Brazil's new forest code faces international opposition
Environmentalists around the world have their eyes on Brazil. A controversial new version of the Forest Code, the law designed to protect Brazil's forests, has passed through parliament and awaits President Dilma Rousseff's signature.
More than 1.7 million people have signed a petition urging Dilma Rousseff to veto the country's new Forest Code.
The Forest Code is the set of laws designed to protect the country's forests. Brazil is home to 40 percent of the world's rain forests.
The new Forest Code would unravel many of the detailed environmental rules designed to protect these forests. Under the current code, landowners are required to conserve forests on their land, and are restricted from logging in certain vital areas, such as along riverbanks.
Since the government started collecting data on deforestation in the 1970s, an area of rainforest nearly the size of France has been deforested to make way for agricultural production. According to the government’s Institute for Applied Economic Research, rules in the new Forest Code could lead to the loss of as much as 190 million acres of forests.
A piece of land cleared to grow soybeans or graze cows is far more valuable than the same piece of land with trees on it, so farmers regularly violate the Forest Code. People that cut down their reserve of trees must reforest it and pay fines. Yet 4.6 million agricultural producers are in violation of the law.
Eduardo Riedel represents those producers as vice president of the National Federation of Agriculture and Livestock. He says Brazil needs the new Forest Code Congress passed because the current law is out of step with reality. The new code would grant amnesty to people who illegally deforested their land before 2008. People won't have to pay the fines as long as they agree to reforest their land.
"We think it’s much better for the environment if you reforest than you pay the fines," Riedel said. "You don’t pay the fine if you reforest."
But environmentalists and scientists see two problems with that rationale. First is the problem of enforcement. The Brazilian Amazon is roughly half the size of the continental United States, yet has just 400 environmental police to patrol the region and enforce laws. A second concern is that the amnesty clause could actually spur more deforestation.
Daniel Brindis, a forests campaigner for Greenpeace in Brazil, said the new Forest Code would degrade respect for conservation laws.
"The message is that you can violate the law with impunity," Brindis said. "It’s actually sending the message that there might be another round of amnesty on the way, or you just don’t need to take the code seriously."
Another change in the law directly encourages deforestation by allowing landowners to cut down trees closer to riverbanks. That troubles Philip Fearnside, a research professor at the National Institute for Research in the Amazon.
"Those riverside forests are very important in terms of avoiding flooding, and there also very important for biodiversity because those are the corridors that allow animals and plants to move between the different patches that are left after deforestation has advanced," Fearnside said.
Supporters and detractors of the changes to the law are both confident President Rousseff will side in their favor.
"Brazil is now over 80 percent urban, so most of the population has no direct economic stake in being allowed to deforest more," Fearnside said. "Opinion polls also show that most of the population was against this, but still the original proposal in the lower House passed by a margin of seven to one for something that’s basically against the interest of the majority of the Brazilian population."
Kumi Naidoo, director of Greenpeace International, thinks Rousseff's popularity rides on this decision.
"President Dilma Rousseff stands at a defining moment for her presidency," Naidoo said."The choice is clear. She can ignore the Brazilian people and side with 'destruction as usual' as enshrined in the new forest code, or exercise her veto and support the call for a new zero deforestation law."
Greenpeace and other environmental groups hope the timing of the United Nations Rio Earth Summit, scheduled to take place in June, will affect Rousseff's decision. Over 125 heads of state and 45,000 delegates are expected to attend the largest environmental conference in a generation, held in Rio de Janeiro.
In a statement, Naidoo wrote the Rio Earth Summit will lose credibility if Rousseff sides with agricultural interests.
Sen. Katia Abreu, president of the Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock of Brazil, said she does not think international pressure from groups like Greenpeace will succeed.
"Brazil is the only country that has the moral authority to discuss (Brazilian) environmental issues," Abreu said. "I don't understand why the NGOs oppose the changes. The main NGOs are European but I do not see them asking Europe to revive its forests. Why only in Brazil?"
The president's decison has filtered into popular culture and sparked a widespread campaign called "Veta Dilma!" or "Veto Dilma!"
The slogan even made its way to an awards ceremony for former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, hosted by Brazilian actress Camila Pitanga. Pitanga broke protocol to call out "Veta Dilma!" to loud applause.
President Rousseff has until May 25 to make her decision.
------------------------------------------------------------
Hosted by Bruce Gellerman, "Living on Earth" is an award-winning environmental news program that delves into the leading issues affecting the world we inhabit. More about "Living on Earth."
JOIN PRI COMMUNITIES:
Anyone looking at Brazil on the map sees a huge swath of green, which symbolizes a country that is blessed by natural resources and a true environmental power. It isn't without a price that the world can see Brazil in this way. We have ensured keeping 61% of the land untouched and preserved. Along with that, we have managed to export U.S. $88 billion annually in agribusiness products to over 140 countries under the stronghold of an outdated environmental law passed in 1965.
Forty-six years ago it was impossible to foresee the need to reduce current carbon emissions in food production. Likewise, it was unthinkable to fathom that the world would have to increase food production 70% by 2050 in order to feed 9 billion people. That is, we had to balance both a just and growing demand for environmental preservation of the planet along with the ethical and moral obligation to produce more in order to ensure that the population has the fundamental right to food.
The pursuit of this balance is what has guided the great debate being waged in the Brazilian Congress, in the process of updating the old Forestry Code. This is the central aim of Brazilian deputies and senators, who are working with great responsibility, despite the environmental lobby, led in large part, by international NGOs. It is these lobbies that misinform the public and claim that the Forest Code is being framed for the benefit of large producers to meet the interests of landowners.
They also claim that the changes will give amnesty for environmental crimes. Those who believe in this either have not read the proposed bill to update the law, or they are interested in creating difficulties for the development of our country.
The bill, which was already approved in the House, by an undisputed majority of 86% of the votes, is now being discussed in the Senate. Currently, there is no single article or line allowing the expansion of deforestation. Likewise, there is no amnesty for environmental crimes. The New Forest Code only suspends fines after perpetrators of environmental crimes sign a pledge for the regularization of their properties.
Producers have a deadline to join an educational environmental program (PRA), which must be inspected by local environmental agencies. Afterwards, the environmental agency will visit the farms to ensure that the terms of the commitment are being met. If the landowners are not in compliance with the Code, or if any possible environmental damage has not been mitigated, the fines will be converted into services for environmental protection. For that reason there is no "amnesty", since there is no pure and simple "forgiveness". Brazilian producers have to rescue their environmental liabilities before having their penalties converted into environmental services -- a true benefit for the environment.
What the environmental lobby calls "amnesty" was already established in the Federal Decree 7029, that dates December 2009. Hence, the New Forest Code is not exonerating those who break the law and nor is it benefiting large producers. It is only enforcing rules that prioritize the protection of the environment instead of raising money through fines. Moreover, those who cleared illegally after 7/22/2008, will not benefit from this.
Much is said about the deforestation of the Amazon forest, but few people know two fundamental points:
1) As of today, 85% of the Amazon forest is preserved, just as it was 500 years ago, when Brazil was discovered. These are the official numbers of the Ministry of Environment of Brazil.
2) Both new and current Forest Codes are only applied on private lands, that represent solely a quarter of the entire Amazon region.
Thus, considering that the New Forest Code maintains all the current protective rules -- such as the requirement that each property of the Amazon forest maintains 80% of the area with native vegetation (called Legal Reserve), we are assured of the preservation of the forest.
The last great misconception that has been conveyed, through sheer lack of information, or perhaps maliciously "planted," is that the Brazilian Congress would be unable to discuss the Forest Code adequately. Who, then, could discuss it? Who, if not the legitimate representatives of the Brazilian people could discuss a law designed to protect the largest rainforest in the world and help feed 9 billion people?
Of course we are capable of changing old codes that create legal uncertainty and prevent the development of our country... and we will.
Senator Katia Abreu is the President of the CNA, the Brazilian Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock.
Please visit http://brazilianforestcode.com/meet-the-code for accurate information, based on scientific official data.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/katia-abreu/who-could-refuse-to-prote_b_1029309.html
Post your comment