Deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest

Deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest
have been asked to write an assignment arguing the hypothesis above. In my assignment I am going to argue both sides of the hypothesis. I will then write my own opinion and conclusion of the hypothesis. Deforestation occurs when people cut down trees and replace that land with cattle ranches and farms in effect reducing the size of the forest. Problems can arise from the different ways in which people want to use their environment. ?Amerindians who are native to the Amazon are being forced out of their natural habitat by loggers, miners and settlers. The Amerindian population has dropped 96% and is now just 220,000." In this scenario the problems which are caused can be very serious in that people and animals can end up dying, because of others wanting to use their environment in another way. This source may not be accurate as it is outdated 4 years and things may have changed. However considering the methods in which land is being taken the source is very likely to be consistent with current goings on. The source is unlikely to be biased because it is written by ?Dorling Kindersley? who writes articles for the purpose of informing people. ?The Carajas mine has been an important part in Brazil?s rebirth.
For a decade the buildings, cars and consumer goods of Western Europe and Japan have been largely created from Carajas iron ore." (bbc news 1997) This source may not be very accurate because it was made in 1996, over six years ago. It is fairly reliable as it is from bbc news. It is not likely to be biased ?Brazil has a new government which is starting to make sure the wealth from the country?s fabulous new resources gets through to everybody." (Narrator Brazil 200 video) This source was made in 2000; this makes the source fairly valid. The Brazil 2000 video is quite a reliable source of information because the video was made to inform people of the crisis that is occurring in Brazil. It may be open to bias. ?There are an enormous range of minerals in the Amazon. There are riches which may not have been developed today. These reserves are cash for our country and I think there is an enormous chance that the benefits will be good for everyone in Brazil." (Brazil 2000 video. bbc 1996) This source of information is fairly old as it was made in 1996, but was made to inform people of what Brazil might become in the year 2000. It may be open to bias. ?Cattle ranching provides only one job per 2000 cattle whereas subsistence farming in the forest can support 50 people per squared kilometre." (Christian aid booklet) This source taken from a charity booklet suggests that there are ways to stop the current problems from developing. It is quite reliable because it is from a charity booklet. The date of the source is absent so judging its relevance may be hard. May be open to bias. ?Timber companies from Indonesia, South Korea and Malaysia are buying p large parts f the forest west of the Amazon. Friar Hector Turrihi, an Italian missionary, talks tearfully of the destruction: ?rubber tappers and Indians are being driven out to live in shanty towns outside the cities. Today we know we can make more money from conserving the forest than by destroying it.?" (The Guardian ? June 1996) This source is likely to be unbiased as it is a newspaper article. It is quite old and the things stated in it may not be true. ?Brazil has the largest foreign debt of any developing country in the world ? well over $100 billion." (World Development Report 1990) This source indicates that Brazil is trying to get out of debt by selling parts of the rainforest. But the people who are really getting affected by this are the tribes people, their homes are being taken away for the sake of MNC?s wanting to make money, taking all risks at all costs of the people. It is unlikely that this source is biased. ?Investigations suggest that that between one third and one half of the worlds oxygen supply comes from trees in the rainforest and that one quarter of the world?s fresh water is stored in the Amazon basin. Both reserves would be lost if the rainforest was destroyed." (Choosing the future wwf) This source is an independent survey so the facts included may not be true, however considering who it is written by, suggests that the facts are reliable. It?s highly unlikely to be biased because the wwf is a firm supporter of stopping unsustainable development of the forest, but might be acting like ?fear mongers? and trying to scare people into acting against deforestation by making up or exaggerating facts. The burning of trees releases carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide traps heat and so this could cause a rise in world temperatures. Polar ice caps could melt causing a 30 metre rise in sea level. 30% of the world?s population lives on land which could be flooded if this happened. Changes in the world?s climate could bring drought to the world?s main food producing areas. (Choosing the future wwf) This source is also an independent survey written by the wwf. This source is fairly unlikely to be biased but the authors may exaggerate the findings to scare people into acting against what is happening in the Amazon. ?The government claims it can not satisfy the demand for land: it would cost $20 billion to settle 2 million families over 4 years. Yet Manoel Cardaso, an economist from the University of Campinas, points out that in 1995 the government spent $12 billion on rescue operations for private companies and banks. "In Brazil the rich are very rich and very power powerful" says Salgado. "For land distribution to change those with privilege would have to give up some of their wealth and power. They don?t want to. Why would they?" (Brazil resource booklet 1997) This source was written in 1997 nearly 6 years ago, degrading its reliability and accuracy. It was made by a reliable author. The facts contained might be slightly exaggerated. This source is unlikely to be biased as it is part of a resource booklet. My own opinion of this matter is that both sides can benefit if they look out for each others needs as much as they look out for their own. Both parties get what they want if the Amazon rainforest benefits from sustainable development. At the present time MNC?s are taking advantage of the lack of defence of the Amazonian tribes and local people. So the only thing that can stop the MNC?s from taking advantage is the Brazilian government itself.

Deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest 8 of 10 on the basis of 3207 Review.