Critical Thinking Paper

Regulating Deforestation Rowyn Peel

CAP 9 Red
3/17/2013

Regulating Deforestation

Because the loss of forests increases the greenhouse effect; the destruction of entire forests instead of individual trees unnecessarily endangers wildlife; and deforestation increases the chances of soil erosion and harmful chemicals in water supplies, the United States Environmental Protection Agency must regulate deforestation by increasing funding and support for the United Nations Reducing Emissions from tropical Deforestation and Degradation program. Forests, especially rainforests, are carbon sinks that help regulate the greenhouse effect; carbon, methane, and other gases in the atmosphere trap solar energy and warm the earth. Extra carbon released through deforestation warms the atmosphere to the point of disrupting normal weather patterns and potentially shifting entire climates. Clear-cutting poses an unnecessary hazard to animals by destroying ecosystems instead of cutting the number of trees needed and replanting those same native trees. The disadvantages of mass erosion reshaping landscapes; chemical- and soil-contaminated water supplies; and inadequacy of the cleared land for farming far outweigh the benefits of entirely cleared land or mass amounts of timber. There is not enough regulation, enforcement of regulations, or consideration in preventing deforestation in the United States and the world.

There has been little effort to stop deforestation completely, because people want money or farmland, and ignore or deny the negative consequences. In 2009, the Sierra Pacific Industries, a privately owned company, had planned to clear-cut 1.7 million acres of Sierra forest for timber, replant the land with one species of pine, and then sell the land for housing development to make the highest profit possible. Warren Alford, a California landowner whose land suffers from the

effects of the companys nearby clearcutting, said, They have a real manifest destiny type of mentality (Gardner). On the Gulf coast, a large mulch company cuts down entire stands of cypress trees to make mulch that will not float away in storms (Editorial: Mulch better). Illegal logging is all too common, especially in tropical countries such as Brazil and Gambia. Although police do apprehend some illegal loggers, a reporter says, It is not unusual for trucks to be seen carrying a great quantity of logs along our streets and highways in Gambia (Stop Illegal Logging). The loggers rarely take into account the environmental damage of clear-cutting, or they believe that it is negligible in comparison with their profit.

Aside from ignorance and greed, deforestation is spurred by the needs of a growing population. The expanding population causes demands for more space, food, and fuel, which come from destroying forestlands (World Must Move Faster). According to a report by the Food and Agriculture Organization in 2011, urbanization and agriculture [are] the main cause[s] of deforestation in Central America, and Luis Romano said cleared land is often for growing coffee (Valladares). People cannot survive without food, but unfortunately, they do not always produce food in the most efficient, environmentally sustainable fashion.

Deforestation itself is extremely harmful to the environment, and therefore to humans as well. It ruins local and global ecosystems, landscapes, water supplies, and water cycles for people, wildlife, and plants. Rainforests once covered 14 per cent of the Earth's surface; now they cover about 6 per cent, and the devastation is continuing (Adams). As this destruction of global and local environments continues, it becomes harder to repair. As opposed to natural forms of clear-cutting in which the trees are burned or otherwise returned to the soil,

deforestation deprives the soil of its energy and energy collectors, greatly extending the time required for any kind of healthy regrowth (Anderson). Unfortunately, regulating it is not a high priority for leaders or individuals, because most people care about the economy more than the environment.

Regulations may be difficult to enforce for various reasons. In some countries, the government is too weak, so people will not follow the laws even if they exist. In Gambia, eight truckloads of timber were impounded by police in the Lower River Region, but that did not stop more illegal loggers from continuing to destroy forests (Stop Illegal Logging). In most countries, leaders would rather focus on seemingly more urgent problems. Many people do not want to think about such a large goal, because it does not fit with their lifestyle. Andrew Simms of the New Economics Foundation says, If your objective is to give the greatest priority to nature and society, you cannot win in an economy built on endless accumulation and the legal guarantee that the interests of capital come first; basically, there is a mentality of money before nature (McCarthy). Until someone or something, such as many major natural disasters, convinces the leaders that they must change their focus to environmental protection, they might not put a lot of effort into any laws they make and regulate regarding deforestation.

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) is one international attempt by the UN to regulate deforestation by paying people to leave trees standing. It can be helpful in reducing forest degradation; in Brazil, state governments have been working towards REDD projects, which resulted in deforestation rates being slashed by over 70% between 2004 and 2011 (A Delay). REDD can form into national or local programs; local

would work better, because most conservation work is achieved by grassroots activities (Fehse). One problem with REDD is that it needs a strong government in place to start, fund, and/or run effective, large-scale projects, and the tropical countries with the most important forests include some of the world's worst-run places (The World Must Move Faster). Another problem is how to obtain the money, though one option would be a carbon tax. Another would be carbon offsets, which are already in place. There is also the option of awarding credits to successful projects and penalizing further deforestation by taking away credits. Even if REDD itself is not very effective, it can be a way to entice developing countries to join more fully in the fight against climate change (Fehse). Finally, it is not enough to preserve forests passively; as Hilary Benn said, We need to plant trees so they can balance the carbon levels again, but also accept REDD to stop further degradation. If REDD were well funded and widely accepted, the monetary rewards might discourage more people from clear-cutting.

There are solutions other than total destruction for most of the reasons behind deforestation. A major cause is to provide space for agriculture. People should minimize the carbon footprint of commercial farming by growing their own food in gardens, on rooftops, and/or with hydroponics, or at least buying local produce. Another cause is the commercial breeding of cattle. Cattle need a lot of cleared land and produce a lot of methane, another major greenhouse gas. To reduce the space needed for cattle, people should eat less beef. Another source of deforestation is development. This often involves destroying natural ecosystems to create room for extensive human housing. Developers should keep as much of the natural environment in place as possible and build around it without disrupting ecosystems, and not build unnecessarily large housing. People can reduce the amount of timber necessary for wood

products by using fewer wood products. The US EPA can persuade people to reduce these causes of deforestation by making the alternatives more economically viable.

Clear-cutting is an unnecessary and destructive method of logging. After clear-cutting a forest, logging companies typically use bulldozing and repeated, intensive herbicide applications Then they fertilize the area and replant it with rows of the same tree (Gardner). Among the herbicides employed on California clearcuts [At least 5] pose hazards to water sources, specifically, the Sierras, which provide 60% of Californias water (Gardner). Another problem is that without tree roots holding the soil in place, there is an increase in erosion, which contaminates the water and decreases the fertility of the land. Even after people plant the new trees, Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson says, A single-species pine plantation contains 90 to 95% fewer species than the forest that preceded it, and makes it impossible for some [animal] species to migrate, find shelter or locate food in their now obliterated habitat (Gardner). There are many negative effects, including the loss of essential medicinal herbs soil erosion, flooding, and desertification [and] a decrease in the amount of rainfall, because the trees can no longer hold water within local cycles (Stop Illegal Logging). Those are some of the relatively immediate repercussions of clear-cutting.

Deforestation contributes up to 25% of annual global emissions, but in climate change discussions, it is demoni[z]ed for distracting attention away from reducing the burning of fossil fuels (Fehse). According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Land conversion and deforestation cause nearly two billion tonnes of carbon to be emitted each year, about a fifth of all global emissions (Benn). Trees are carbon sinks, meaning they take in carbon;

destroying trees releases that carbon and decreases how much carbon trees absorb. Science has confirmed that excess carbon in the atmosphere traps solar energy and warms the Earth, which is already causing more severe weather, the beginnings of shifting climates. If people continue to clear-cut forests, the increasing amount of greenhouse gases will lead to uncomfortable, extreme climates in areas with relatively moderate climates. Hurricane Sandy shows that this change is already happening. Sandy devastated areas that did not previously get severe hurricanes. In the San Francisco Bay Area, the already cool, foggy summer climate is becoming colder and greyer. While people focus on reducing pollution in order to solve climate change, they may not address the fact that other actions, such as deforestation, also contribute to the unbalanced carbon levels in the atmosphere. Deforestation has long-term consequences that have already begun.

The EPA must prohibit deforestation and limit wood product usage and imports, because clear-cutting harms the environment, endangers wildlife unnecessarily, and threatens human life. Some people believe that they need to clear-cut forests to do something more important with the land or to get wood more easily, but they ignore or are unaware of the repercussions. There are not enough regulations around the world, so there has been a net loss of worldwide forestland each year since the Industrial Era (Adams). The EPA must also encourage people to reduce their wood product consumption, because that may contribute to deforestation; even if the wood came from legal logging, it still kills trees. Some major wood product consumers are schools/teachers, so they could try to limit the amount of paper used in class and for homework. Deforestation is a serious threat to the planet on a local and global scale, so the US EPA must work with the UN to promote REDD.

Works Cited

Adams, Emily E. "Eco-Economy Indicators: Forest Cover." Earth Policy Institute. Earth Policy Institute, 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. Anderson, Thomas. "Cheaper but not better. (Letter to the Editor)." Globe & Mail [Toronto, Canada] 13 June 1994: A12. Global Issues in Context. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. Benn, Hilary. "We must lay down axes, pick up our shovels, and get tree-planting." Independent [London, England] 14 Dec. 2009: 32. Global Issues in Context. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. "A Delay in Key Decisions at Doha Could See Redd+ Lose Its Climate Change Focus." Africa News Service 29 Nov. 2012. Student Resources In Context. Web. 16 Apr. 2013 "Editorial: Mulch better: Environmentally friendly products sidestep the need for mulch obtained from clearcutting cypress." Houston Chronicle 31 Mar. 2007: n. pag. Points of View. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. Fehse, Jan. "A United Nations' Carbon Offset Deforestation Project Can Help Prevent Deforestation." Carbon Offsets. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "Forests and Carbon Trading: Seeing the Wood and the Trees." OECD Observer (May-June 2008). Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 16 Apr. 2013. Gardner, Hallie. "Cut Down." E: The Environmental Magazine Mar.-Apr. 2009: n. pag. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. McCarthy, Michael. "The Green Movement at 50: Mission Unaccomplished." The Independent. 14 Jun 2012: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.03 Feb 2013. "Stop Illegal Logging (Editorial)." Africa News Service 19 Oct. 2011: n. pag. Global Issues in Context. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. Valladares, Danilo. "Central America: Region Has Highest Rate of Forest Loss." Global Information Network. 15 Feb 2011: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 04 Mar 2013. The World Must Move Faster to Conserve Tropical Rainforests." Biodiversity. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "The World's Lungs: There Is Hope for Forests, But Mankind Needs to Move Faster if They Are to Be Saved." The Economist (23 Sept. 2010). Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 3 Feb. 2013.

Annotated Bibliography Adams, Emily E. "Eco-Economy Indicators: Forest Cover." Earth Policy Institute. Earth Policy Institute, 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. This provides details of forest cover from 1990 to 2010, reasons for deforestation (often economic: growing commercial crops in place of forests), countries that are trying to prevent it, why, and how. It points out that the US contributes to deforestation in other countries, even if there is growth within its borders. It also mentions that biodiversity and nativity of trees is important, not just area of forestland.

Anderson, Thomas. "Cheaper but not better. (Letter to the Editor)." Globe & Mail [Toronto, Canada] 13 June 1994: A12. Global Issues in Context. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. This article shows why clearcutting is not environmentally sound, therefore no better than selective logging. It compares human clearcutting to natural fire/insect clearcutting, and says science does not support clearcutting It could be useful for repercussions and/or opposite argument.

Benn, Hilary. "We must lay down axes, pick up our shovels, and get tree-planting." Independent [London, England] 14 Dec. 2009: 32. Global Issues in Context. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. <http://find.galegroup.com/>. This is an excerpt from a speech in which Former Secretary of State for the Environment talks about the negative impacts of losing vast amounts of forests quickly. He encourages other leaders at the conference to accept REDD as well as plant trees. It could be useful for strengthening my paper overall.

"A Delay in Key Decisions at Doha Could See Redd+ Lose Its Climate Change Focus." Africa News Service 29 Nov. 2012. Student Resources In Context. Web. 16 Apr. 2013. This is about REDD+ programs. It discusses how it may not work because of limited focus and funding in many key countries. It talks about some of the organizations that are trying with or without REDD in the US, Brazil, etc.

"Editorial: Mulch better: Environmentally friendly products sidestep the need for mulch obtained from clearcutting cypress." Houston Chronicle 31 Mar. 2007: n. pag. Points of View. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. This editorial focuses on the clearcutting of cypress trees to make chips for mulch, and the damage it does to the coastlines; cypress trees hold up better in storms, thus reducing erosion, but they are quickly being wiped out. This could be useful for a specific example involving short-term negative environmental consequences, as well as ways people can help with the solution if they are informed.

Fehse, Jan. "A United Nations' Carbon Offset Deforestation Project Can Help Prevent Deforestation." Carbon Offsets. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "Forests and Carbon Trading: Seeing the Wood and the Trees." OECD Observer (May-June 2008). Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 16 Apr. 2013. This gives good reasons to try and stop deforestation (contributes to climate change). It explains why REDD is a good idea, and mentions that countries should uphold the Kyoto Treaty.

Gardner, Hallie. "Cut Down." E: The Environmental Magazine Mar.-Apr. 2009: n. pag. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. This provides clear details of clear-cutting in the Sierra Nevada forests and a town's residents' reaction against the large timber company. It provides reasons of why clear-cutting is directly and indirectly harmful to the environment.

"Kyoto Protocol." Gale Student Resources in Context. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Student Resources In Context. Web. 16 Apr. 2013. This outlines the goals of the Kyoto Protocols, some of the countries involved, the subsequent attempts to regulate carbon emissions on a global scale, and states and cities in the US that are attempting to meet the requirements although the US did not sign onto the agreement.

Malkin, Elisabeth. "Growing a Forest, And Harvesting Jobs." New York Times. 23 Nov 2010: A.10. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 03 Feb 2013. This article says that the Zapotec won the right to the land and nurture it for their descendants. It describes the Zapotec methods of maintaining the Ixtlan forest in Mexico while making a profit from selling lumber and pieces made from wood. It is a good example for solutions.

McCarthy, Michael. "The Green Movement at 50: Mission Unaccomplished." The Independent. 14 Jun 2012: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.03 Feb 2013. This focuses mostly on the failures of the green movement, but provides some reasons for why there is deforestation in the first place and why it is a hard problem to solve; humans would need to change their philosophy towards nature in order to fix the problem.

"Stop Illegal Logging (Editorial)." Africa News Service 19 Oct. 2011: n. pag. Global Issues in Context. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. This article explains in detail the environmental repercussions of cutting trees, and economic repercussions of illegal, unregulated logging. It is focused on the large scale of illegal logging in the Sahel region of Africa, and says that the illegal loggers should be apprehended more severely and legal loggers should still be cautious and aware of the consequences.

Valladares, Danilo. "Central America: Region Has Highest Rate of Forest Loss." Global Information Network. 15 Feb 2011: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 04 Mar 2013. This article talks about different regions in Central America and their net loss or gain of forestland, mostly losses. It explains why deforestation happens, why forests are able to regain land, why it is important to distinguish between forests and plantations, and lists some benefits of forests. It could be useful for reasons behind deforestation, thus how to solve it.

Wells, Zachary, and Kelly Moore Brands. "Seeing REDD: a useful climate-change policy tool, or a license to deny forest dwellers' rights?" World Watch 1 Nov. 2009: 29. Global Issues in Context. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. This article debates the consequences REDD may have on indigenous people living in government-owned forests who are technically squatters. It provides suggestions for solving legal problems, but does not directly address the focus of my paper. It is potentially useful for solutions.

The World Must Move Faster to Conserve Tropical Rainforests." Biodiversity. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "The World's Lungs: There Is Hope for Forests, But Mankind Needs to Move Faster if They Are to Be Saved." The Economist (23 Sept. 2010). Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. This article provides examples of bad consequences of not stopping deforestation, some history of deforestation, some reasons behind why there is or is not deforestation in different countries, and a possible solution for speeding the world on its way to preventing deforestation (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation). It could be useful for examples of repercussions and possibly other parts of the paper.