Some common reasons of
deforestation are:
- To make more land available for housing and
- To harvest timber to create commercial items such as
paper, furniture and homes
- To create ingredients that are highly priced consumer items, such as the oil from palm trees
- To create room for cattle ranching
Common methods of
deforestation are burning trees and clear cutting. These tactics leave the land
completely barren and are controversial practices.
Clear cutting is when
large swaths of land are cut down all at once. A forestry expert quoted by
the Natural Resources Defense Councildescribes clear cutting
as "an ecological trauma that has no precedent in nature except for a
major volcanic eruption."
Burning can be done
quickly, in vast swaths of land, or more slowly with the slash-and-burn
technique. Slash and burn agriculture entails cutting
down a patch of trees, burning them and growing crops on the land. The ash from
the burned trees provides some nourishment for the plants and the land is
weed-free from the burning. When the soil becomes less nourishing and weeds
begin to reappear over years of use, the farmers move on to a new patch of land
and begin the process again.
Deforestation and climate change
Deforestation is considered to be one of the
contributing factors to global climate change. According to Michael Daley,
associate professor of environmental science at Lasell College in Newton,
Massachusetts, the No. 1 problem caused by deforestation is the impact on the
global carbon cycle. Gas molecules that absorb thermal infrared radiation are
called greenhouse gases.
If greenhouse gases are in large enough quantity, they can force climate
change, according to Daley. While oxygen (O2) is the second most
abundant gas in our atmosphere, it does not absorb thermal infrared radiation,
as greenhouse gases do. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most prevalent
greenhouse gas. In 2012, CO2accounted for about 82 percent of all
U.S. greenhouse gas, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Trees can help, though. 300 billion tons of
carbon, 40 times the annual greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels, is
stored in trees, according to Greenpeace.
The deforestation of trees not only lessens
the amount of carbon stored, it also releases carbon dioxide into the air. This
is because when trees die, they release the stored carbon. According to the 2010 Global Forest Resources Assessment, deforestation releases nearly a billion tons of carbon
into the atmosphere per year, though the numbers are not as high as the ones
recorded in the previous decade. Deforestation is the second largest
anthropogenic (human-caused) source of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere,
ranging between 6 percent and 17 percent. (Van
Der Werf, G. R. et al., 2009)
Carbon isn't the only greenhouse gas that is
affected by deforestation. Water vapor is also considered a greenhouse gas.
"The impact of deforestation on the exchange of water vapor and carbon
dioxide between the atmosphere and the terrestrial land surface is the biggest
concern with regard to the climate system," said Daley. Changes in their
atmospheric concentration will have a direct effect on climate.
Deforestation has decreased global vapor
flows from land by 4 percent, according to a study published by the National Academy of Sciences.
Even this slight change in vapor flows can disrupt natural weather patterns and
change current climate models.
Other effects of deforestation
Forests are complex ecosystems that affect almost every
species on the planet. When they are degraded, it can set off a devastating
chain of events both locally and around the world.
Loss of species:
Seventy percent of the world’s plants and animals live in forests and are
losing their habitats to deforestation, according to National Geographic. Loss
of habitat can lead to species extinction.
It also has negative consequences for medicinal research and local populations
who rely on the animals and plants in the forests for hunting
and medicine.
Water cycle:
Trees are important to the water cycle. They absorb rain fall and produce water
vapor that is released into the atmosphere. Trees also lessen the pollution in
water, according to the North Carolina State University, by stopping polluted runoff. In the Amazon, more than
half the water in the ecosystem is held within the plants, according to the
National Geographic Society.
Soil erosion:
Tree roots anchor the soil. Without trees, the soil is free to wash or blow
away, which can lead to vegetation growth problems. The WWF states that
scientists estimate that a third of the world’s arable land has been lost to
deforestation since 1960. After a clear cutting, cash crops like coffee, soy
and palm oil are planted. Planting these types of trees can cause further soil
erosion because their roots cannot hold onto the soil. "The situation in
Haiti compared to the Dominican Republic is a great example of the important
role forests play in the water cycle," Daley said. Both countries share
the same island, but Haiti has much less forest cover than the Dominican
Republic. As a result, Haiti has endured more extreme soil erosion, flooding
and landslide issues.
Life quality:
Soil erosion can also lead to silt entering the lakes, streams and other water
sources. This can decrease local water quality and contribute to poor health in
populations in the area.
Forest cover loss has
occurred at a period when area under jhum cultivation is declining, suggesting
that the land use policy has been counterproductive to forests
Two spectacular bamboo dances, one
celebrated, the other reviled, enliven the mountains of Mizoram. In the
colourful Cheraw, Mizo girls dance as boys clap bamboo culms at their feet
during the annual Chapchar Kut festival. The festival itself is linked to the
other dance: the dance of the bamboos on Mizoram’s mountains brought about by
the practice of shifting agriculture, locally called jhum or ‘lo.’ In jhum,
bamboo forests are cut, burnt, cultivated, and then rested and regenerated for
several years until the next round of cultivation, making bamboos vanish and
return on the slopes in a cyclic ecological dance of field and fallow. While
Cheraw is cherished by all, jhum is actively discouraged by the State and the
agri-horticulture bureaucracy. Although jhum is a regenerative system of
organic farming, Mizoram, the first Indian State to enact legislation to
promote organic farming, is now pushing hard to eradicate jhum under its New
Land Use Policy (NLUP).
Labelling jhum as unproductive and
destructive of forest cover, policy makers and industry now promote “settled”
cultivation and plantations, such as pineapple and oil palm, claiming they are
better land use than jhum. However, oil palm, rubber and horticultural
plantations are monocultures that cause permanent deforestation, a fact that
the India State of Forest Report 2011 (ISFR) notes to explain declines in
Mizoram’s forest cover. In contrast, jhum is a diversified cropping system that
causes only temporary loss of small forest patches followed by forest recovery.
Understanding this is crucial to formulate land use policy that is
economically, ecologically, and culturally appropriate for the entire
north-eastern hill States.
Organic jhum
Jhum uses natural cycles of forest
regeneration to grow diverse crops without using chemical pesticides or
fertilizers. Early in the year, farmers cut demarcated patches of bamboo
forests and let the vegetation sun-dry for weeks. They then burn the slash in
contained fires in March to clear the fields, nourish the soil with ashes, and
cultivate through the monsoon. In fields that are one to three hectares in area,
each farmer plants and sequentially harvests between 15 to 25 crops. After
cultivation, they rest their fields and shift to new areas each year. The
rested fields rapidly regenerate into forests, including over 10,000 bamboo
culms per hectare in five years. After dense forests reappear on the original
site, farmers return for cultivation, usually after six to ten years, which
forms the jhum cycle.
Regenerating fields and forests in the jhum
landscape provide resources for many years. The farmer obtains firewood,
charcoal, wild vegetables and fruits, wood and bamboo for house construction
and other home needs. The diversity of food and cash crops cultivated and
ancillary resources provided by jhum fields complicate comparisons with terrace
or monocrop agricultural systems. One-dimensional comparisons — such as of rice
yield per hectare or annual monetary return — can be misleading, because one
needs to assess the full range of resources from jhum field, fallow, and
forest, over a full cultivation cycle, besides food security implications.
Comparing monocrops like wet rice paddies
cultivated using chemical inputs with organic jhum is not just comparing apples
with oranges. It is like comparing a pile of pineapples with a basket
containing rice, vegetables, cash crops, firewood, bamboo, and more.
Inter-disciplinary studies indicate that at cycles of ten years or more, jhum
is, in the words of Prof. P. Ramakrishnan at Jawaharlal Nehru University,
“economically productive and ecologically sustainable.”
In Mizoram, it is jhum fires burning forests,
we fail to see forests and bamboo regenerating rapidly after a season of
cultivation. ISFR estimated that bamboo bearing areas occupy 9,245 square
kilometres or 44 per cent of Mizoram. For every hectare of forest cleared for
jhum, farmers retain 5 to ten hectares as regenerating fallow and forest in the
landscape. Also, forests left uncut by jhum farmers contain bamboo species.
Yet, government policy tilts firmly against
jhum. The State’s NLUP deploys over Rs.2,800 crore over a five-year period “to
put an end to wasteful shifting cultivation” and replaces it with “permanent
and stable trades.” Under this policy, the State provides Rs.1,00,000 in a year
directly to households, aiming to shift beneficiaries into alternative
occupations like horticulture, livestock-rearing, or settled cultivation. The
policy has created opportunities for families seeking to diversify or enhance
income. Still, NLUP’s primary objective — to eradicate “wasteful” shifting
cultivation — appears misdirected.
Even before NLUP was implemented, despite
decades of extensive shifting cultivation, over 90 per cent of Mizoram’s land
area was under forest cover, much of it bamboo forests resulting from jhum.
Recent declines in forest cover have occurred at a period when area under jhum
cultivation is actually declining, while area under settled cultivation is
increasing, suggesting that the land use policy has been counterproductive to
forests.
Oil palm and forest loss
Oil palm, notorious for extensive
deforestation in south-east Asia, is cultivated as monoculture plantations,
devoid of tree or bamboo cover, and drastically reduces rainforest plant and
animal diversity. In Mizoram, 1,01,000 hectares have been identified for oil
palm cultivation. Following the entry of three corporate oil palm companies,
over 17,500 hectares have already been permanently deforested within a decade.
Promoting and subsidising such plantations and corporate business interests
undermines both premise and purpose of present land use policies. As forest
cover and bamboo decline, people in some villages now resort to buying bamboo,
once abundant and freely available.
Detractors of jhum often concede that jhum
was viable in the past, but claim population growth has forced jhum cycles to
under five years, allowing insufficient time for forest regrowth, thereby
making jhum unsustainable. Reduction of jhum cycle is serious, but evidence
linking it to population pressure is scarce. In reality, jhum cycles often
decline because of external pressures, relocation and grouping of villages, or
reduced land availability.
Attempting to eradicate and
replace shifting cultivation is inappropriate. Instead, a better use of public
money and resources would be to work with cultivators and agroecologists to
refine jhum where needed. The State can involve and incentivise communities to
foster practices that lengthen cropping and fallow periods, develop village
infrastructure and access paths to distant fields, and provide market and price
support, and other benefits including organic labelling to jhum cultivators.
Today, the State only supports industry and alternative occupations, leaving
both bamboo forests and farmers who wish to continue with jhum in the lurch.
Unless a more enlightened government reforms future policies in favour of
shifting agriculture, Mizoram’s natural bounty of bamboos is at risk of being
frittered away.
Comments
Post a Comment