Over 10,000 Amazon Rainforest Species Risk Extinction, Landmark Report Warns (www.cbc.ca) 23
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CBC.ca: More than 10,000 species of plants and animals are at high risk of extinction due to the destruction of the Amazon rainforest -- 35 percent of which has already been deforested or degraded, according to the draft of a landmark scientific report published on Wednesday. Produced by the Science Panel for the Amazon (SPA), the report brings together research on the world's largest rainforest from 200 scientists from across the globe. It is the most detailed assessment of the state of the forest to date and both makes clear the vital role the Amazon plays in global climate and the profound risks it is facing. Cutting deforestation and forest degradation to zero in less than a decade "is critical," the report said. It also called for massive restoration of already destroyed areas. Furthermore, the report said the continued destruction caused by human interference in the Amazon puts more than 8,000 endemic plants and 2,300 animals at high risk of extinction. According to the report, of the Amazon basin's original size, 18 per cent has already been deforested -- mostly for agriculture and illegal timber. Another 17 per cent has been degraded.
A separate study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday showed that some parts of the Amazon are emitting more carbon than they absorb, based on measurements of carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide taken from above the rainforest between 2010 and 2018. Lead author Luciana Gatti, a scientist at Brazil's Inpe space research agency, suggests the increased carbon emissions in southeastern Amazonia -- where deforestation is fierce -- is not only the result of fires and direct destruction, but also due to rising tree mortality as severe drought and higher temperatures become more common.
A separate study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday showed that some parts of the Amazon are emitting more carbon than they absorb, based on measurements of carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide taken from above the rainforest between 2010 and 2018. Lead author Luciana Gatti, a scientist at Brazil's Inpe space research agency, suggests the increased carbon emissions in southeastern Amazonia -- where deforestation is fierce -- is not only the result of fires and direct destruction, but also due to rising tree mortality as severe drought and higher temperatures become more common.
Business is business. Just kiss it goodbye. (Score:3, Insightful)
Nobody cares. Very unfortunate
Re: (Score:2)
Business is business indeed. Every time there's a story about the destruction of the rainforest, I have the same thought: We convert lots of land for use by factories, cows, houses, etc. Aren't we basically telling these poor countries to continue being poor and avoid industrialization? I think it's important that we save the rainforest, but how do you convince them to avoid what was obviously successful for us? Is this a bad take?
Re: (Score:2)
Business is business indeed. Every time there's a story about the destruction of the rainforest, I have the same thought: We convert lots of land for use by factories, cows, houses, etc. Aren't we basically telling these poor countries to continue being poor and avoid industrialization? I think it's important that we save the rainforest, but how do you convince them to avoid what was obviously successful for us? Is this a bad take?
Yes. It is a bad take.
You have been tricked into believing the false dilemma between destruction of the environment and denying progress.
The third path is to help poorer nations/regions leapfrog to better more modern solutions and skip over the destructive intermediate stages. It is not necessary for everyone to repeat the mistakes of the past to learn from them.
A successful example of such leapfrogging is the spread of cellular communications in poor nations -bypassing the difficulties of running wires e
Re: (Score:2)
OK, but that's not happening right? We haven't moved beyond farming cows for food, so how are we going to tell them not to? We'd have to do something like offer them money or jobs somehow to protect the rainforest.
Landmark report (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a serious problem we should fix.
Pedandtically speaking, calling it a "Landmark report" seems a little excessive, since I've been hearing these kinds of reports since the 80s. There are even songs about it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, because we've got an amazing track record of meddling with nature. We can definitely just fuck it up and then fix it no problem, nothing could go wrong, because it's not a chaotic system with trillions of variables or anything. Besides, as humans we're a super-species that can obviously keep track of trillions of variables and predict precisely what will happen when we meddle anyway, because we're that special.
If you've not figured it out, what I'm saying is don't be so fucking stupid.
Re: Out of? (Score:1)
When you consider how many species and entire clades have gone extinct, nature does not seem great at it either.
Re: Out of? (Score:1)
It depends on how you define a species. If you use the 'capable of interbreeding' definition, it's probably no where near 10k. But the recent trend of identifying species by their habitat means that a lizard (for example) living in one creek might be considered extinct when it disappears. Even when the next creek is still infested with them.
They are not under extintion. (Score:2)
What really pisses me off... (Score:5, Insightful)
What really pisses me off is sentences like this: "Cutting deforestation and forest degradation to zero in less than a decade "is critical," the report said."
It's always some deadline set in the future, being 10 or 20 years from now. It should be done NOW. Not in a month, not in a year, especially not in a decade. The rainforest is already ruined way too much as it is NOW. Make action and do something NOW!
It feels like those news about Microsoft finally making a proper OS or the year of the desktop Linux. For me Linux has been a desktop of choice for a decade, and I don't care who else uses it.
Re: (Score:2)
why people world-wide are voting for authoritarian strong-men: late capitalism
What does that even mean? People vote because "late capitalism"?
It is no joke, scary (Score:3)
It's a major problem everybody needs to be aware of... and I guess most are, but to the extent of 10,000 species... that is beyond terrible. Better government and less corruption is critical. The US needs to lean on those guys.
Buy it then (Score:2)
If deforestation needs to stop, tell whomever cares to get the funds together to buy the rainforest. Then they can own the land and protect it.
The amazon (Score:2)