For wildlife, huge difference between different kinds of agriculture

We live in an increasingly human-dominated world, where once-intact native habitats are being rapidly fragmented into smaller 'islands' surrounded by a hostile 'sea' of human land-uses.  But for wildlife, not all human land-uses are equal.

Bobcats like having trees overhead

Bobcats like having trees overhead

A recent study in southern California shows that the bobcat, an important but shy wildlife species, is affected very differently by different types of farming.

Like most species, bobcats must move to survive.  Animals trapped in small habitat fragments live in populations too small to be viable.  Bobcats are therefore far more likely to survive if human-dominated lands surrounding habitat fragments are 'permeable' to their movements.

One way to make fragmented landscapes more permeable is to create movement corridors linking the fragments together -- what some have called "bandages for wounded landscapes". 

Another way is to use less-hostile types of agriculture that pose less of a barrier to sensitive species.  For bobcats, it turns out that orchards pose considerably less of a barrier to movements than do intensively cultivated row-crops such as maize, soy, and sugar beets.

Bobcats used row crops only rarely, and even then tried to dash through them quickly, evidently feeling highly vulnerable.  However, their movements in orchards were much more relaxed and similar to those in native habitats.

Studies in the tropics have similarly shown that agriculture that retains tree cover is often much more benign for nature. 

In the New World tropics, for instance, birds, bats, and many other species tend to be much more abundant in shade-cacao plantations (used for producing cocoa), where larger trees are retained or grown to shade the cacao trees, than in more intensively used lands. 

Bare-eyed antbird, an understory specialist in New World rainforests

Bare-eyed antbird, an understory specialist in New World rainforests

Wildlife diversity is especially high when native tree species are retained in the shade-cacao plantations, rather than using exotic fruit or timber species.  Another big bonus for wildlife is having native forest nearby the shade-cacao plantation.

However, shade-cacao is not a panacea for tropical species.  The most sensitive wildlife, such as understory birds, rarely use cacao and are mostly restricted to native rainforest.

The bottom line: native habitats are always the best, but when agriculture is unavoidable, not all types of farming are created equal.  Understanding how different farming methods affect wildlife -- and which wildlife species are most vulnerable -- will give us a leg up for managing and conserving nature.


New technologies allow real-time monitoring of rampant forest destruction

New high-tech methods are giving scientists and conservationists a fighting chance to detect illegal deforestation -- before it's too late to save imperiled forests.  Here, Matt Finer, a researcher who's long worked in the western Amazon and Andes, tells us about his efforts to map the array of growing threats to the forests of Peru.

Imperiled primates in Peru

Imperiled primates in Peru

The Andean Amazon still has large tracts of mega-diverse, carbon-rich, and relatively intact tropical forest, making it one of the top conservation priorities in the world. However, the array of threats facing the region is rapidly growing.

A key problem hindering conservation and management efforts in the Andean Amazon is a lack of near real-time deforestation information. In recent years, we've seen major advances in tracking deforestation, but this information is often given to authorities far too late for enforcement action.

Two new satellite-based monitoring systems, Global Forest Watch and Terra-i, have made major strides towards real-time deforestation monitoring.

However, these systems, which are global-scale and based on moderate-resolution (250-500 meter) satellite data, often need further analysis to be relevant for Amazonian conservation.

The organization I work with, the Amazon Conservation Association (ACA), is using Landsat imagery (with 30-meter resolution) and special software (known as CLASlite) to rapidly detect forest loss.

ACA recently launched a new web portal, known as MAAP -- the Monitoring of the Andean Amazon Project -- to make our results widely available. We're focusing initially on the Peruvian Amazon, with plans to expand to Bolivia and Ecuador.

Three of our reports (Images #1, #5, and #6) focus on the spread of illegal gold mining in the Madre de Dios region of Peru. Notably, we found deforestation encroaching into the buffer zone of Tambopata National Reserve and entering the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve.

Red, black, and yellow areas show the growing threat of illegal gold mining

Red, black, and yellow areas show the growing threat of illegal gold mining

Images #2 and #9 map a so-called “sustainable” cacao operation that is actually clearing expanses of primary forest. The focus of an ALERT campaign, the legality of this deforestation is highly questionable.

Images #3 and #7 show that we can detect new logging roads. This is vital because illegal logging is challenging to detect with satellite imagery. But now we can readily find logging roads and point authorities to where illegal loggers are likely active.

Image #8 shows how Landsat and high-resolution imagery can be combined to map a new illegal coca plantation, in this case deep within the proposed Sierra del Divisor National Park.

Finally, Image #4 reveals a rapidly emerging threat, oil palm. Oil palm has caused major impacts in Southeast Asia and is quickly expanding in central and northern Peru.

In the near future, MAAP will continue tracking deforestation in the Andean Amazon while aiming to promote better law enforcement and policies to reduce illegal forest loss.

To receive our reports, just email us (maap@amazonconservation.org) with the word "Subscribe" in the subject line.

MAAP is a groundbreaking effort to shine a light on environmentally irreplaceable areas where illegal loggers, miners, and forest destroyers are running rampant.  Please help us to save some of the world's most biologically rich and imperiled ecosystems!

Amazon update: 'Sustainable' corporation under fire, appears to plan huge increase in forest destruction

Here are three recent news items about United Cacao, the corporation that claims to be producing 'sustainable' cacao -- the main ingredient in chocolate -- but has been accused by ALERT of destroying over 2,000 hectares of biodiversity-rich rainforest in Peru.

A rainforest dies in Peru

A rainforest dies in Peru

1)  In recent days the share price of United Cacao has fallen by around $25, a 14% drop in its share value.

2) We have just learned that on 9 December 2014, the Peruvian subsidiary of United Cacao -- known as Cacao del Peru Norte -- was ordered by the Peruvian Agricultural Ministry to halt agricultural operations on one of its key properties, named Fundo Tamshivacu, which is located in Mavnas Province.

3) Alarmingly, we have also learned -- via recent reports in the Peruvian newspaper La Region (see here, here, and here) -- that at least 45,000 hectares of forested land in the Peruvian Amazon has been sold to subsidiary companies controlled by Dennis Melka, the owner of United Cacao. 

This suggests that much larger forest-clearing operations could be planned for the near future -- although whether this would be for cacao, or for another crop such as oil palm, is unknown. 

As can be seen below, these five properties adjoin the 2,000-hectare block (in orange) that was recently cleared by Cacao del Peru Norte:

The five newly purchased properties -- all dominated by old-growth rainforest -- that have been purchased by subsidiaries of United Cacao in Peru  ( courtesy of  Save America's Forests  and the  Amazon Conservation Association) .

The five newly purchased properties -- all dominated by old-growth rainforest -- that have been purchased by subsidiaries of United Cacao in Peru (courtesy of Save America's Forests and the Amazon Conservation Association).

Please pass the word: Be strongly advised that investments in United Cacao or any of its Peruvian subsidiaries are likely to promote large-scale forest destruction.  It is the opinion of ALERT scientists that this corporation should be shunned by any investor who cares about the environment.

Our continued thanks to scientists and journalists working in the region for these updates, especially John C. Cannon and the leading environmental website, Mongabay.com.

 

ALERT's latest campaign: 'Sustainable' corporation blasted for destroying Amazon rainforest

A corporation that aims to be the world’s biggest supplier of ‘sustainable’ cacao -- the main ingredient in chocolate -- is being accused by ALERT scientists of destroying large expanses of biodiversity-rich forest in Peru.  ALERT issued this press release today.

Rainforest destruction in the Peruvian Amazon...

Rainforest destruction in the Peruvian Amazon...

The Company, United Cacao, previously raised 10 million pounds on the London Stock Exchange, and is now hoping to raise additional funds on the Lima Stock Exchange in Peru to expand its operations in the Peruvian Amazon. 

ALERT scientists caution investors that United Cacao’s products may be far from environmentally sustainable, and that they should exercise exceptional caution before investing in the company or its Peruvian subsidiary, Cacao del Peru Norte.

“This company has its roots in Southeast Asia’s palm oil industry, which has been a huge driver of forest destruction,” said ALERT director William Laurance.  Laurance has conducted research in the Amazon region for nearly 20 years.

“World-class scientists at the Carnegie Institution at Stanford University and the Amazon Conservation Association have used satellite data and cutting-edge laser technology to show that United Cacao has recently cleared more than 2,000 hectares of mostly old-growth rainforest in Peru,” said ALERT member Thomas Lovejoy, a long-term Amazon expert and former environmental advisor to three U.S. presidents.

A small fraction of the cleared land evidently was farmed in the past, and parts of the forest were likely selectively logged in the 1980s, according to a detailed report in the leading environmental website Mongabay.com, based on thorough investigative research by John C. Cannon.

However, the laser technology -- known as LIDAR -- has shown that the carbon stocks contained in the destroyed forests were among the highest known for the Peruvian Amazon, according to Carnegie researcher Greg Asner.  This clearly indicates that the cleared block was formerly dominated by mature or old-growth rainforest.

“There’s no way you can clear old-growth rainforest and then claim to produce sustainable cacao,” said Lovejoy. 

“Not only that,” said Lovejoy, “but the corporation did so very quietly and without conducting an environmental impact study.  That sets a very dangerous precedent.”

“We see a lot of green-washing among corporations today -- where firms try to appear sustainable but really aren’t,” said ALERT member Lian Pin Koh, an associate professor at the University of Adelaide in Australia. 

“My fear, based on these recent findings of large-scale forest destruction, is that United Cacao is one of these green-washing corporations,” said Koh. 

“The forests of the Peruvian Amazon are just about the biologically richest real estate on the planet,” said Laurance.  “And unfortunately there’s a feeding frenzy happening, with large-scale expansion of oil palm and cacao plantations, as well as a great deal of legal and illegal mining and logging.”

“Investors need to be sure that they’re putting their money into projects and corporations that are truly sustainable,” said Laurance.  “Right now we have a lot of doubts about United Cacao.”