From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: "Rainforest Destruction Has Many Victims"
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:56:16 GMT

gph@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (G. Paul Houtz) writes:
: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: 
: >:    It would seem to me that the conclusion from your statement that 0.5%
: >:    is a *LOT* of area and a *LOT* of wood should lead us to conclude that
: >:    a *LOT* of the wood on the market is deforested wood.  
: >
: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: 
: >Nope - most of it is cut for farming. Tom is right - very little of the
: >hardwood ends up on the international market.
: 
:    So you are saying that they just burn the hardwood?   I was given
:    the impression that the wood was cut down and sold for quick cash
:    on the international market and the land was used for farming.

That is exactly what Tom and I are saying. Most of it is burnt as slash.
Much of the land that is cleared does not even have roads into the area.
Kind of hard to remove the timber when there is no access for vehicles.

Also, the government has put controls on how much hardwood can be
exported. This also discourages the salvaging of the wood.

:    If this is the case, than most of the wood could be coming from
:    this deforestation.

It probably does, but it is still only a small part of the timber that
is cut.

... delided ...

:    Also your contention that the deforested land in Amazonia that has been
:    grazed by cattle eventually returns to forest is simply incorrect.
:    Once the rainforest has been destroyed and the land is no longer useful
:    for grazing, it is subject to desertification.  None of the slash-and-burn
:    agriculture in Brazil had naturally returned to rainforest.  It doesn't
:    happen.

You are reading something into my statement that is not there. I did not say
that the land returned to rain forest. Matter of fact, you might notice that
I stated that erosion was the greatest problem. Without erosion, the land will
recover.

Also, I have no idea how long land is good for cattle grazing. I thought I
was talking about farming. The land can be farmed for far less time than
it can be used for cattle grazing. If I recall correctly, only one or two
years, before the soil is too depleted for farm crops.

:    
: >:    I just can't believe that the ground and air surveys have been so 
: >:    far off, and only the SHUTTLE could detect the actual amount of 
: >:    deforestation, nor do I believe that scientists have purposely been
: >:    exagerating the amount of deforestation over the last decade.
: >
: >You forget just how large the area is. You cannot get good estimates from
: >low altitudes. I doubt if the scientists were exaggerating - they were only
: >doing the best they could, with what information they had.
: 
:    Long before the space shuttle, people were able to accurately
:    survey huge areas of the world.   Land area estimates and accurate 
:    board feet estimates of forets in both North and South America were 
:    available long before the first orbit of sputnik.   How do you think
:    accurate charts of the Pacific Ocean were created before the space
:    shuttle?   
: 
:    I simply don't believe it.

The charts in the Pacific, or other areas, are not measuring areas of small
acreage. The positions of the islands, until fairly recently, were known
only within a few miles. Of course, the features of the islands were known
better, since they could be surveyed on foot, or by using detailed aerial
photography.  However, the photographic method is impractical for extremely
large areas. Remember that Brazil is as large as the contiguous 48 states.
Imagine trying to estimate the amount of clear cutting here, using low
altitude and ground surveys. There is no way that they can be accurate.

Bill
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU