Farmers plant trees to fight deforestation

Image via Wikipedia

Note:  We have our Brazil Contest, where you can win a framed photograph from National Geographic Photographer Peter Guttman, going on until December 15, 2009.  Just leave a comment to be eligible.  Details at http://ecoadventuretravel.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/its-here-the-brazil-contest/. (~Robert)

The Washington Post had a wonderful article about changes in Brazil to help protect the environment.  I thought it would be interesting for the readers here:

For nearly 20 years, Luiz Alberto Bortolini cleared trees and planted soybeans as fast as he could, one of many pioneers who turned this barren outpost into prosperous farmland.

Now, he and hundreds of other successful farmers are replanting trees as part of an ambitious initiative to reduce deforestation. Their goal — to set aside one-third of their farms for native vegetation — is revolutionary in a region long resistant to environmental controls.

“It had to happen, as soon as possible,” said Bortolini, 50, who now has a 6,200-acre farm. “This is in the farmers’ interests because the farmer is the one most dependent on the environment.”

The initiative, driven by the market and by new pressure from regulators, comes as the government considers proposals to dramatically reduce the rainforest destruction that has made Brazil a leading producer of greenhouse gases. Earlier this month, Brazil said it would cut emissions by up to 38.9 percent from projected 2020 levels, a pledge designed to encourage other countries to take major steps at next month’s global warming summit in Copenhagen.

“I think what they are moving towards is essentially a no-deforestation position by 2030,” said David Cleary, who oversees conservation strategies in Latin America for the Nature Conservancy, an international conservation organization. “It’s way, way beyond any commitment that Brazil has made in deforestation before.”

Already, deforestation has fallen by half in Brazil since 2006, as the threat of sanctions against ranchers and better enforcement of environmental regulations curbed the fires and chain saws used to raze trees across the world’s biggest rainforest.

Still, a swath of forest the size of Connecticut was destroyed last year. Environmentalists also worry about road-paving projects in the Amazon and about the construction of hydroelectric dams in the wilds. Meanwhile, a group of lawmakers is lobbying to loosen the country’s forest code, an environmental-protection law that requires farmers in the Amazon to set aside 80 percent of their land for native species.

“This is a good illustration of the stark contradictions at play within Brazil’s business-friendly and conservation-minded policy circles,” said Christian Poirier, Brazil program coordinator for Amazon Watch. Nascent projects such as the town of Lucas’s initiative, he said, are “threatened by forces that seek to dilute the code and by extension dilute Brazil’s commitments to reduce emissions going into Copenhagen.”

But there are communities in Brazil where farmers and ranchers are working with environmentalists to implement projects balancing development with environmental conservation.

They are driven by a new reality: buyers of agricultural products, from soybeans to meat, increasingly require producers to certify environmentally friendly practices. Lucas farmers, who sell to multinational giants such as Cargill and Bunge, were quick to understand.

“Farmers there, like farmers anywhere, are quite conservative — they are not environmental angels,” said Cleary of the Nature Conservancy. “But they move when they feel it’s in their interest to move.”

Among the first to take heed in Lucas was Marino Franz, who like many farmers here migrated north from Brazil’s more populous south.

He arrived in 1980 and scraped by as a field hand. Today, he has a 25,000-acre spread and owns a plant that refines soybeans into ethanol. He is also the mayor.

“I noticed the concerns European consumers had regarding the environment,” Franz said. “They were worried about soy imported from Brazil.”

Lucas officials reacted by joining with the Nature Conservancy to develop a proposal to bring farmers in line with forest code regulations, which were rarely observed here and elsewhere in Brazil.

In this region, once a mosaic of savannahs and forests, farmers have to set aside about 35 percent of their land for native vegetation. As an alternative, they can pay to protect unspoiled woodlands far from their state as compensation for past deforestation, an option several farmers said they prefer because of the challenges and costs of replanting trees.

Luciane Bertinatto Copetti, the town’s agriculture and environmental secretary, said authorities first mapped the region’s 670 farms using satellite imagery and then met with each property owner. Those farmers, she said, have collectively agreed to participate in the replanting effort, which began a few months ago.

That farmers would even consider such a proposal — which offers no financial assistance — until recently would have seemed preposterous in a state of hardy individualists.

Barely a generation ago, settlers came here to Mato Grosso, which literally means “thick brush,” encouraged by the government, which offered low-interest loans and cheap land. Many struggled, living in tents and toiling in oven-hot fields, far from railway lines and paved roads.

“When we arrived here, there were no laws so there were no instructions from government institutions,” said Bortolini, the farmer. “Each one did whatever he thought he could do.”

Today, Mato Grosso is an agricultural powerhouse, and Lucas is one of its most prosperous towns.

The population in town hovers above 50,000, twice what it was in 2000, and 485 businesses opened this year. In a way, Lucas could be mistaken for any American farm town — big, wide streets, mom-and-pop stores, new public schools and dealerships selling John Deere tractors.

Among the first farmers to start replanting was Darci Eichelt, 45, who took up here in 1986.

On a recent morning, he drove his pickup truck along a dirt road through green fields of soybeans. He stopped and walked to a clump of trees. A year ago, they were about three feet tall, he said. Now, some have reached 10 feet.

“Can you imagine all this in 10 years?” he said. “It’s going to be beautiful.”

 

<!–[if gte mso 10]>

Abbas:

At the website page located at: http://www.expertlawfirm.com/criminal_defense/burglary.html

Please replace the existing content at that site with the following:

Burglary Attorneys and Burglary Lawyers in Southern California

Robert Miller and Associates attorneys have experience in handling burglary cases in Southern California. If you or someone you know has been charged in Southern California with burglary, conspiracy to commit burglary, felony theft, or possession of burglary tools, we can help.

Under the law, California Penal Code section 459, burglary is committed when entering a building with the specific intent to steal something or commit a felony. All the State needs to prove is that you had the intent to steal something or commit a felony when entering a building. The prosecution does not have to prove

that you actually stole something or committed a felony.

For example, you could be found guilty of burglary for entering a building with the intent of vandalizing it. You could also be found guilty of burglary even if there was no evidence that you stole property if the State can prove you had the intent to steal something when you entered the building.

There are two types of burglary under California law:

• First degree burglary, which is always a felony and a strike; and
• Second degree burglary, which can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony and is not a strike.

First degree burglary happens when a burglary is alleged to have been committed in an inhabited dwelling (i.e. a home). The penalties for this crime, under the statute, can be probation, two years, four years or six years in state prison. (Note that when you are granted probation this means you could serve no time or get up to 365 days in county jail as a condition of your probation, along with other terms). If probation is denied then you are sent to state prison for a minimum of two years to a maximum of six years.

Moreover, residential burglary is always a ‘strike.’ When you have a strike, you must serve 85 percent of any jail or prison sentence. Strikes also have potentially immense ramifications if future felonies are committed. If another felony is committed by a person with one strike, he/she will serve no less than 80 percent of any jail or prison time and the potential prison sentence will be doubled. For example, if you have a prior residential burglary and then get another residential burglary, your maximum sentence doubles from six years to twelve years. If you have two strikes and commit any type of future felony you can spend the remainder of your life in prison (three strikes and you are out for the rest of your life!).

In sum, first degree burglary or residential burglary are serious criminal charges. Moreover, the District Attorney and the courts are very protective of homes, and will, in most cases, want actual incarceration,  when someone has been charged with burglarizing a home. Therefore, Miller and Associates criminal defense attorneys will always try to reduce the first degree burglary charge to the much less serious commercial or second degree burglary to avoid potential jail time in these types of cases.

Second degree burglary is any burglary that does not take place in an inhabited dwelling place, commonly called commercial burglary. Commercial burglary usually takes place in businesses. You can be charged with commercial burglary when you have the specific intent to steal something from a store when you walk in the door. Typically, commercial burglaries will be charged as misdemeanors when the value of the property taken is less than $400.00. If the value is over $400.00, then the burglaries will be charged as felonies. So, you can be charged for misdemeanor commercial burglary when stealing something as little as a pack of gum. The maximum penalty for misdemeanor commercial burglary is one year in the county jail, although the penalties are often much less. If the value of the property is over $400.00, you will most likely be charged with a felony.  However, Miller and Associates can reduce the felony to a misdemeanor in some cases. The penalties for felony commercial burglary can be probation (up to one year in the county jail) or 16 months, two years or three years in prison. Since commercial burglary is not a strike people will be allowed to serve just 50 percent of any prison sentence.

The Key Issue for Burglary is Intent

Can the State prove that there was an intent to steal? If the State can’t prove intent to steal, then charges will most likely be dismissed or the defendant will be found not guilty at trial. If the State has problems with proving intent to steal, then the case can be dismissed or settled for reduced charges with potentially zero jail or prison time.

If intent to steal can be easily proven by the evidence, then there is still hope to avoid any actual jail time. The key factor in this case is to show remorse and to pay back Full Restitution to the victim(s). What was taken must be given back or paid for by the defendant in order to get a reduced punishment and hopefully reduced charges as well.

Other key factors to consider in these cases are whether the defendant has a prior criminal record for theft. If the defendant has a prior record for theft, especially burglaries, punishment will typically be more severe. If there is no prior record, then punishment can be greatly reduced. Miller and Associates gets probation for the vast majority of its clients; with probation comes the opportunity to have community service, home arrest, or work project as opposed to actual jail time.

If you or a loved one has been arrested for burglary, get professional representation from an experienced attorney immediately to protect your rights by contacting our firm.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Brazil celebrates 45% reduction in Amazon deforestation (guardian.co.uk)
• Massive blackout leaves Brazil on edge (nationalpost.com)
• Why Going Green – and the Climate Negotiations in Copenhagen – Matter Now More than Ever (takepart.com)
• By Degrees: Paying to Keep Trees Up in Brazil (nytimes.com)

Is Eco-Friendly Tourism even possible?

Image via Wikipedia

Reminder:  Our Blog Contest – win beautiful mounted photographs from Brazil – is ongoing until December 15th.  Leave a comment to have a chance to become a winner!

I found the following article in the London Guardian, and thought it would be interesting for my blog readers.  Lucy Siegle has a great point about defining what eco-tourism is, and whether or not it is even possible to become an eco-friendly tourist.  I think that the very nature of travel has always involved using resources, but the benefits of travel, and the benefits to the environment in having an eco-aware group in the world, outweighs the negatives, in my personal opinion.  Here’s the article:

When you see some of the holidays masquerading as ecotourism you’d be forgiven for thinking the term “greenwash” was invented for the tourism industry. Oh, it was. In fact this pejoratively used hybrid was coined in the 1980s by American environmentalist Jay Westervelt, who was incensed by the way hotels put signs up pleading with guests to reuse their towels thus “saving the environment” when they were doing nothing to promote recycling elsewhere and really, he suspected, just wanted to save on laundry bills.

Since then things have improved, but there are still lots of trips wearing a bogus “ecotourism” tag. These include swimming with captive dolphins (the feature documentary The Cove on the annual dolphin slaughter in Japan is a reminder of the truth behind their capture and trade) and hunting holidays with “sustainable” quotas – Tanzania has received criticism for the sale of ancestral lands to monopolies for under the market price, leaving local tribes high and dry.

But often holidaymakers mistake sustainable ideas – such as lower-impact transport – with ecotourism. Incidentally research by the Heidelberger Institute for Energy and Environmental Research comparing the pollutant parameters and ecological effects of different holiday transport found coach travel to use six times less energy than planes. But this still doesn’t make your coach trip ecotourism.

Making the distinction might sound like pedantry but it’s crucial. Ecotourism doesn’t have an enshrined legal definition, but bodies such as Nature Conservancy and the World Conservation Union agree on its parameters – that it is nature-based, educative towards the environment, managed sustainably and contributes to the protection of the natural site. Scale is also important. You should pick a project that is obviously small, manageable and which feeds directly back into the local economy.

But where do you go for the real thing? Responsible-travel.org has long provided a sane counterpoint to the die- hard green message that you must never again set foot anywhere on account of carbon emissions. Their take is that there is a trade off between the emissions caused by flying, so it’s the traveller’s responsibility to fly less, switching to one holiday that generates income for the local community. A typical Responsible Travel holiday includes an introduction to the Amazon rainforests, staying in a lodge in Peru built using native materials and owned by the Infierno community.

In her very good book Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise? Martha Honey argues that true ecotourism should involve a truthful conservation-led calculation as to how many tourists a habitat can sustain. Famously the Galapagos islands employ quotas, a move that flies in the face of the democratisation of spontaneous travel but might just save one of the world’s most vulnerable habitats.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Top 50 Ecotourism Blogs and Sites (travelanswerman.com)
• Let’s be more responsible and make travel greener (travel-rants.com)
• Joint Statement Marshals Forces to Greening Health Care (newswire.ca)

Why did Thomas Friedman visit Brazil?

(A note from Robert:  During this month we are promoting our Brazil contest, we present the following story from redd-monitor.org).

Why did Conservation International invite Thomas Friedman to go to Brazil? By Chris Lang, 12th November 2009  Friedman  Thomas Friedman’s most recent column for the New York Times comes from Tapajós National Forest, Brazil. His trip was organised by Conservation International and the Brazilian government (Friedman doesn’t say who paid). Conservation International could not have chosen a better journalist to back up their pro-carbon market ideology. Friedman, author of The World is Flat and Hot, Flat and Crowded, firmly believes that markets are the solution, regardless of the question. Even better, Friedman is incapable of putting forward an argument. He doesn’t even try. He simply makes statements and assumes that because he’s made them they must be true. His latest offering “Trucks, Trains and Trees“, reveals his genius for taking a complex issue and rendering it as complete gobbledygook.  Friedman’s story is straightforward enough: Man flies from the USA to the Brazilian rainforest. The rainforest is full of trees. Saving the rainforest will allow man to continue flying.  Matt Taibbi, the journalist who recently described Goldman Sachs as “a great vampire squid“, points out that Friedman doesn’t actually do anything except write books and newspaper columns. “So in my mind it’s highly relevant if his manner of speaking is fucked,” Taibbi writes. Taibbi has taken apart Thomas Friedman’s manner of speaking on several (very entertaining) occasions.  “No matter how many times you hear them, there are some statistics that just bowl you over,” Friedman starts his article. The statistic he’s talking about is the “roughly 17 per cent” of global emissions coming from deforestation. That statistic doesn’t bowl me over. It became a cliché several years ago. Clearly, Friedman hasn’t heard this statistic very often, which perhaps indicates how much research Friedman did before writing this article. Last week, Friedman’s friends at Conservation International signed a statement that states “The best current estimate would be about 15% if peat degradation is included.” Without peat degradation (Friedman does not mention peat in his article) the figure is more like 12%.  Friedman continues:      “It is going to be a long time before we transform the world’s transportation fleet so it is emission-free. But right now — like tomorrow — we could eliminate 17 percent of all global emissions if we could halt the cutting and burning of tropical forests.”  To Friedman, then, “right now” is the same as “like tomorrow”. Perhaps he’s never had to negotiate with a five year old child who is threatening to throw his wallet down the toilet. Otherwise he would recognise the difference between “Give me the wallet, right now” and “Give me the wallet, like tomorrow”.  Friedman can see no way to change the world’s transportation fleet overnight, so he suggests we forget that inconvenient source of emissions. But stopping deforestation? Easy. So why don’t we do it “right now – like tomorrow”?  In the next sentence Friedman explains what we have to do to stop all deforestation:      “to do that requires putting in place a whole new system of economic development — one that makes it more profitable for the poorer, forest-rich nations to preserve and manage their trees rather than to chop them down to make furniture or plant soybeans.”  So all we need is a “whole new system of economic development”. Why didn’t Friedman tell us how to stop deforestation decades ago? Friedman, the great proponent of globalisation and neo-liberalism, has gone anti-capitalist. No really. Here’s what he says next: “Without a new system for economic development in the timber-rich tropics, you can kiss the rainforests goodbye. The old model of economic growth will devour them.”  The genius of Friedman is that just as we’re trying to wrap our heads around whatever it is he’s talking about, he throws a Friedmanism at us. “The only Amazon your grandchildren will ever relate to is the one that ends in dot-com and sells books.”  I suspect that the vast majority of the grandchildren of readers of the New York Times relate to the Amazon rainforest through books, TV programmes and the internet. Most of them will not be invited by Conservation International to fly there. How does anyone “relate to” an ecosystem covering 5.5 million square kilometres in nine countries? What is Friedman talking about?  Taibbi makes fun of Friedman’s ability to screw up, not sometimes, but always: “He has an anti-ear, and it’s absolutely infallible; he is a Joyce or a Flaubert in reverse, incapable of rendering even the smallest details without genius.” Taibbi’s right. Why on earth did Friedman add the words “and sells books” to the end of his sentence about the Amazon? How many readers of the New York Times don’t know that the website Amazon-dot-com sells books?  Friedman tells us he’s gone to Brazil “to better understand this issue”. But Friedman writes by talking to himself. Here he is flying over the Amazon:      “Flying in here by prop plane from Manaus, you can understand why the Amazon rainforest is considered one of the lungs of the world. Even from 20,000 feet, all you see in every direction is an unbroken expanse of rainforest treetops that, from the air, looks like a vast and endless carpet of broccoli.”  Who considers the Amazon rainforest “one of the lungs of the world”? Friedman isn’t telling. Trust me, Friedman says, if you flew over the Amazon, then you too would know why the Amazon is considered to be one of the lungs of the world.  But if the Amazon is one of the lungs, where is the other one? The Congo, Indonesia, Siberia, Canada? How much forest do you need before it becomes a lung? How many lungs does the world have?  Friedman tells us he flew over “an unbroken expanse of rainforest treetops”. Crikey. What did Friedman expect to see while flying above the biggest area of rainforest in the world other than treetops? Skyscapers? Spaghetti junction? The Star Ship Enterprise?  The combination of “vast and endless” is another Friedmanism. The Amazon is vast, but it is not endless. If Friedman thinks it’s endless, that’s because he’s forgotten that when his plane took off from the USA, he was not in the Amazon rainforest.  Here’s what Friedman learned when his plane landed (he doesn’t tell us how the plane got through the unbroken expanse of treetops, or the endless carpet of broccoli, but apparently it did):      “What you learn when you visit with a tiny Brazilian community that actually lives in, and off, the forest is a simple but crucial truth: To save an ecosystem of nature, you need an ecosystem of markets and governance.”  Friedman doesn’t tell us what he saw or heard in the community to reach this conclusion, apart from one villager who told him “We were born inside the forest. So we know the importance of it being preserved, but we need better access to global markets for the products we make here. Can you help us with that?” (That, incidentally, is the only quotation in the article from anyone living in the Amazon.)  Friedman does not explain what on earth he’s talking about when he says “an ecosystem of markets and governance.” Perhaps this is the “new system for economic development” that he mentioned earlier on. José María Silva, vice president for South America of Conservation International, tells Friedman that “You need a new model of economic development — one that is based on raising people’s standards of living by maintaining their natural capital, not just by converting that natural capital to ranching or industrial farming or logging.” So now we have Friedman and Conservation International saying the same thing about economic development. On planet Friedman, that makes it true. No need for anything pesky like arguments or evidence.  Friedman tells us that “Brazil has already set aside 43 percent of the Amazon rainforest for conservation and for indigenous peoples. Another 19 percent of the Amazon, though, has already been deforested by farmers and ranchers.” He doesn’t tell us where those numbers come from, he just tells us that 38% of the Brazilian Amazon rainforest is still “up for grabs”.  Then Friedman reveals that he’s not gone anti-capitalist after all. In fact, his “whole new system of economic development” looks a lot like CO2lonialism:      “The more we get the Brazilian system to work, the more of that 38 percent will be preserved and the less carbon reductions the whole world would have to make. But it takes money.”  This, then, is Friedman’s solution. Brazil has to stop deforestation so that the rest of the world can carry on polluting.      [W]e need to make sure that whatever energy-climate bill comes out of the U.S. Congress, and whatever framework comes out of the Copenhagen conference next month, they include provisions for financing rainforest conservation systems like those in Brazil. The last 38 percent of the Amazon is still up for grabs. It is there for us to save. Your grandchildren will thank you.  Needless to say, Friedman doesn’t explain how “we” are supposed to influence the U.S. energy-climate bill or the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen. Or what “we” are supposed to do to “save” the 38 per cent of the Brazilian Amazon that is “still up for grabs”.  Trading forest carbon, which seems to be what Friedman is proposing as a solution (although not explicitly), would create a vast loophole allowing business as usual (at least for the countries and corporations that can afford to buy the carbon credits – the same countries and corporations that created the climate problem in the first place).  On planet Friedman, as long as the “vast and endless carpet of broccoli” is still there, there’s no need to “transform the world’s transportation fleet so it is emission-free”. And on planet Friedman there’s no meaningful discussion of the issues involved. Presumably that’s why Conservation International invited Friedman to go to Brazil.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Modern model of economic growth is devouring world’s rain forests (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Friedman, Zakaria, and Gergen all Converge on SMU Campus for 2009 Tate (smudailymustang.com)
• Friday Face-Offs: “Kids” – 4th Place (hermenaut.org)

Brazil gets the Olympics – but what does it mean for biodiversity?

Image via Wikipedia

Note:  Our blog’s contest, for a chance to win photographs of Brazil, starts November 15th.

You don’t normally associate biodiversity and conservation with cities, but Rio de Janeiro is an exception. Its extraordinary topography means steep hill slopes and mountainsides are still forested: not the least of the issues associated with the growth of favelas, Rio’s hillside slums, is that their expansion corrodes this green mantle.

Rio’s forests are a remnant of the Atlantic Forest that once covered most of coastal Brazil and stretched as far inland as Paraguay. Only 7 percent is left, making it much more threatened than the Amazon and even more biodiverse, since the surviving fragments act as refuge areas for species that once had much wider ranges. This makes what survives of the Atlantic Forest extraordinarily important. One of Latin America‘s oldest national parks, Tijuca National Forest, sits entirely within the city’s boundaries, a natural treasure greater than any of its beaches. What does the Olympics mean to all this? In short, a mixed bag.

There will be big environmental benefits. The thing that first strikes visitors arriving at Rio’s international airport, after the dilapidation of the airport itself, is the stench when you step outside the terminal. This toxic olfactory cocktail comes from the chemical plants and oil refineries that line Guanabara Bay, together with the sewage produced by the 5 million inhabitants of the Zona Norte, where tourists never go but half of Rio’s population lives. Gagging on your way into town is an appropriate introduction to the contradictions produced by our glamorous international profile.

With the eyes – and, more to the point, the noses – of the world upon us, something will finally be done: serious sewage treatment and pollution control is coming. Maybe by 2016, for the first time in generations, it will even be possible to swim in the bay. One shudders to think what will happen to the yachting crews otherwise.

But beyond the bay, things are more ambiguous. The coming construction boom will provide alternative employment to the young men in the favelas who would otherwise move into our biggest growth industry after oil: narcotrafico. This boom will tamp down violence from criminals and the police (there’s a big overlap between the two). The easy headlines about the risks posed by violence in Rio are misleading: nobody, from the drug lords down, has any interest in choking off the multidimensional bonanza the Olympics promises to be.

And therein lies a problem: after having been stable for 20 years, the city’s population is likely to jump again as the boom attracts migrants from all over Brazil, which means expanding favelas and more human pressure on that precious Atlantic Forest.

This will be most acute in the southern beachside neighborhoods of Barra, Recreio and Vargem Grande, which were booming for years even before the Olympics. Many of the new sporting facilities in Rio’s bid, including the Olympic village, will be built here. As recently as the 1970s this area was still largely undeveloped, the stupendous beach of Barra fringing an unspoiled expanse of mangroves, coves and headlands ending in Barra da Sepetiba, a scalloped and shifting promontory of dunes and beaches pointing 12 miles into the Atlantic and the glorious (now rapidly overdeveloping) coastline south of Rio.

This oasis of nature so close to a megacity couldn’t last. From the late 1970s, a gigantic real estate boom saw Barra transformed into a depressingly Americanized complex of malls, highways, condominiums and apartment blocks. As the only reasonably flat area with land available anywhere in the city, it was inevitable this area would be earmarked for Olympic development, but the key issue is what impact this will have on the coast’s surprisingly strong zoning and development controls.

Rio’s governments, appalling as they often are, occasionally get some things spectacularly right – the 40 percent drop in driving deaths since a well-enforced ban on alcohol and driving began last year is a current example. In the late 1990s, in the nick of time, a municipal park called Prainha put the coast immediately south of the real estate boom off limits to developers, preserving the two stunning beaches of Prainha and Grumari and linking them up to the still pristine coastline around and including Barra da Sepetiba, long preserved by the Brazilian Navy, to whom the promontory belongs. Ironically, a few months before the success of the Olympic bid, the developers had managed to get the zoning laws in Prainha relaxed. Now, with blood already in the water, the level of development is about to spiral. It could well spiral out of control – and if it does, the last piece of properly preserved coastline within the city’s boundaries will go.

Those of us who know and love Rio feel torn. On the one hand, there’s no denying this is a great city with a great talent for spectacle, and it has all the potential to stage a great world event like the Olympics, perhaps more memorably than has ever been done before. But Rio is a memorable place in other, less positive ways. Many local politicians would shock even Tony Soprano, and their corruption and incompetence has mismanaged the city into the ground. Many of its well-known problems are directly traceable to the city’s dreadful politics. With Brazil’s international image on the line, the federal government may have to step in.

The stakes for Rio’s environment are even higher. An image taking a hit is, in the final analysis, a trivial thing – but once a coast or a forest goes, it almost never comes back. Fingers crossed.

Full disclosure – I was asked to participate in our Brazil contest by the public relations firm for the Brazilian Tourism Board.  No compensation was made to me.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rio 2016 (americablog.com)
• I.H.T. Special Report: Business Travel: An Influx of Business Wealth in Rio (nytimes.com)
• You: ‘Villain’ of Brazil-Paraguay war ‘was misunderstood’ (guardian.co.uk)

Ecotourism Awards Granted in Norway

Image via Wikipedia

The 8th Annual Skål International Ecotourism Awards were presented by the President of Skål International, Hulya Aslantas and Director External Communication & Media Karine Coulanges, during the Opening Ceremony of the 70th Skål World Congress held in Budapest, Hungary, on 2nd November 2009 at the Palace of Arts.
Skål, an international association since in 1934 is the largest organisation of travel and tourism professionals in the world. It is the only association which embraces all sectors of the travel and tourism industry, in five Continents, 90 Countries and at over 500 locations, with 20,000 members from hoteliers to travel agents; airline, maritime, waterways, railway and coach transportation companies, tourism media, tourism academies and official tourism promotion bodies, etc.

Skål International is aiming at quality in tourism and values sustainable development in Tourism as the key to the industry’s future success and considers Ecotourism but one area of the various components of sustainable development and responsible tourism.

To encourage the conservation of the environment and help to promote the development of responsible and sustainable tourism, Skål International initiated an awards program in 2002, during “The Year of Ecotourism and the Mountains” as declared by United Nations.

While the purpose of these awards was to highlight best practices in ecotourism around the world, they were also created with the aim of acquainting the world with this new concept that puts emphasis on the importance of the interaction of the physical, cultural and social environment, the traveler’s responsibility and the need for active community participation for Ecotourism.

In their eight year the awards have received continued support worldwide and this year 49 entries were received originating from 25 Countries; seven from Asia, 11 from the Americas, 15 from Europe, 10 from Africa and six from Oceania.

The Awards show the true implication of Skål International towards the protection of the environment in conjunction with sustainable tourism. Ecotourism, together with other alternative forms of tourism strengthens the local economies and contributes to sustainable development.

The applications were evaluated by three independent judges and the scores given by each separately, are added up to find the winners. The primary criteria for the evaluation is based on such points like, contribution to the conservation of nature and cultural heritage, community involvement, educational features, business viability and innovation.

Skål International is grateful for the meticulous work conducted by the three judges,

* Eugenio Yunis, from UNWTO
* Jack Sofier, Swedish Education and Consulting, Portugal
* José Koechlin, Inkaterra, Peru
Johnson Diversey whose global mission assumes a green position that supports sustainability in terms of Ecology, Efficiency, reduction in energy consumption, Food and Employee safety, is our main sponsor. The products they create and the methods they use are all aimed at making our world a safer and cleaner place.
This year, Iznik Foundation was a cosponsor of the quartz trophies they have specially designed for Skål International. Combining ecology with the unique art of Iznik (Ancient Nicea); the awards are a sign of preservation of natural sources and traditions and with their special characteristics they are specially chosen to emphasize the value of our global riches.

SUSTAINABLE ECOTOURISM, AUSTRALIA SUSTAINABLE ECOTOURISM, AUSTRALIA
BASECAMP MASAI MARA – KENYA, NORWAY BASECAMP MASAI MARA – KENYA, NORWAY
The 8th Annual Skål International Ecotourism Awards The 8th Annual Skål International Ecotourism Awards
FRONTIERS NORTH ADVENTURES, CANADA FRONTIERS NORTH ADVENTURES, CANADA
GOEDGEDACHT TRUST, SOUTH AFRICA GOEDGEDACHT TRUST, SOUTH AFRICA
MIDLANDS MEANDER EDUCATION PROJECT, SOUTH AFRICAMIDLANDS MEANDER EDUCATION PROJECT, SOUTH AFRICA
WE CARE – OPERATION PENGUIN, NORWAY WE CARE – OPERATION PENGUIN, NORWAY

The winners are announced as follows:
1. In the category of Tour Operators and Travel Agents:

FRONTIERS NORTH ADVENTURES, CANADA

2. In the category of Urban Accommodation:

WE CARE – OPERATION PENGUIN, NORWAY

3. In the category of Rural Accommodation:

BASECAMP MASAI MARA – KENYA, NORWAY

4. In the category of General Countryside:

SUSTAINABLE ECOTOURISM, AUSTRALIA

5. In the category of City and Villages:

GOEDGEDACHT TRUST, SOUTH AFRICA

6. In the category of Educational Programmes – Media:
MIDLANDS MEANDER EDUCATION PROJECT, SOUTH AFRICA

Related articles by Zemanta

• Frontiers North Adventures wins International Ecotourism Award (newswire.ca)
• Plan Nord Consultation Table: Canadian Boreal Initiative Support, with Reservations (newswire.ca)
• Canadian Launch of the Celebration for the 2010 International Year of (newswire.ca)

Brazil takes the lead in climate change policies

Note:  You can enter our Brazil travel contest starting November 15th, at the following link:  http://ecoadventuretravel.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/its-here-the-brazil-contest/

As reported by Nature, the nation of Brazil appears poised to give the rest of the world a primer in what climate leadership looks like, which should come in handy in inspiring other nations to step up and follow suit when the time comes to roll up their sleeves and get some real work done.

Brazil has already made major strides in addressing rates of deforestation in the Amazon basin, and the current news Nature delivers is that it is setting sights squarely on its greenhouse gas emissions as we approach COP15. Nature describes the still-developing, not officially announced initiatives reportedly being pieced together by the Brazilian government as “the most significant step yet by a developing country going into December’s United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen.”

The primary source of excitement surrounding Brazil’s nascent initiative is its apparent intent to leap well over the bar set for it as a developing nation. Current climate change constructs leave for fully industrialized nations the challenge of capping and reducing carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions, while developing nations are encouraged to reduce the growth in their greenhouse gas emissions, and to work toward low- and no-carbon technologies as they are able and as such greener technologies are supported directly by wealthier nations.

Nature reports that Brazil is mulling over a comprehensive program that will reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by a full third from projected 2020 levels, which would represent a nearly 10 percent drop from 2007 emissions.

Details are reportedly under discussion by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and his cabinet this week, with the possibility for an official policy statement or proposal set to appear over the next few days.

It’s here – the Brazil Contest

A few months ago, as some of the more loyal readers know, I was contacted on behalf of EMBRATUR, the Brazilian Tourism Board, about a potential contest or giveaway on the Eco Tourism Blog, based on my prior posts about destinations and sustainable activities, so I thought this may be of interest.

To spread the word about Brazil’s natural beauty, I partnered with the public relations firm representing EMBRATUR, to give away signed and framed photographs of the Brazilian Amazon by award-winning photojournalist Peter Guttman to my readers. A magazine reviewer recently proclaimed, “View the world through Peter Guttman’s eyes once and chances are you’ll want to wear those glasses for the rest of your life.”  The photos available were displayed as part of the annual meetings at the United Nations last year.

Here’s photos I took of the beautifully (and solidly) framed, heavy, high gloss photo:

Here are the contest rules:

The contest starts November 15th, 2009.  I am asking readers to write in with their best adventure or outdoor vacation memory, experiences with South American travel or the one place they’ve always wanted to travel to in the world.

I only accept submissions on the blog itself, which means you’ll need to register.  (Registration is free, and I take your privacy seriously.  Your email will never be used for any other purpose than to contact you, and will never, ever, be sold to anyone).

The contest ends at midnight PST on December 15, 2009, and I’ll promptly ship the photographs out immediately.

For your reference, the value of each photo is about $800, and they are professionally framed, 16- by 24-inch photos.

Facts about the Amazon

-          Sixty percent of the Amazon rainforest is contained within Brazil.

-          The Amazon welcomed nearly 500,000 tourists in 2008

-          The Amazon represents more than half of the planet’s remaining rainforests and comprises the largest and most species-rich tract of tropical rainforest in the world.

-          The Amazon boasts 324 mammals, 2,500 species of fish and 1,800 different species of birds.

-          The Amazon is in the running to be one of the New Seven Wonders of Nature and can be voted for online at http://www.new7wonders.com/.

Good luck to you!

Related articles by Zemanta

• Tuesday Travel Trivia (Week 53): Now with awesome prizes! (gadling.com)
• Gisele Bundchen UN Ambassador: Takes On Brazil President Over Amazon (huffingtonpost.com)
• Press Release: Scorpions – Amazonia: Live In The Jungle DVD (2009) artwork & release dates announced (heavymetaladdiction.com)
• Ecosystem erosion quickening, scientists say (cbc.ca)

Ecotourism in Israel

I stumbled on the following article at the Jerusalem Post regarding ecotourism in Israel.  I’ve got to be honest, Israel is not the first country I think of when I think “eco-tourism“.  Ecotourism, as I wrote about in the post immediately preceding this one, means communing in a natural environment with both flora and fauna in their natural habitats, and Israel doesn’t seem to have much of either, from what I can tell (I’ve never been there), but they also have other problems, do they not?  I’m aware of the kibbutz concept, and it looks like the government is trying to use the previous success of Israeli farms to push tourism into Israel farther.

At any rate, seeking to help farmers diversify their income, the Agriculture Ministry has launched a course to train farmers in eco-tourism. The pilot class started this week and includes 20 farmers from the Galilee and the Golan. As it becomes more difficult to make a living off agriculture, more farmers have turned to tourism to supplement their income. Taking advantage of their rural setting, the farmers want to cash in on the world’s hunger for ecologically friendly enterprises. The ministry hopes that by combining environmentally sound agriculture with green tourism, farmers will be able to remain on the land. “Agri-rural tourism is one of the major leverages that the rural regions have to offer,” said Shai Dotan, director of the ministry’s agricultural-tourism development project. “The goals of the course are to assist the residents of Israel’s rural areas to adjust to the changes that are taking place in Israel’s agricultural sector.” The course has seven full-day sessions, each taking place in one of the participants’ farms. The participants learn about different methods to make their farm an eco-friendly environment, focusing on things such as water conservation, energy production, organic gardening and recycling. “In the past I’ve attended many courses that taught the principles of environmental farming, but I always left with the feeling that I don’t know how to begin,” said Miri Falach, counseling director of the ministry’s Galilee and Golan districts. “This course is different, because it doesn’t only teach the principles, it gives participants the opportunity to gain hands-on experience of the things they learn. Next week, for example, we will be teaching the participants how to set up and maintain an organic garden. The week after that we will work on installing a water-recycling plant.”

Falach came up with the idea to offer the course, and many of the topics covered are already in practice on her farm on Moshav Had-Nes in the Golan Heights. “I have several cottages on my property and I felt terrible about the amount of water that goes to waste,” Falach said. “My home overlooks the Kinneret, and I can plainly see what the water shortage has done to the lake level. “To think that every tourist who comes to stay fills the Jacuzzi, and that the water then goes to waste, seemed like a real shame,” she said. “So I decided to collect the drained water and water my garden with it.” Falach said she often gets funny looks for her sustainability-promoting actions, but she hopes that others will catch on soon. “There are 120 farms on my moshav, and I’m the only one to take any action on this front,” she said. “But I believe that there is a real potential here for growth.” While environmental tourism may not be a top priority for Israelis, Falach said, when it comes to the international market, there is a growing demand. “I can only hope that Israel follows this trend the same as it does others,” she said. “Maybe in a few years people here will also take environmental considerations into account when choosing a place to spend their vacations. We think this course will help prepare people for that day.” The ministry’s rural-development branch hopes to eventually set up a ranking system to evaluate the levels of sustainability of each farm, Falach said, adding: “In the same way hotels have star rankings, we’ll have leaf rankings or something like that.” The course is also being supported by the Israel Farmers Federation. Federation chairman Avshalom Vilan, a former Meretz MK, said he supports the ministry’s efforts to promote tourism in the rural areas because farmers can no longer rely on agricultural production alone. “This doesn’t replace agriculture, but it can definitely supplement it,” Vilan said. “We have seen this phenomenon pick up momentum in the last 10 years and have been involved in similar efforts ourselves.” The course is being subsidized by the ministry and costs NIS 850. If the pilot proves successful, there are plan to hold the course in other parts of the country.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Ten Top Green Startup Triple Wins (startupprofessionals.com)
• We Are The Startup Nation (techaviv.com)
• J-Street’s College Arm Drops ‘Pro-Israel’ From Slogan (usnews.com)

The rise and growth of ecotourism

Image by Storm Crypt via Flickr

Tourism is one of the growth sectors of the global economy. World-wide, it is predicted to more than double from 2000 figures by 2020, when the World Tourism Organization calculates there will be 1.6 billion international travelers. Nature-based tourism refers to those tourism experiences that are directly or indirectly dependent on the natural environment and require a land or water base. The sector includes activities undertaken in mid and back country tourism zones but does not include front country experiences such as downhill skiing, golf or other destination resort activities Ecotourism means ecological tourism, where ecological has both environmental and social connotations Generally speaking, ecotourism focuses on local cultures, wilderness adventures, volunteering, personal growth and learning new ways to live on the planet. It is typically defined as travel to destinations where the flora, fauna, and cultural heritage are the primary attractions.

Responsible ecotourism includes programs that minimize the adverse effects of traditional tourism on the natural environment, and enhance the cultural integrity of local people. Therefore, in addition to evaluating environmental and cultural factors, initiatives by hospitality providers to promote recycling, energy efficiency, water re-use, and the creation of economic opportunities for local communities are an integral part of ecotourism. “Many organizations and operators involved in ecotourism have used different variations and definitions of this term,” said Sarah Leonard, the executive director for Alaska Wilderness and Recreation Tourism Association, a non-profit trade association that represents wilderness-based tourism businesses. “A challenge within the industry is that there is no one recognized definition.” Lacking that, Leonard pointed to two definitions, one given by the International Ecotourism Society: “Ecotourism is responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and sustains the well-being of local people.”

The second definition was formed by an author: “Ecotravel involves activities in the great outdoors-nature tourism adventure travel, birding, camping, skiing, whale watching and archaeological digs-that take place in marine, mountain, island and desert ecosystems.”

The days are dominated by getting out and exploring and interacting with nature. There’s enough comfort at night where (guests) enjoy their vacation, but not enough that we separate them from the natural world.  For many, ecotourism involves two concepts, one focusing on economics, and the other focusing on the environment. “At certain times and certain places, it’s better to grow the economy by protecting certain areas and letting businesses develop around those,” he said. “That’s a way to achieve sustainability to enjoy the many benefits that nature provides year after year and to make a living at the same time. “But also, it’s a way of operating where you have minimal impact on the environment, appropriately sized groups and sharing of information with the group so they go away with a much deeper appreciation for the environment, wildlife and habitat,” he said. “It’s like a form of education.” The word “ecotourism” can emphasize the ecological significance of a destination and thus provide guidance to tourists as to appropriate conduct. The word can also impart the impression that a provider of travel services is “ecologically” committed. Indeed, the Ecotourist Association of Australia defines ecotourism as ‘ecologically sustainable tourism that fosters environmental and cultural understanding, appreciation and conservation’.

Related articles by Zemanta

• BMO Financial Group Future Green Leaders’ Fund Established at Trent University (newswire.ca)
• National Science Foundation grant funds island revitalization study (guavabee.com)
• Caught reading – Andrew Mannion (liveactivecultures.net)
• Chernobyl: From Nuclear Accident to Ecotourism? (ecotourismleavingfootprints.blogspot.com)
• Life Style and Global Warming (slideshare.net)

Eco Tourism comes to Bolivia

Image via Wikipedia

Bolivia is a country that has a special place in my heart.  (And so does Christi Sue Penland, a girl I dated from Bolivia).   The country, especially the capital city, La Paz, is just a trip.  Almost 13,000 feet above sea level, high in the Andes, most people don’t have the constitution to do well (at first) in the capitol.  Not much grows, and everything, from houseflies to airplanes, have difficulty in the high high altitude.

Can such a place be ideal for eco-tourism?  When travelers think of ecotourism destinations, places like Costa Rica or Belize come to mind, but not Bolivia. However, This is about to change because the indigenous people known as the Tacanas, of Bolivia’s Amazon region, are banking on ecotourism as an alternative way to make a living.

Located at the banks of the Beni River in the village of San Miguel del Bala, the Tacanas, about 5,000 in population throughout the area, built an eco-lodge that includes seven cabins, made of local materials including dry palm leaves and native wood. The cabins are scattered throughout the area, providing privacy inside the rainforest. The remote lodging is accessible by way of a 40-minute boat ride from the small town of Rurrenbaque in Northern Bolivia.

While at the lodge, guests can go trek through different trails that lead out from the lodge. These excursions teach visitors about ancient hunting techniques, and medicinal plants found in the rainforest. Guests can also visit a salitral cave where wildlife roam freely or a natural pool and waterfall. After a long day of hiking the forest, guests enjoy local cuisine such as grilled fish wrapped in the leaves of the dunucuabi plant. Visitors can also visit with one of the Tacana families in one of their houses made of palm leaves and bamboo.

According to the Latin American Herald Tribune the 45 Tacana families that live in San Miguel de Bala are primarily fishermen and farmers. The community’s leader, Biter Supa, told the Tribune that lack of electricity and health care are the Tacana’s main problems. But, that they do have potable water and a local school which the roughly 60 children living in the village attend.

Near the lodge is Madidi National Park, consisting of 4.5 million acres of land located between the northeastern area of La Paz province and on the border of Peru. The park is one of the largest biodiversity regions in the world and is home to 1,000 animal species including jaguar, spectacled bear, tapir, and capybara. It’s also home to approximately 6,000 varieties of plants.

Some of the park has been designated as Tierras Comunitarias de Origen (TCOs), by the government, which can be described as similar to the Native American reservations throughout the U.S. The area is set-aside for the indigenous communities to continue their traditions and to have a permanent home in the region.

According to Nicolas Janco, with the Mashaquipe tourist agency who spoke with the Latin American Herald Tribune,  “Tourism is an engine that is helping us greatly to improve our quality of life. Especially for the Tacana.”  He is currently lobbying the Bolivian government to promote the indigenous-populated rainforest area as a tourist destination.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Indian political awakening stirs Latin America (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• From a decider to a dawdling ditherer (tech.bl0x.info)
• Bolivian Indians in historic step (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Circus Animals: Freed in Bolivia, Now They Need Homes (time.com)
• Drug tourism and cocaine bars (gadling.com)