<p>The destruction of Brazil's Amazon rainforest reached its highest level in a decade this year, government data released on Friday showed, driven by illegal logging and the encroachment of agriculture on the jungle.</p>

<p>Satellite images for the 12 months through the end of July 2018 showed that 7,900 square kilometers (3,050 square miles) of forest were cleared in the Amazon, equivalent to more than half the territory of Jamaica. That was a 13.7 percent increase from the same period in the prior year.</p>

<p>Deforestation is a key factor behind global warming, accounting for around 15 percent of annual emissions of heat-trapping gases, similar to that of the transportation sector.</p>

<p>On Friday, a US&nbsp;government report found that climate change will cost the United States hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century.</p>

<p>Brazil's environment minister Edson Duarte said in a statement that illegal logging was the main factor behind the increase in deforestation in the Amazon. He called on the government to increase its policing of the jungle.</p>

<p>The states of Pará and Mato Grosso were the largest contributors to the deforestation increase. Mato Grosso is Brazil's top grains producer, leading Brazil's booming soybean output.</p>

<p>Brazil's Climate Observatory, a network of non-governmental organizations, said in a separate statement that the increase was not a surprise. Besides illegal logging, it said Brazil's growing commodities sector was contributing to forest destruction as farmers sought to expand.</p>

<p>Marcio Astrini, from the local office of Greenpeace, said the Brazilian government had not done enough to fight deforestation and recent policy moves such as ones reducing areas under federal protection fueled environmental destruction.</p>

<p>Both groups said they were worried that deforestation could increase further during the government of President-elect Jair Bolsonaro, due to take office in January. He has sharply criticized the Brazilian environmental protection agency, and the agriculture sector is one of his main political bases.</p>

<p>Despite the recent rise, deforestation remains sharply below the levels recorded in the early 2000s, before the Brazilian government launched a strategy to fight forest destruction. In 2004, for example, more than 27,000 square km were cleared, an area the size of Haiti.</p>

<p>Scientists consider the Amazon as one of nature's best protections against global warming, as it acts as a giant carbon "sink" by absorbing the gas. The jungle is also rich in biodiversity, hosting billions of species yet to be studied.</p>


The destruction of Brazil's Amazon rainforest reached its highest level in a decade this year, government data released on Friday showed, driven by illegal logging and the encroachment of agriculture on the jungle.

The destruction of Brazil's Amazon rainforest reached its highest level in a decade this year, government data released on Friday showed, driven by illegal logging and the encroachment of agriculture on the jungle. Satellite images for the 12 months through the end of July 2018 showed that 7,900 square kilometers (3,050 square miles) of forest were cleared in the Amazon, equivalent to more than half the territory of Jamaica. That was a 13.7 percent increase from the same period in the prior year. Deforestation is a key factor behind global warming, accounting for around 15 percent of annual emissions of heat-trapping gases, similar to that of the transportation sector. On Friday, a US government report found that climate change will cost the United States hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century. Brazil's environment minister Edson Duarte said in a statement that illegal logging was the main factor behind the increase in deforestation in the Amazon. He called on the government to increase its policing of the jungle. The states of Pará and Mato Grosso were the largest contributors to the deforestation increase. Mato Grosso is Brazil's top grains producer, leading Brazil's booming soybean output. Brazil's Climate Observatory, a network of non-governmental organizations, said in a separate statement that the increase was not a surprise. Besides illegal logging, it said Brazil's growing commodities sector was contributing to forest destruction as farmers sought to expand. Marcio Astrini, from the local office of Greenpeace, said the Brazilian government had not done enough to fight deforestation and recent policy moves such as ones reducing areas under federal protection fueled environmental destruction. Both groups said they were worried that deforestation could increase further during the government of President-elect Jair Bolsonaro, due to take office in January. He has sharply criticized the Brazilian environmental protection agency, and the agriculture sector is one of his main political bases. Despite the recent rise, deforestation remains sharply below the levels recorded in the early 2000s, before the Brazilian government launched a strategy to fight forest destruction. In 2004, for example, more than 27,000 square km were cleared, an area the size of Haiti. Scientists consider the Amazon as one of nature's best protections against global warming, as it acts as a giant carbon "sink" by absorbing the gas. The jungle is also rich in biodiversity, hosting billions of species yet to be studied.

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon reaches decade high

<p>A heartbreaking video is recently doing rounds on social media showing devastating impact of deforestation in Indonesia.</p>

<p>A video showing an orangutan trying to fight with bulldozer pulling down trees as the ape attempts to save his habitat.&nbsp</p>

<p>According to reports, the video was filmed in 2013 was released on an environmental day. It was shot in West Borneo by the animal welfare organisation, International Animal Rescue.&nbsp</p>

<p>The 30-seconds video posted on Facebook by International Animal Rescue shows a distressed orangutan trying to fight with a bulldozer that is felling trees.&nbsp</p>

<p>"This desperate frantically seeking refuge from the destructive power of the bulldozer a machine that has already decimated everything else around him," International Animal rescue wrote in a video caption.</p>

<p>The Facebook further informs that the two members of the rescue team of International Animal Rescue who was present at the site managed to rescue orangutan. &nbsp</p>

<p>"Despite all the obstacles thrown at them, our team were able to rescue this orangutan and bring him to safety," International Animal rescue wrote.</p>

<p>Scenes like this have become more and more frequent in Indonesia. Indonesia forests are home to over 1000 orangutans and the deforestation has caused the population of orangutans to plummet habitats are destroyed and orangutans are left to starve and die.</p>

<p>Indonesia is home to some of the most biologically diverse forests in the world and ranks third in the number of species behind Brazil and the Democratic Republic of Congo.</p>

<p>In a plea urging people to plant more trees, the animal welfare organisation further wrote, "We need to ACT NOW. This World Environment Day, plant a tree and help us rebuild and protect precious orangutan habitat. The situation is critical, and we are running out of time."&nbsp</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Finternationalanimalrescue%2Fvideos%2F10156426920389910%2F&show_text=0&width=560" style="border:noneoverflow:hidden" width="560"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<p>&nbsp</p>


According to reports, the video was filmed in 2013 was released on an environmental day. It was shot in West Borneo by the animal welfare organisation, International Animal Rescue

A heartbreaking video is recently doing rounds on social media showing devastating impact of deforestation in Indonesia. A video showing an orangutan trying to fight with bulldozer pulling down trees as the ape attempts to save his habitat. According to reports, the video was filmed in 2013 was released on an environmental day. It was shot in West Borneo by the animal welfare organisation, International Animal Rescue. The 30-seconds video posted on Facebook by International Animal Rescue shows a distressed orangutan trying to fight with a bulldozer that is felling trees. "This desperate frantically seeking refuge from the destructive power of the bulldozer a machine that has already decimated everything else around him," International Animal rescue wrote in a video caption. The Facebook further informs that the two members of the rescue team of International Animal Rescue who was present at the site managed to rescue orangutan. "Despite all the obstacles thrown at them, our team were able to rescue this orangutan and bring him to safety," International Animal rescue wrote. Scenes like this have become more and more frequent in Indonesia. Indonesia forests are home to over 1000 orangutans and the deforestation has caused the population of orangutans to plummet habitats are destroyed and orangutans are left to starve and die. Indonesia is home to some of the most biologically diverse forests in the world and ranks third in the number of species behind Brazil and the Democratic Republic of Congo. In a plea urging people to plant more trees, the animal welfare organisation further wrote, "We need to ACT NOW. This World Environment Day, plant a tree and help us rebuild and protect precious orangutan habitat. The situation is critical, and we are running out of time." ×

Watch: Heartbreaking viral video shows Orangutan trying to save its home in Indonesia

<p>Many observers of China&rsquo;s escalating global program of foreign investment and infrastructure development are crossing their fingers and hoping for the best. In an ideal world, China&rsquo;s unbridled ambitions will improve economic growth, food security and social development in many poor nations, as well as enrich itself.</p>

<p>Such hopes are certainly timely, given the isolationism of the US Trump administration, which has created an international leadership vacuum that China is eager to fill.</p>

<p>But a close look reveals that China&rsquo;s international agenda is far more exploitative than many realise, especially for the global environment. And the Chinese leadership&rsquo;s claims to be embracing &ldquo;green development&rdquo; are in many cases more propaganda than fact.</p>

<p>To help steer through the maze, I provide here a snapshot of China&rsquo;s present environmental impacts. Are China&rsquo;s assertions reasoned and defensible, or something else altogether?</p>

<p><strong>Predatory force?</strong></p>

<p>For a start, China is overwhelmingly the world&rsquo;s biggest consumer of illegally poached wildlife and wildlife products. From rhino horn&nbsp;to pangolins, to shark fins, to a menagerie of wild bird species, Chinese consumption drives much of the global trade in wildlife exploitation and smuggling.</p>

<p>Over the past 15 years, China&rsquo;s rapacious appetite for ivory has largely driven a global collapse of elephant populations. In response to growing international criticism, China promised to shut down its domestic ivory trade by the end of 2017.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/file-20171130-12075-1at9skl-20171213063935.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The author examining a Forest Elephant gunned down by ivory poachers in central Africa. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>But even before China&rsquo;s ban has taken full force, a black market for ivory is developing in neighbouring Laos. There, Chinese entrepreneurs are churning out great quantities of carved ivory products, specifically designed for Chinese tastes and openly sold to Chinese visitors.</p>

<p>China is also the world&rsquo;s biggest importer of illegal timber, a trade that imperils forests while defrauding developing nations of billions of dollars each year in timber royalties.</p>

<p>China claims to be working to reduce its illegal timber imports, but its efforts are half-hearted at best, judging by the amount of illegal timber still flowing across its border with Myanmar.</p>

<p title="Terrorism, fashion and Illegal animal trafficking"><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/terrorism-fashion-and-illegal-animal-trafficking-20996"><strong>Also read: Terrorism, fashion and Illegal animal trafficking</strong></a></p>

<p><strong>Infrastructure tsunami</strong></p>

<p>More damaging still are China&rsquo;s plans for infrastructure expansion that will irreparably degrade much of the natural world.</p>

<p>China&rsquo;s One Belt One Road initiative alone will carve massive arrays of new roads, railroads, ports, and extractive industries such as mining, logging, and oil and gas projects into at least 70 nations across Asia, Europe, and Africa.</p>

<p>Chinese President Xi Jinping promises that the Belt and Road initiative will be &ldquo;green, low-carbon, circular and sustainable&rdquo;, but such a claim is profoundly divorced from reality.</p>

<p>As my colleagues and I recently argued in Science and Current Biology, the modern infrastructure tsunami that is largely being driven by China will open a Pandora&rsquo;s box of environmental crises, including large-scale deforestation, habitat fragmentation, wildlife poaching, water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.</p>

<p>China&rsquo;s pursuit of natural resources is also escalating across Latin America. In the Amazon, for example, big mining projects &ndash; many of which are feeding Chinese industries &ndash; don&rsquo;t just cause serious local degradation, but also promote widespread deforestation from the networks of roads bulldosed into remote areas to access the mines.</p>

<p title="How women are protecting wildlife in South Africa
"><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/the-first-ladies-of-conservation-how-the-black-mambas-are-protecting-wildlife-in-south-africa-13178"><strong>Also read: How women are protecting wildlife in South Africa</strong></a></p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" gesture="media" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mwwlxlMoVVQ" width="560"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Overall, China is the most aggressive consumer of minerals on the planet and the biggest driver of tropical deforestation.</p>

<p>Beyond this, China is pushing to build a 5,000km railroad across South America, to make it cheaper for China to import timber, minerals, soy and other natural resources from ports along South America&rsquo;s Pacific coast. If it proceeds, the number of critical ecosystems that would be impacted by this project is staggering.</p>

<p>A World Bank study of more than 3,000 overseas projects funded or operated by China revealed how it often treats poor nations as &ldquo;pollution havens&rdquo; &ndash; transferring its own environmental degradation to developing nations that are desperate for foreign investment.</p>

<p>Finally, much has been made of the fact that China is beginning to temper its appetite for domestic fossil-fuelled energy. It is now a leading investor in solar and wind energy, and recently delayed construction of more than 150 coal-fired electricity plants in China.</p>

<p>These are unquestionably pluses, but they need to be seen in their broad context. In terms of greenhouse-gas emissions, China has exploded past every other nation. It now produces more than twice the carbon emissions of the United States, the second-biggest polluter, following the greatest building spree of coal, nuclear, and large-scale hydro projects in human history.</p>

<p>Despite its new post-Trump role as the world&rsquo;s de facto climate leader, China&rsquo;s overall agenda could scarcely be described as green.</p>

<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<figcaption>
<p><strong>Iceberg </strong><strong>ahead</strong></p>

<p>Some would say it&rsquo;s unfair to criticise China like this. They would argue that China is merely following a well-trodden path of exploitative development previously forged by other nations and colonial powers.</p>

<p>But China is not the same as any other nation. The astounding growth and size of its economy, its dangerously single-minded vision for exploiting natural resources and land internationally, its intolerance of internal and external criticism, and its increasingly closed media and official myopia all combine to make it unique.</p>

<p>President Xi admits that many Chinese corporations, investors and lenders operating overseas have often acted aggressively and even illegally. But he says his government is powerless to do much about it. The most notable government response to date is a series of &ldquo;green papers&rdquo; containing guidelines that sound good in theory but are almost universally ignored by Chinese interests overseas.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/file-20171130-30896-1lw73xn-20171213064007.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Indigenous forest people in the Congo Basin become increasingly poor and marginalised as foreign miners, loggers and poachers invade their lands. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Are Xi&rsquo;s assertions of powerlessness believable? He increasingly rules China with an iron hand. Is it really impossible for China to guide and control its overseas industries, or are they simply so profitable that the government doesn&rsquo;t want to?</p>

<p>Of course, China&rsquo;s huge international ambitions will have some positive effects, and could even be economically transformative for certain nations. But many other elements will benefit China while profoundly damaging our planet.</p>
</figcaption>
</figure>

<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/chinas-growing-footprint-on-the-globe-threatens-to-trample-the-natural-world-88312" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.</p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).</em></p>

<p>Image Credit:&nbsp;Bill Laurance and&nbsp;Mahmoud</p>


Chinese investment is driving an unprecedented investment boom in global infrastructure. But despite its claims to be pursuing green development, China's building bonanza is harming the planet

Many observers of China’s escalating global program of foreign investment and infrastructure development are crossing their fingers and hoping for the best. In an ideal world, China’s unbridled ambitions will improve economic growth, food security and social development in many poor nations, as well as enrich itself. Such hopes are certainly timely, given the isolationism of the US Trump administration, which has created an international leadership vacuum that China is eager to fill. But a close look reveals that China’s international agenda is far more exploitative than many realise, especially for the global environment. And the Chinese leadership’s claims to be embracing “green development” are in many cases more propaganda than fact. To help steer through the maze, I provide here a snapshot of China’s present environmental impacts. Are China’s assertions reasoned and defensible, or something else altogether? Predatory force? For a start, China is overwhelmingly the world’s biggest consumer of illegally poached wildlife and wildlife products. From rhino horn to pangolins, to shark fins, to a menagerie of wild bird species, Chinese consumption drives much of the global trade in wildlife exploitation and smuggling. Over the past 15 years, China’s rapacious appetite for ivory has largely driven a global collapse of elephant populations. In response to growing international criticism, China promised to shut down its domestic ivory trade by the end of 2017. The author examining a Forest Elephant gunned down by ivory poachers in central Africa. (Others) × But even before China’s ban has taken full force, a black market for ivory is developing in neighbouring Laos. There, Chinese entrepreneurs are churning out great quantities of carved ivory products, specifically designed for Chinese tastes and openly sold to Chinese visitors. China is also the world’s biggest importer of illegal timber, a trade that imperils forests while defrauding developing nations of billions of dollars each year in timber royalties. China claims to be working to reduce its illegal timber imports, but its efforts are half-hearted at best, judging by the amount of illegal timber still flowing across its border with Myanmar. Also read: Terrorism, fashion and Illegal animal trafficking Infrastructure tsunami More damaging still are China’s plans for infrastructure expansion that will irreparably degrade much of the natural world. China’s One Belt One Road initiative alone will carve massive arrays of new roads, railroads, ports, and extractive industries such as mining, logging, and oil and gas projects into at least 70 nations across Asia, Europe, and Africa. Chinese President Xi Jinping promises that the Belt and Road initiative will be “green, low-carbon, circular and sustainable”, but such a claim is profoundly divorced from reality. As my colleagues and I recently argued in Science and Current Biology, the modern infrastructure tsunami that is largely being driven by China will open a Pandora’s box of environmental crises, including large-scale deforestation, habitat fragmentation, wildlife poaching, water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. China’s pursuit of natural resources is also escalating across Latin America. In the Amazon, for example, big mining projects – many of which are feeding Chinese industries – don’t just cause serious local degradation, but also promote widespread deforestation from the networks of roads bulldosed into remote areas to access the mines. Also read: How women are protecting wildlife in South Africa × Overall, China is the most aggressive consumer of minerals on the planet and the biggest driver of tropical deforestation. Beyond this, China is pushing to build a 5,000km railroad across South America, to make it cheaper for China to import timber, minerals, soy and other natural resources from ports along South America’s Pacific coast. If it proceeds, the number of critical ecosystems that would be impacted by this project is staggering. A World Bank study of more than 3,000 overseas projects funded or operated by China revealed how it often treats poor nations as “pollution havens” – transferring its own environmental degradation to developing nations that are desperate for foreign investment. Finally, much has been made of the fact that China is beginning to temper its appetite for domestic fossil-fuelled energy. It is now a leading investor in solar and wind energy, and recently delayed construction of more than 150 coal-fired electricity plants in China. These are unquestionably pluses, but they need to be seen in their broad context. In terms of greenhouse-gas emissions, China has exploded past every other nation. It now produces more than twice the carbon emissions of the United States, the second-biggest polluter, following the greatest building spree of coal, nuclear, and large-scale hydro projects in human history. Despite its new post-Trump role as the world’s de facto climate leader, China’s overall agenda could scarcely be described as green. Iceberg ahead Some would say it’s unfair to criticise China like this. They would argue that China is merely following a well-trodden path of exploitative development previously forged by other nations and colonial powers. But China is not the same as any other nation. The astounding growth and size of its economy, its dangerously single-minded vision for exploiting natural resources and land internationally, its intolerance of internal and external criticism, and its increasingly closed media and official myopia all combine to make it unique. President Xi admits that many Chinese corporations, investors and lenders operating overseas have often acted aggressively and even illegally. But he says his government is powerless to do much about it. The most notable government response to date is a series of “green papers” containing guidelines that sound good in theory but are almost universally ignored by Chinese interests overseas. Indigenous forest people in the Congo Basin become increasingly poor and marginalised as foreign miners, loggers and poachers invade their lands. (Others) × Are Xi’s assertions of powerlessness believable? He increasingly rules China with an iron hand. Is it really impossible for China to guide and control its overseas industries, or are they simply so profitable that the government doesn’t want to? Of course, China’s huge international ambitions will have some positive effects, and could even be economically transformative for certain nations. But many other elements will benefit China while profoundly damaging our planet. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity). Image Credit: Bill Laurance and Mahmoud

Opinion: China's growth is harming the planet

<p>A sharp increase in forest fires stoked record losses in global forest cover equivalent to the area of New Zealand in 2016, a Global Forest Watch report has said.</p>

<p>The alarming pace of destruction of 51% higher than the prior year with a loss of 73.4 million acres (29.7 million hectares), according to data from the University of Maryland&nbsp;was partially due to climate change that has increased the risks and intensity of wildfires by triggering temperature rise and drought in some places, the monitor said yesterday.</p>

<p>The 2015-2016 weather phenomenon El Nino, one of the strongest on record, also played a role, having created particularly dry conditions in the tropics. Many of those tropical areas are not naturally prone to catching fire&nbsp;but vulnerability increased due to poor management and was exacerbated by El Nino.</p>

<p>Deadly blazes in Brazil and Indonesia were among those contributing to the loss. This year, deadly blazes have again devastated regions of Portugal as well as California.</p>

<p>Brazil&#39;s Amazon region lost 9.1 million acres of tree cover more than three times that of 2015. And Portugal saw some 4% of its forests go up in smoke in 2016, the highest proportion of any other country.</p>

<p>Nearly half of all forests burned in the European Union in 2016 were in Portugal, where fire-prone eucalyptus and pine plantations along with poor soil encouraged the deadly flames.</p>

<p>The country is set to break the record for destroyed forests in 2017, with recent disasters killing dozens of people.</p>

<p>Early 2016 saw one of the largest fires ever recorded in Central Africa, destroying 37,000 acres of forest in the Republic of Congo.</p>

<p>Last year&#39;s Fort McMurray fire in Canada ravaged more than 1.5 million acres, causing $8.8 billion in damage.</p>

<p>Deforestation resulting from agriculture, logging and mining also contributed to the losses.</p>

<p>The report urged improving fire and forest management, including early warning systems, fire bans during dry seasons and more augmented investment in forest protection and restoration.</p>


A sharp increase in forest fires stoked record losses in global forest cover equivalent to the area of New Zealand in 2016

A sharp increase in forest fires stoked record losses in global forest cover equivalent to the area of New Zealand in 2016, a Global Forest Watch report has said. The alarming pace of destruction of 51% higher than the prior year with a loss of 73.4 million acres (29.7 million hectares), according to data from the University of Maryland was partially due to climate change that has increased the risks and intensity of wildfires by triggering temperature rise and drought in some places, the monitor said yesterday. The 2015-2016 weather phenomenon El Nino, one of the strongest on record, also played a role, having created particularly dry conditions in the tropics. Many of those tropical areas are not naturally prone to catching fire but vulnerability increased due to poor management and was exacerbated by El Nino. Deadly blazes in Brazil and Indonesia were among those contributing to the loss. This year, deadly blazes have again devastated regions of Portugal as well as California. Brazil's Amazon region lost 9.1 million acres of tree cover more than three times that of 2015. And Portugal saw some 4% of its forests go up in smoke in 2016, the highest proportion of any other country. Nearly half of all forests burned in the European Union in 2016 were in Portugal, where fire-prone eucalyptus and pine plantations along with poor soil encouraged the deadly flames. The country is set to break the record for destroyed forests in 2017, with recent disasters killing dozens of people. Early 2016 saw one of the largest fires ever recorded in Central Africa, destroying 37,000 acres of forest in the Republic of Congo. Last year's Fort McMurray fire in Canada ravaged more than 1.5 million acres, causing $8.8 billion in damage. Deforestation resulting from agriculture, logging and mining also contributed to the losses. The report urged improving fire and forest management, including early warning systems, fire bans during dry seasons and more augmented investment in forest protection and restoration.

Forest fires contributed to record global tree cover loss: Report

<p>He is a strawberry farmer in his late 70s. The dug well on his three acres in old Mahabaleshwar is stone dry. His wife and he struggle to keep the farm going. They manage to, as there is still some water in their borewell. But even that little he shares, free of charge, with the temple bordering their land. The severe drought hurts his yield but not his generosity. His name is Yunus Ismail Nalaband &ndash; and he gives that water to the Krishnamai temple, the oldest symbol of the source of the Krishna river in Satara district, quite cheerfully.</p>

<p>&ldquo;Is it really my water?&rdquo; he asks. &ldquo;It all belongs to the uparwala [the Almighty], does it not?&rdquo; His wife, Roshan Nalaband, also in her 70s, nods approvingly. They&rsquo;re both packing their strawberries in little boxes. &ldquo;The traders will come by to pick them up,&rdquo; says Roshan. &ldquo;The prices are higher this year because of scarcity, but that is offset by a poorer yield and lesser quality of the crop.&rdquo; They speak, without pausing at work, of the way the water crisis is hurting them. Only Roshan breaks off for a minute to give us some water and offer us further refreshments.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/pari2-20170926070852.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Yunus Nalaband and his wife Roshan Nalaband: Small farmers, growing mainly strawberries on their three acres. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/pari3-20170926071053.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Completely dried-out well of Yunus Nalaband and his wife Roshan Nalaband. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>The kunda (temple tank) at the Krishnamai is empty except when it gets water from the Nalabands&rsquo; borewell. The tank went dry this season. The Krishnamai is just a few minutes&rsquo; walk from the more-visited Panchganga temple, also regarded as the symbolic source of the Krishna and four other rivers &ndash; Koyna, Venna, Savitri and Gayatri. Their actual sources are not too far from here. The Krishnamai itself is probably the oldest temple in the Wai-Mahabaleshwar region. A beautiful little one, seen by locals as the home of the river goddess.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/pari4-20170926071140.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The Krishnamai temple in Old Mahabaleshwar: the little &lsquo;kunda&rsquo; in front of it is dry for the first time in living memory. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>My friend and colleague Jaideep Hardikar and I, together with other journalists in each of the districts we visited, went to the source &ndash; symbolic or actual &ndash; of several rivers in Maharashtra in the month of May. The idea was to journey downstream each river and talk to farmers, labourers and others living along these routes. To listen to them speak about how the mega water crisis &ndash; much larger than a meteorological drought &ndash; is affecting their lives.</p>

<p>While it is normal for some parts of rivers to run dry in summer, this is now happening even in their source regions, along stretches where they have never dried up. &ldquo;Maharashtra&rsquo;s once perennial rivers have significantly been converted into seasonal ones,&rdquo; says Prof. Madhav Gadgil, who headed the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel. &ldquo;Amongst the reasons for this have been large-scale damming and a host of other activities along the course and basins of these rivers,&rdquo; says the leading ecologist and writer.</p>

<p>&ldquo;In six decades, I have not seen the kunda of the Krishnamai empty and dry,&rdquo; says Narayan Zade. That&rsquo;s in a region with an annual average rainfall of close to 2,000 mm. A retired tourist guide and migrant worker, Zade spends his days sitting around this temple. He is clear though that the drought isn&rsquo;t just about the rainfall. He says tourists and outsiders &ndash; &ldquo;you people&rdquo; &ndash; have much to answer for.</p>

<p>&ldquo;Of course there has been major deforestation,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;But not by locals. If one of us here cuts a couple of branches, he goes to jail. But people from outside cut and take truckloads of timber &ndash; they get away with it.&rdquo; While Zade too has worked as a tour guide, he says unregulated tourism has done great damage: &ldquo;&hellip;all those resorts and places have come up&rdquo; causing further loss of green cover. Now, he prefers the quiet Krishnamai to the Panchganga temple bustling with tourists.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/pari5-20170926071255.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Narayan Zade at the Krishnamai temple. He blames outsiders &ndash;&lsquo;you people&rsquo; &ndash; for deforestation, overcrowding and other activities that add to the water scarcity. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>The temple&rsquo;s front yard has a spectacular spot overlooking the Dhom Balkawadi dam. It still has some water, but much less than it should, even for this time of the year. Years of damming and major diversions of water along the river have had an impact. There is also the chaos of never-to-be-completed lift irrigation schemes. These are at the core of the state&rsquo;s &ldquo;irrigation scam&rdquo;.</p>

<p>Quite a few villages that were meant to gain from those insanely expensive schemes, but never did, are in the Khatav and Maan tehsils of Satara. The Ner dam and lake in that district are meant to supply water, both for drinking and irrigation, to a much larger number of villages, but the supply is mostly cornered by sugarcane cultivators in just 19 villages nearby. Ner is about 80 kilometres downstream from the Krishnamai.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/pari6-20170926071435.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The Ner lake and dam in Satara district: even water meant for drinking is monopolised by sugarcane growers in just 19 nearby villages. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Besides Maan and Khatav, 11 other very dry tehsils here are spread across three districts &ndash; Satara, Sangli and Solapur. People from these tehsils confer each year in what they call adushkaal parishad (drought council). &ldquo;They are demanding, among other things, a &lsquo;Maan desh&rsquo;, a separate &lsquo;drought district&rsquo; comprising these 13 tehsils ,&rdquo; says Dr. Maruti Ramakrishna Katkar, a retired district medical officer.</p>

<p>&ldquo;Their present districts give them little say in anything,&rdquo; says Katkar. But how would &lsquo;seceding&rsquo; to form a new district help them? The old districts would be glad to see them go and be even less answerable to them, surely? He puts one of the leaders of the new &lsquo;drought district&rsquo; movement, Prof. Krishna Ingole, on the phone with us. Ingole says the shared interests of the people in that region bind them together and districthood will enhance their bargaining power.</p>

<p>&ldquo;These tehsils are about 1,000 feet above sea level and in a rain shadow zone,&rdquo; Katkar says. &ldquo;We have less than 30 rainy days annually. All our areas have seen major migrations. There are gold and jewellery workers among the migrants who send back remittances that keep the local economy going.&rdquo;</p>

<p>The water crisis is not a problem of the last year or two. Nor of a single big drought. It has built over the decades, driven largely by human hand. Why, asks retired irrigation engineer Sharad Mande in Pune, are there no long-term measures to deal with it? He answers his own question: &ldquo;The life of dams is 80-90 years. The life of pipelines is 35-40 years. That of water treatment plants &ndash; about 25-30 years. Of pumping machinery, 15 years. But the life of a chief minister is five years. There is no credit for the long-term action. Only for what you do immediately.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Between 2000 and 2010, official data show, the state&rsquo;s irrigation potential increased by just 0.1 per cent. That, after spending Rs. 70,000 crores on irrigation during the same decade. Over half of that, going by the findings of the Chitale Committee that probed the irrigation scam, may have been siphoned off on dud schemes.</p>

<p>In Maharashtra, official and Right to Information-accessed data show, the cost of a dam can increase by 500 per cent within a month after a contract for it is awarded. Or by nearly 1,000 per cent within six months. As many as 77 projects have been &ldquo;under execution&rdquo; for over 30 years. Cost overruns are bigger than the budgets of some small Indian states put together.</p>

<p>Groundwater is also running low in Maharashtra, where 65 per cent of the net irrigation is based on this resource. The state&rsquo;s ban in April 2016 on the sinking of borewells below 200 feet comes three decades too late.</p>

<p>Even the drinking water problem is far greater than it ought to be in regions along the Krishna river&rsquo;s course. A lot of water gets diverted to construction activity. There are rural to urban transfers, and agriculture to industry diversions.</p>

<p>Within agriculture, most of the water is monopolised by sugarcane. Even Ner lake water intended for drinking gets diverted to that crop. Two-thirds of Maharashtra&rsquo;s cane is grown in drought-prone regions. As for the sugar factories, &ldquo;Please don&rsquo;t call them that,&rdquo; Mande grumbles. &ldquo;They are MLA factories &ndash; that&rsquo;s what they produce.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Each acre of sugarcane uses up to 180 acre-inches of water in a year &ndash; that is, almost 18 million litres &ndash; apart from normal rainfall. An acre of irrigated hybrid jowar requires barely 10 per cent of that. A lot of people are not attacking sugarcane per se. Just grow it in regions that have the water for it, they say. Not in zones of scarcity. Cane is cultivated on 4 per cent of the land, but consumes 70 per cent of irrigation water in Maharashtra.</p>

<p>&ldquo;This dugwell of ours has never been dry in six decades,&rdquo; says Yunus Nalaband, back in Mahabaleshwar. He and Roshan continue packing their strawberries. Mahabaleshwar accounts for close to 80 per cent of the country&rsquo;s strawberry production. The two gift us a few strawberries and even some black mulberry fruit.</p>

<p>Barely a hundred yards in front of us is the Krishnamai temple that they supply free water too. Behind us are the three acres they still cultivate. But with water running out, these may not be, unlike in the nostalgic Beatles song, &lsquo;Strawberry Fields Forever&rsquo;.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/pari7-20170926071534.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Yunus and Roshan struggle to cultivate in the drought period but share the little water they get from their borewell with the Kirshnamai temple. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>This<a href="https://ruralindiaonline.org/articles/no-life-should-end-in-the-gutter/">&nbsp;</a><a href="https://ruralindiaonline.org/articles/source-of-the-rivers-scams-of-the-rulers/">article</a><a href="https://ruralindiaonline.org/articles/no-life-should-end-in-the-gutter/">&nbsp;</a>was originally published on 25/ 05/2016&nbsp;on the&nbsp;<a href="https://ruralindiaonline.org/">People&#39;s Archive of Rural India.</a></p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Photo Credit: P. Sainath</p>


Why rivers run dry while money floods the system in Maharashtra. A journey downstream the Krishna river

He is a strawberry farmer in his late 70s. The dug well on his three acres in old Mahabaleshwar is stone dry. His wife and he struggle to keep the farm going. They manage to, as there is still some water in their borewell. But even that little he shares, free of charge, with the temple bordering their land. The severe drought hurts his yield but not his generosity. His name is Yunus Ismail Nalaband – and he gives that water to the Krishnamai temple, the oldest symbol of the source of the Krishna river in Satara district, quite cheerfully. “Is it really my water?” he asks. “It all belongs to the uparwala [the Almighty], does it not?” His wife, Roshan Nalaband, also in her 70s, nods approvingly. They’re both packing their strawberries in little boxes. “The traders will come by to pick them up,” says Roshan. “The prices are higher this year because of scarcity, but that is offset by a poorer yield and lesser quality of the crop.” They speak, without pausing at work, of the way the water crisis is hurting them. Only Roshan breaks off for a minute to give us some water and offer us further refreshments. Yunus Nalaband and his wife Roshan Nalaband: Small farmers, growing mainly strawberries on their three acres. (Others) × Completely dried-out well of Yunus Nalaband and his wife Roshan Nalaband. (Others) × The kunda (temple tank) at the Krishnamai is empty except when it gets water from the Nalabands’ borewell. The tank went dry this season. The Krishnamai is just a few minutes’ walk from the more-visited Panchganga temple, also regarded as the symbolic source of the Krishna and four other rivers – Koyna, Venna, Savitri and Gayatri. Their actual sources are not too far from here. The Krishnamai itself is probably the oldest temple in the Wai-Mahabaleshwar region. A beautiful little one, seen by locals as the home of the river goddess. The Krishnamai temple in Old Mahabaleshwar: the little ‘kunda’ in front of it is dry for the first time in living memory. (Others) × My friend and colleague Jaideep Hardikar and I, together with other journalists in each of the districts we visited, went to the source – symbolic or actual – of several rivers in Maharashtra in the month of May. The idea was to journey downstream each river and talk to farmers, labourers and others living along these routes. To listen to them speak about how the mega water crisis – much larger than a meteorological drought – is affecting their lives. While it is normal for some parts of rivers to run dry in summer, this is now happening even in their source regions, along stretches where they have never dried up. “Maharashtra’s once perennial rivers have significantly been converted into seasonal ones,” says Prof. Madhav Gadgil, who headed the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel. “Amongst the reasons for this have been large-scale damming and a host of other activities along the course and basins of these rivers,” says the leading ecologist and writer. “In six decades, I have not seen the kunda of the Krishnamai empty and dry,” says Narayan Zade. That’s in a region with an annual average rainfall of close to 2,000 mm. A retired tourist guide and migrant worker, Zade spends his days sitting around this temple. He is clear though that the drought isn’t just about the rainfall. He says tourists and outsiders – “you people” – have much to answer for. “Of course there has been major deforestation,” he says. “But not by locals. If one of us here cuts a couple of branches, he goes to jail. But people from outside cut and take truckloads of timber – they get away with it.” While Zade too has worked as a tour guide, he says unregulated tourism has done great damage: “…all those resorts and places have come up” causing further loss of green cover. Now, he prefers the quiet Krishnamai to the Panchganga temple bustling with tourists. Narayan Zade at the Krishnamai temple. He blames outsiders –‘you people’ – for deforestation, overcrowding and other activities that add to the water scarcity. (Others) × The temple’s front yard has a spectacular spot overlooking the Dhom Balkawadi dam. It still has some water, but much less than it should, even for this time of the year. Years of damming and major diversions of water along the river have had an impact. There is also the chaos of never-to-be-completed lift irrigation schemes. These are at the core of the state’s “irrigation scam”. Quite a few villages that were meant to gain from those insanely expensive schemes, but never did, are in the Khatav and Maan tehsils of Satara. The Ner dam and lake in that district are meant to supply water, both for drinking and irrigation, to a much larger number of villages, but the supply is mostly cornered by sugarcane cultivators in just 19 villages nearby. Ner is about 80 kilometres downstream from the Krishnamai. The Ner lake and dam in Satara district: even water meant for drinking is monopolised by sugarcane growers in just 19 nearby villages. (Others) × Besides Maan and Khatav, 11 other very dry tehsils here are spread across three districts – Satara, Sangli and Solapur. People from these tehsils confer each year in what they call adushkaal parishad (drought council). “They are demanding, among other things, a ‘Maan desh’, a separate ‘drought district’ comprising these 13 tehsils ,” says Dr. Maruti Ramakrishna Katkar, a retired district medical officer. “Their present districts give them little say in anything,” says Katkar. But how would ‘seceding’ to form a new district help them? The old districts would be glad to see them go and be even less answerable to them, surely? He puts one of the leaders of the new ‘drought district’ movement, Prof. Krishna Ingole, on the phone with us. Ingole says the shared interests of the people in that region bind them together and districthood will enhance their bargaining power. “These tehsils are about 1,000 feet above sea level and in a rain shadow zone,” Katkar says. “We have less than 30 rainy days annually. All our areas have seen major migrations. There are gold and jewellery workers among the migrants who send back remittances that keep the local economy going.” The water crisis is not a problem of the last year or two. Nor of a single big drought. It has built over the decades, driven largely by human hand. Why, asks retired irrigation engineer Sharad Mande in Pune, are there no long-term measures to deal with it? He answers his own question: “The life of dams is 80-90 years. The life of pipelines is 35-40 years. That of water treatment plants – about 25-30 years. Of pumping machinery, 15 years. But the life of a chief minister is five years. There is no credit for the long-term action. Only for what you do immediately.” Between 2000 and 2010, official data show, the state’s irrigation potential increased by just 0.1 per cent. That, after spending Rs. 70,000 crores on irrigation during the same decade. Over half of that, going by the findings of the Chitale Committee that probed the irrigation scam, may have been siphoned off on dud schemes. In Maharashtra, official and Right to Information-accessed data show, the cost of a dam can increase by 500 per cent within a month after a contract for it is awarded. Or by nearly 1,000 per cent within six months. As many as 77 projects have been “under execution” for over 30 years. Cost overruns are bigger than the budgets of some small Indian states put together. Groundwater is also running low in Maharashtra, where 65 per cent of the net irrigation is based on this resource. The state’s ban in April 2016 on the sinking of borewells below 200 feet comes three decades too late. Even the drinking water problem is far greater than it ought to be in regions along the Krishna river’s course. A lot of water gets diverted to construction activity. There are rural to urban transfers, and agriculture to industry diversions. Within agriculture, most of the water is monopolised by sugarcane. Even Ner lake water intended for drinking gets diverted to that crop. Two-thirds of Maharashtra’s cane is grown in drought-prone regions. As for the sugar factories, “Please don’t call them that,” Mande grumbles. “They are MLA factories – that’s what they produce.” Each acre of sugarcane uses up to 180 acre-inches of water in a year – that is, almost 18 million litres – apart from normal rainfall. An acre of irrigated hybrid jowar requires barely 10 per cent of that. A lot of people are not attacking sugarcane per se. Just grow it in regions that have the water for it, they say. Not in zones of scarcity. Cane is cultivated on 4 per cent of the land, but consumes 70 per cent of irrigation water in Maharashtra. “This dugwell of ours has never been dry in six decades,” says Yunus Nalaband, back in Mahabaleshwar. He and Roshan continue packing their strawberries. Mahabaleshwar accounts for close to 80 per cent of the country’s strawberry production. The two gift us a few strawberries and even some black mulberry fruit. Barely a hundred yards in front of us is the Krishnamai temple that they supply free water too. Behind us are the three acres they still cultivate. But with water running out, these may not be, unlike in the nostalgic Beatles song, ‘Strawberry Fields Forever’. Yunus and Roshan struggle to cultivate in the drought period but share the little water they get from their borewell with the Kirshnamai temple. (Others) × This article was originally published on 25/ 05/2016 on the People's Archive of Rural India. Photo Credit: P. Sainath

Source of the rivers, scams of the rulers

<p>By:&nbsp;James Douglas Langston</p>

<p>Deforestation has historically been the price of development, but the world is now going through a forest transition; since 2015, there has been net global reforestation.</p>

<p>The pace and quality of this transition is mixed. In the world&rsquo;s remaining high conservation-value forests, deforestation rates are high and poverty persists but development opportunities are within sight.</p>

<p>These forests are mainly located in the tropical developing world and have growing human populations. Because as forest-dependent people are increasingly involved in cash economies , they use their forests to participate in markets. This will inevitably lead to changes in forests.</p>

<p>But can these transitions be nurtured so that future forest landscapes deliver the biodiversity and ecosystem benefits that societies need or desire?</p>

<p><strong>Human interference</strong></p>

<p>It&rsquo;s not that the world&rsquo;s remaining forests are pristine and untouched. Humans have shaped and domesticated the remote Amazonian and Bornean and Congo Basin forests for millennia; all forests are the result of human actions.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Humans have shaped and domesticated the remote Amazonian and Bornean and Congo Basin forests for millennia; all forests are the result of human actions</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Humans have shaped and domesticated the remote Amazonian and Bornean and Congo Basin forests for millennia; all forests are the result of human actions" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>But as development pressures and the rate of globalisation increase, and as market and cash economies spread, changes in forests are intensifying. Forest clearance and disturbance has seen biodiversity decline and ecosystems suffer.</p>

<p>Conservationists typically respond to this in one of two ways. They either tackle the threat head on and try to counter it (classic threat-based conservation). Or they hand over forest management to local people (community-based forestry).</p>

<p>This latter is a recent popular trend and it&rsquo;s based on the assumption that locals will take care of biodiversity.</p>

<p>But neither threat-based conservation nor local management has proven successful for preserving forests. Tropical forests are still subject to high deforestation rates in less developed countries and conservationists lament the ongoing decline in biodiversity and ecosystems.</p>

<p>These forests are home to many thousands of people, who often have few economic opportunities. What is their future; what will happen to their forests; and where do they fit in future strategies for conservation?</p>

<p><strong>Romance vs making a living</strong></p>

<p>Some conservationists assume that forests will be preserved by forest-dependent people because they&rsquo;re content with their &ldquo;traditional lifestyles&rdquo;, disconnected from cash economies and living in romanticised sustainable communities.</p>

<p>And rights groups point out that people living in forests often have insecure land rights, lack freedoms and power, and are victims of land grabs by companies and governments. They say fixing these requires handing forests completely over to local communities.</p>

<p>Under the influence of their assumptions, rights-based and conservation groups both argue &ndash; perhaps implicitly &ndash; that communities, given the opportunity, will manage forests in a sustainable way.</p>

<p>Recently, even &ldquo;green-black&rdquo; alliances, where conservation groups and Indigenous rights groups collaborate over shared goals, have been shown to be problematic. Indigenous groups and local communities may not manage their forests to conserve biodiversity or, for that matter, the climate change mitigation values of the forests.</p>

<p>In spite of the lack of evidence that local management will lead to conservation, development organisations, NGOs and governments have mobilised vast sums of money to turn the management of lands over to local people.</p>

<p>But a slew of recent articles explains why local management is not a panacea.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>In general, forests managed by local people will only deliver benefits when this doesn&rsquo;t conflict with short-term economic interests</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=In general, forests managed by local people will only deliver benefits when this doesn?t conflict with short-term economic interests" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Communities and indigenous people would, of course, like to see forests, nature and biodiversity - and in abundance. But their priority, like that of most people, is improving their own well-being and that of their children. This means making choices.</p>

<p>Data from Indonesia, the Congo Basin and Brazil show that, in general, forests managed by local people will only deliver benefits when this doesn&rsquo;t conflict with short-term economic interests.</p>

<p><strong>Realistic forest futures</strong></p>

<p>To local people, tackling threats to forests is seen as opposing development and will continue to fail. Opposing new roads in areas where people are deprived of development opportunities, for instance, is clearly not a viable way forward.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Where governance is weak and people are poor, forests will not survive unless conservation engages with the process of development, rather than opposes it</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Where governance is weak and people are poor, forests will not survive unless conservation engages with the process of development, rather than opposes it" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>But the alternative strategy of handing management over to local people in the hope that they will protect biodiversity is also not realistic. If the only options on offer are forest protection or development at their expense (plantations, for instance, or mines and agriculture) then most people will, naturally, choose the latter.</p>

<p>Where governance is weak and people are poor, forests will not survive unless conservation engages with the process of development, rather than opposes it.</p>

<p>Current efforts, then, can be seen as seeking to conserve the forests of the past. But what we need is to transition to future forested landscapes that will meet the needs of the 9.5 billion resource-hungry people expected to populate the world by 2050, as well as conserve biodiversity and ecosystem processes.</p>

<p>The binary approach of integration or segregation is thus misleading. Strictly protected areas are essential but they will have to be part of a matrix of landscape components that provide for increased prosperity and sustainability.</p>

<p>A balance between conservation and development can only be struck at a landscape &ndash; or seascape &ndash; level. This approach brings together stakeholders and aims to balance the multiple &ndash; and sometimes conflicting &ndash; objectives in a landscape or seascape.</p>

<p>It&rsquo;s mindful that local peoples&rsquo; needs and aspirations change with time. People living near forests will say their preferred future includes the continued existence of forests and therefore, biodiversity and intact ecosystems. The challenge is to achieve this alongside improvements in livelihoods.</p>

<p>Blueprints and roadmaps are useless, then, unless they reflect and satisfy local development needs. Continual learning and adaptation is needed to work with changing priorities on both the local and global scales.</p>

<p>Only once local management coalitions explicitly acknowledge trade-offs, when winners and losers are clearly identified prior to any intervention, and local peoples share a commonly agreed path to their future, can we better nurture forests.<br />
&nbsp;</p>

<p>James Douglas Langston is a PhD Candidate and Demonstrator in the Development Practice Programme at&nbsp;James Cook University.</p>


Continual learning and adaptation is needed to work with changing priorities on both the local and global scales

By: James Douglas Langston Deforestation has historically been the price of development, but the world is now going through a forest transition; since 2015, there has been net global reforestation. The pace and quality of this transition is mixed. In the world’s remaining high conservation-value forests, deforestation rates are high and poverty persists but development opportunities are within sight. These forests are mainly located in the tropical developing world and have growing human populations. Because as forest-dependent people are increasingly involved in cash economies , they use their forests to participate in markets. This will inevitably lead to changes in forests. But can these transitions be nurtured so that future forest landscapes deliver the biodiversity and ecosystem benefits that societies need or desire? Human interference It’s not that the world’s remaining forests are pristine and untouched. Humans have shaped and domesticated the remote Amazonian and Bornean and Congo Basin forests for millennia; all forests are the result of human actions. Humans have shaped and domesticated the remote Amazonian and Bornean and Congo Basin forests for millennia; all forests are the result of human actions × But as development pressures and the rate of globalisation increase, and as market and cash economies spread, changes in forests are intensifying. Forest clearance and disturbance has seen biodiversity decline and ecosystems suffer. Conservationists typically respond to this in one of two ways. They either tackle the threat head on and try to counter it (classic threat-based conservation). Or they hand over forest management to local people (community-based forestry). This latter is a recent popular trend and it’s based on the assumption that locals will take care of biodiversity. But neither threat-based conservation nor local management has proven successful for preserving forests. Tropical forests are still subject to high deforestation rates in less developed countries and conservationists lament the ongoing decline in biodiversity and ecosystems. These forests are home to many thousands of people, who often have few economic opportunities. What is their future; what will happen to their forests; and where do they fit in future strategies for conservation? Romance vs making a living Some conservationists assume that forests will be preserved by forest-dependent people because they’re content with their “traditional lifestyles”, disconnected from cash economies and living in romanticised sustainable communities. And rights groups point out that people living in forests often have insecure land rights, lack freedoms and power, and are victims of land grabs by companies and governments. They say fixing these requires handing forests completely over to local communities. Under the influence of their assumptions, rights-based and conservation groups both argue – perhaps implicitly – that communities, given the opportunity, will manage forests in a sustainable way. Recently, even “green-black” alliances, where conservation groups and Indigenous rights groups collaborate over shared goals, have been shown to be problematic. Indigenous groups and local communities may not manage their forests to conserve biodiversity or, for that matter, the climate change mitigation values of the forests. In spite of the lack of evidence that local management will lead to conservation, development organisations, NGOs and governments have mobilised vast sums of money to turn the management of lands over to local people. But a slew of recent articles explains why local management is not a panacea. In general, forests managed by local people will only deliver benefits when this doesn’t conflict with short-term economic interests × Communities and indigenous people would, of course, like to see forests, nature and biodiversity - and in abundance. But their priority, like that of most people, is improving their own well-being and that of their children. This means making choices. Data from Indonesia, the Congo Basin and Brazil show that, in general, forests managed by local people will only deliver benefits when this doesn’t conflict with short-term economic interests. Realistic forest futures To local people, tackling threats to forests is seen as opposing development and will continue to fail. Opposing new roads in areas where people are deprived of development opportunities, for instance, is clearly not a viable way forward. Where governance is weak and people are poor, forests will not survive unless conservation engages with the process of development, rather than opposes it × But the alternative strategy of handing management over to local people in the hope that they will protect biodiversity is also not realistic. If the only options on offer are forest protection or development at their expense (plantations, for instance, or mines and agriculture) then most people will, naturally, choose the latter. Where governance is weak and people are poor, forests will not survive unless conservation engages with the process of development, rather than opposes it. Current efforts, then, can be seen as seeking to conserve the forests of the past. But what we need is to transition to future forested landscapes that will meet the needs of the 9.5 billion resource-hungry people expected to populate the world by 2050, as well as conserve biodiversity and ecosystem processes. The binary approach of integration or segregation is thus misleading. Strictly protected areas are essential but they will have to be part of a matrix of landscape components that provide for increased prosperity and sustainability. A balance between conservation and development can only be struck at a landscape – or seascape – level. This approach brings together stakeholders and aims to balance the multiple – and sometimes conflicting – objectives in a landscape or seascape. It’s mindful that local peoples’ needs and aspirations change with time. People living near forests will say their preferred future includes the continued existence of forests and therefore, biodiversity and intact ecosystems. The challenge is to achieve this alongside improvements in livelihoods. Blueprints and roadmaps are useless, then, unless they reflect and satisfy local development needs. Continual learning and adaptation is needed to work with changing priorities on both the local and global scales. Only once local management coalitions explicitly acknowledge trade-offs, when winners and losers are clearly identified prior to any intervention, and local peoples share a commonly agreed path to their future, can we better nurture forests. James Douglas Langston is a PhD Candidate and Demonstrator in the Development Practice Programme at James Cook University.

To conserve forests, we need to think beyond current ideas of integration or segregation

<p>&nbsp;A landmark Indian forest rights law passed 10 years ago with the aim of protecting indigenous people has been crippled by conflicting legislation, and a lack of political will and funds to ensure its implementation, according to a report.</p>

<p>More than a fifth of India&#39;s population was expected to benefit from the 2006 Forest Rights Act covering vast areas of forest land roughly the size of Germany.</p>

<p>Instead, only 3 per cent of potential community forest rights have been granted so far, and conflicts between states and indigenous communities have been rising as demand for land increases in the world&#39;s fastest-growing major economy.</p>

<p>&quot;(The law) has the potential to conserve forests and biodiversity (and) improve local livelihoods,&quot; Neema Pathak Broome, a researcher with rights group Kalpavriksh, said in the report released Tuesday by a citizens&#39;&nbsp;advocacy group.</p>

<p>&quot;Unfortunately, due to a lack of political will and intentional efforts to undermine the law, this vast potential for democratic forest governance remains unrealised.&quot;</p>

<p>In the decade since the law was passed, the central government and several states have introduced other laws that sometimes run counter to the Forest Rights Act.</p>

<p>For example, a new federal law introduced in July that compensates for deforestation ignores the rights of indigenous people and the requirement for consent of the village council for use of forest land, activists said.</p>

<p>The Ministry of Tribal Affairs, which is charged with implementing the 2006 law, is &quot;understaffed and under-resourced&quot;, while state forest departments are largely &quot;hostile, at best apathetic&quot; in implementing it, the report said.</p>

<p>The western states of Maharashtra and Gujarat, the eastern state of Odisha and the southern state of Kerala lead in recognising community and individual forest rights, the report said.</p>

<p>States including Assam, Bihar, Goa, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand have lagged behind, it said.</p>

<p>As well as conserving forests, the law has the potential to secure livelihoods, promote women&#39;s rights and contain conflicts in areas hit by violent extremism, it said.</p>

<p>The government needs to mobilise political support and funds for its implementation and strengthen the Tribal Affairs Ministry and state agencies, the report said.</p>

<p>&quot;The biggest stumbling block is that there&#39;s very limited understanding of the Forest Rights Act, even within the government,&quot; Tushar Dash, from advocacy group Vasundhara, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.</p>

<p>&quot;They believe granting forest rights obstructs development, and are instead giving forest lands for industrial use. But it&#39;s been established that protecting forest rights encourages development and helps conservation efforts far more.&quot;&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>(Reuters)</p>


Only 3% of potential community forest rights have been granted so far, conflicts between states and indigenous communities are on the rise

A landmark Indian forest rights law passed 10 years ago with the aim of protecting indigenous people has been crippled by conflicting legislation, and a lack of political will and funds to ensure its implementation, according to a report. More than a fifth of India's population was expected to benefit from the 2006 Forest Rights Act covering vast areas of forest land roughly the size of Germany. Instead, only 3 per cent of potential community forest rights have been granted so far, and conflicts between states and indigenous communities have been rising as demand for land increases in the world's fastest-growing major economy. "(The law) has the potential to conserve forests and biodiversity (and) improve local livelihoods," Neema Pathak Broome, a researcher with rights group Kalpavriksh, said in the report released Tuesday by a citizens' advocacy group. "Unfortunately, due to a lack of political will and intentional efforts to undermine the law, this vast potential for democratic forest governance remains unrealised." In the decade since the law was passed, the central government and several states have introduced other laws that sometimes run counter to the Forest Rights Act. For example, a new federal law introduced in July that compensates for deforestation ignores the rights of indigenous people and the requirement for consent of the village council for use of forest land, activists said. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs, which is charged with implementing the 2006 law, is "understaffed and under-resourced", while state forest departments are largely "hostile, at best apathetic" in implementing it, the report said. The western states of Maharashtra and Gujarat, the eastern state of Odisha and the southern state of Kerala lead in recognising community and individual forest rights, the report said. States including Assam, Bihar, Goa, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand have lagged behind, it said. As well as conserving forests, the law has the potential to secure livelihoods, promote women's rights and contain conflicts in areas hit by violent extremism, it said. The government needs to mobilise political support and funds for its implementation and strengthen the Tribal Affairs Ministry and state agencies, the report said. "The biggest stumbling block is that there's very limited understanding of the Forest Rights Act, even within the government," Tushar Dash, from advocacy group Vasundhara, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation. "They believe granting forest rights obstructs development, and are instead giving forest lands for industrial use. But it's been established that protecting forest rights encourages development and helps conservation efforts far more." (Reuters)

India's forest rights law staggered by conflicting policies: Report

deforestation

Deforestation, News on Deforestation, stories on Deforestation, articles on Deforestation, Deforestation stories at Wion, Deforestation news, Deforestation latest news