Deforestation, especially in the Amazon is a huge topic that has received a great deal of media attention. The earths tropical rainforests are regarded as the planets lungs, and the destruction therefore effects us all - this makes it an excellent case study to illustrate the environmental impacts associated with cattle ranching. I want to talk in this final post about the amazon, about one more impact - biodiversity, and then conclude this Amazonian chapter of my blog by summarising the efforts in addressing the issues underlined in past posts.

Source: 14 figures on environmental conservation

Biodiversity

The Pantanal region of South America is renowned as a wildlife hotspot and a pristine ecosystem comprised of various native species of flora and fauna. 

The Pantanal - Source

The Pantanal has been impacted by non sustainable ‘predatory’ socio-economic development. With the major economic activity of cattle ranching being at the centre of the problem (Alho 2011).

Removal of forest simply equals loss of habitat, shelter and food. That is the underlying reality and something that policy makers and individuals hastily grabbing land do not consider as relevant.

Habitat isolation and fragmentation studied in the tropical rainforest of costa rica has also been indicative of a decrease in the abundance and compositional of wildlife (Broadbent et al. 2012). As biological corridors are eradicated and rendering species with little to no territory and putting them under ecological stress.

The introduction of environmental pollutants associated with agriculture, such as pesticides and herbicides additionally have an effect, these agents can affect non-pest species that are simply considered ‘collateral damage’ due to agricultural necessity.

Furthermore, with the invasion of human development comes the invasion of other species, who may colonise degraded land or outcompete native biology in the proximal rainforests. 

The large scale removal of the biological melting pot that is the rainforest with soy fields instantly and dramatically reduces the biodiversity from a very high to extremely low index. Look the these two images and decide for yourself what looks to be more biologically rich?

After 

Before

Finally, illegal hunting also threatens the native wildlife. Predators may attack the introduced cattle and be illegally culled by ranchers to protect the herd. I know this is a particular problem in some parts of the US, where cattle use public land for pasture and there have been cases of farmers killing wolves bears mountain lions and cougars to protect the livestock - illegally. A controversial example of this was the decision to cull the wedge wolfpack because of their increased consumption of beef in washington state - find the full article here.

It is believed that up to137 plant, animal and insect species are lost every day due to rainforest destruction (Rainforest statistics and facts -Save the amazon).

LEAD approach

The UN, Livestock, Environment and Development group are attempting to address the deforestation situation in its programme entitled: ‘Improved decision-making in addressing livestock’s role in the deforestation process’, with a particular focus in the Latin American region.

FAO

The initiative has three primary objectives, which are:

‘Aiming to understanding and therefore predict, the trends of future deforestation processes in the region.’

‘Developing benefit-sharing mechanisms at farm and community levels for biodiversity and carbon sequestration services as incentives to produce global environmental benefits resulting from integrated ecosystems management approach.’

‘Preparing policy guidelines for the sustainable intensification of livestock aimed to enhance biodiversity and mitigate the impacts of livestock-induced land use change.’ FAO, United Nations.

I personally believe that these goals are well intended. Although, simply predicting the future trend of expansion is not addressing the issue but merely monitoring it. Furthermore, I have already discussed my thoughts on intensifying livestock practices in order to ‘reduce’ the impact and I believe it to be a false justification and a poor mitigation technique in the place of something concrete to tackle the wider picture.

However, developing benefit sharing mechanisms at the grass roots level, will be in my opinion beneficial. This will provide the environmental education that is lacking in some regions and may even filter through to give a sense of environmental conciseness to the deforestation protagonists.

I think that policies and laws need to be enforced regarding deforestation before it is too late, the natural world must soon be put in front of economic development or it will be a thing of the past.

These shocking advertisements attempt to reveal the true horror of deforestation.

Source: GreenPlanet