal peoples who would be only too happy to nurture the regrowth of the forest, they would simply need education and resources to do the reforestation.
Re:Most folks don't understand... (Score:2, Insightful)
Everybody understands. The people who matter just don't care. I guess they would rather eat than save the planet for your kids.
Re:Most folks don't understand... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Most folks don't understand... (Score:5, Insightful)
You note that the European Common Agriculture Policy is impeding progress, yet blame it on the "free market"? It was short-sighted individuals who caused this mess, but clearly the socialist policies aren't fixing it.
Giving subsidies to useless rich fucks who happen to own a lot of land, while small owners are left in the cold is now Socialism? Oh fuck, I must have read the wrong books, then. But it sure is Free Market all the way, because the corollary to the neoliberal theories is that only the rich can suck on State's tits, all the others can't because that'd be Communism and promoting laziness.
And tossing away the right to own property in the interest of the "common good" would be rash and cause long-term hardship.
When exactly did I suggest that? Can't you guys see any colour besides black and white?
If you have great ideas for saving this land, why don't you draw up some plans, organize, and lobby for the government to purchase these neglected lands through a more democratic process of eminent domain?
Who says I don't? Who says they give a fuck? Money talks louder, dude.