Graph D shows clearly the large amount of rainforest still left in Latin America compared to Asia and Africa (the other large areas containing rainforest). It tells us that the total area of rainforest in 1975 was approximately 6250 million hectares in Latin America, approximately 2000 million in Africa and approximately 3000 in Asia. By 2000, when the results are shown again on the graph, the rainforest area had fallen to approximately 5750 million hectares in Latin America, approximately 1750 million in Africa and approximately 2500 million in Asia. This is a difference of an estimated 500 million hectares in Latin America, 250 million in Africa and 500 million in Asia.
Graph E, shows that approximately 0.475% of the rainforest in Latin America is lost every year, this taken as a percentage of the 1975 area.
Both of these graphs show that rainforests are decreasing in area every year. More results would have to have been taken to actually show the rate (increasing or decreasing) that the rainforest is being lost at. They express them in different ways. If this carries on then there will be no more rainforest left.
2a. Brazil’s rainforests are valuable to people all over the world as well as those in Brazil. This is because of four main reasons.
- The trees in the rainforest convert carbon dioxide into oxygen through photosynthesis.
- Many animals and plants in the rainforests are becoming extinct because of deforestation.
- Some plants are used for medicines. These grow wild in the forest. Some species of plant that has yet to be found could prove to be a great medicinal discovery.
- New species are found each day so we don’t know what species are still left in the rainforests.
2b.
i. The procedure of photosynthesis is so important because carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. If it builds up then it will cause global warming. Once this starts then the ultimate scenario is worldwide flooding. As plants are carbon based organisms when they are burnt during deforestation carbon dioxide is released in that way as well. Plants are so valuable because they produce oxygen and help to maintain the ratios of different gases in the air. If all the plants disappeared then people and animals would suffer from having to live with poor air. As outlined by the US National Academy of Sciences,
‘A typical patch of rainforest, just 6km square, contains as many as 1500 species of flowering plants and up to 750 species of tree.’
So the rain forests are an important and concentrated source of plants to provide us with the right gases this is why we must try to protect them.
ii. The rainforest is home to millions of species of animals as proved by the US National Academy of Sciences,
‘A typical patch of rainforest, just 6km square contains, 400 species of bird, 150 kinds of butterfly, 100 different types of reptile and 60 species of amphibian. The numbers of insects are so great that no one has been able to count them but there may be as many as 42,000 species in this small area.’
This just goes to show the wide variety of life in the rainforests and some of these animals can only survive in rainforest conditions. If the rainforest is cut down then the animals will have no home and eventually become extinct therefore reducing the important biodiversity of the world.
iii The rain forest contains many plants, some of which are of immeasurable value to people. This is because as explained by the book ‘conserving Rainforests’,
‘… plants such as curare, ipecac, wild yam and Madagascar periwinkle can be used to fight major diseases such as cancer, leukemia, muscular and heart diseases.’
This is vital to the development of science and technology, as there maybe unknown plants out in the forest that could cure major diseases such as AID’s.
iv New species of animal and plant are still being found today. The rainforest is a concentrated source of new species and so it is valuable in that way. There still maybe many species out there that we don’t know about and if the rainforest is destroyed the species could disappear along with them.
3. These tables show the effect that three different projects would have on the local environment, the local people, the local economy and the national economy if they took place.
3b
3c
Steeton Hall Farm
Colton
Tadcaster
N. Yorkshire
LS24 8EN
Dear President of Brazil,
I am writing to express my thoughts on the future of the Amazon Rainforest. I have researched this topic thoroughly as it is of quite some concern to me. At the moment the rainforest is being destroyed at an alarming rate. The land use going on at the moment within the Amazon is not sustainable so permanent damage is being done. A sustainable use of land is one that will use natural resources without endangering the supply for future generations. There are various different ways of using the land in a sustainable way. I think they should be taken into consideration, as the rainforest is a natural feature of great importance.
Three main sustainable ways of developing the rainforests have been forwarded to me,
- Small scale village enterprises.
- A multinational drug company
- A Brazilian tourist and education group.
All of these projects can be analysed and broken into advantages and disadvantages. The main factor that I have taken into consideration is the encouragement of the development of Brazil. Overall I believe that the best project would be the Brazilian tourist and education group, the eco-tourism option. I think that this is the project that would boost Brazils economic development the most. Also, taking into account the other factors, it will benefit local people and their economy and will not endanger the local environment.
COMPARE AND CONTRAST.
The reasons that I chose this project above all the others are it was the one that looked most beneficial in the most areas.
This project will, yes, cause some damage to the rainforest to start off with, but looking on a long term scale it will educate locals and foreigners on the importance of the rainforest so that they may be able to help with the preservation of it. Once the initial clearance of land for accommodation etc. has been done then the rest of the work going on will be sustainable. The ‘Small Scale Village Enterprises’ project does seem a sustainable use of land so this is one of its advantages, however the Multinational Drug Company option seems to need a lot of cleared land to successfully launch their project to start with to accommodate all the buildings etc. This is bad but the use of land afterwards seems mostly sustainable. I would still consider this to be a disadvantage of this project, which helped me to reject it.
In terms of boosting the economic development in Brazil, I think that the proposal I have chosen is by far the best. As it is involving the Brazilian government it will mean that quite a large amount of the profits will go to the national economy, therefore raising many standards in Brazil e.g. technology. The tourists from the project will also provide incomes for neighboring facilities and this will, in turn boost economic development. There will never be an amazingly high national income where the rainforest is involved, as so many matters need to be dealt with but this project comes out quite well on that matter. The other projects, however in my opinion do not do as well.
Because the Multi-National Drug Company is foreign and just using the land the profits of the corporation will not stay in Brazil. Brazil will get some profits out of it though as rent of the land have to be paid. This is not a good method of getting money from the land as the Eco-tourism idea.
The Small Scale Village enterprise sounds the least profitable way of all. The project is sustainable but only produces a small profit from its produce, which then goes into the local economy anyway and doesn’t do much to help the national economic development.
So again Eco-tourism comes out top. This is one of the main reasons that I chose this option, as it is important for the country to develop.
OTHER ADVANTAGES AND DISADVAGTAGES
Loss of culture is another consideration to be taken into account. It is important that the chosen project does not exploit the local people and make them lose their culture. The local people will always be there the project needs to work in harmony with them otherwise some conflicts may occur. The Multinational Drug Company will only provide low- grade jobs for the local people such as cleaners and maids.
The other two project suggest teaching the locals and working in harmony with them, instead of exploiting them.
- Other land uses that are going on and also could be considered for this plot of land are logging and ranching. However these are not sustainable ways of land use. Just because I have decided on a suitable project for this area of land doesn’t mean that logging and mining will not carry on in the other thousands of hectares of rainforest. Although we cannot stop this, a good idea would be to try and restrict it. Some good restrictions were thought up for the Sarawak rainforest in Malaysia. They are quoted from a text- book here:
- Loggers must extract no more than 10 to 20 percent of timber from any conservation area.
- When operations have finished the logged zone must be left to recover for between 25 and 40 years.
Although these restrictions did not work in Malaysia because they were not enforced enough, if you do choose to use them then you could learn from their mistakes and enforce them as much as possible. A sustainable use is frequently one that does not include leaving large areas of open space as, because the soils are very poor, a lot of soil erosion can take place. A good explanation of this is given in the book, ‘Conserving Rainforests’,
‘Without the tree cover, rain cannot be absorbed and so it drains off the ground, gradually washing away the topsoil. Stripped of its nutrients, the remaining soil is of little value for crop growing. The soil that has been washed away causes rivers to become blocked with silt. When tropical rainstorms occur, the blocked rivers burst their banks, causing extensive flooding.’
So this goes to show that if non-sustainable land use goes on and causes flooding then the sustainable land users will suffer also.
It is hard because Western countries have not set a good example as they have destroyed most of their rainforests but that just means that the remaining ones are even more important so need to be preserved.
Yours sincerely,
Hayley Pearcy.
‘The rainforest is a beautiful and diverse natural system. We should preserve it for aesthetic reasons and for future generations.’
COLLINS GEOGRAPHY STUDY AND REVISION GUIDE.