From: st1t0@elroy.uh.edu (CARL SEILER)
Subject: Re: Please Help:  Rain Forests
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 01:14:00 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.161950.1414@ccsvax.sfasu.edu>, f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes...
>Please pardon the English.  I wish I knew Portuguese.
> 
>My daughter is very interested in environmental matters and would like
>to get some information on the involvement of American companies in
>encroachments on the Brazilian rain forests.  Any information you could
>provide would be appreciated.

According to the World Resources Report, Brazil is listed as a Group II
country.   This means that they have a low rate of deforestation although
large amounts of forest are affected.  Brazil has over 350 million
hectares of closed forest and a rate of deforestation of 0.4 percent.  This
rate of deforestation is lower than many Asian countries.  See
Robert Repetto's Report _The Forest for The Trees? Government Policies and
the Misuse of Rainforest Resources_ published by the World Resources Institute
in 1988 (it may have a newer edition).  

Brazil has lost many of its trees not due to the exploitation of lumber, but
to clearing for farming and ranching purposes.  Many of the trees end up 
rotting on the ground.  As the Asian supply of wood begins to dwindle, we
can expect Brazil to move into the lumber business with more force.

Your question was about American companies, though.  Very little of the 
deforestation is due to American companies' envolvement.  Much of it has to 
do with Brazilian government polices regarding the settlement of
rainforest areas.  Admittedly, much of this poor policy was suggested
and encouraged by the U.S. government and U.S. companies.  The schemes are many
and complicated, but can be summarized:  move to the forest, clear the area, 
keep it clear, and it's yours to keep.  The government encouraged settlers to
move out there to build farms rather than live on naturally occurring crops.
U.S. companies would then assist in making roads out to the frontier of
Brazil, paid for by the U.S. and Brazilian governments.  If a settler failed
to keep his land cleared, he could be spotted by a local land agent and that
agent could find somebody else who would want to move into a prime spot
that hasn't been kept clear (it has been suggested that sometimes a "fee" for
this service would be required).

Oh well, I could go on and on, much to the anger of most people in the 
newsgroup.  Regardless, most deforestation activity has occurred only 
secondarily by U.S. companies.  Most deforestation in Brazil does not come
as a result of making paper towels or lumber.  It comes from settlement and 
expansion which may be indirectly supported by U.S. companies, as I mentioned.
Please, note that I don't say that ALL of it occurs this way, nor do I say that
U.S. companies are absolutely not involved.  It's just that if your daughter
is looking for information such as this, she might want to look moreclosely 
at Asian deforestation.

Carl Seiler

P.S. All those in the net who wish to flame me, send your mail to me
in English.  It will take me too long to translate your flames from Portuguese.
I know this may seem like an ethnocentric norte-americano thing to say, but
I can't help it.
Carl Seiler                         |  Department of Econonmics
Graduate Student                    |  University of Houston
ST1T0@jetson.uh.edu                 |
Neither I nor anyone else is responsible for what I post.  It may be generally
considered hogwash, nonsense, and dribble.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.brazil