Daily Quick Read - September 5, 2019

Meat the Enemy

Two key drivers to Amazon deforestation are farming and ranching.  The two are closely linked. Farms raise feed for cattle to eat both in Brazil and around the world.  If we want to do something about the burning in the Amazon, other than hand waving, we could change our diets.

Brazil is the world’s largest meat exporter. The country is home to around 200 million cows and supplies a quarter of the global beef market. It should then come as no surprise that deforestation and forest fires are ravaging Brazil.

What we’re witnessing now in the Amazon is just the latest stage of a tragedy that’s been unfolding for years. Deforestation through forest fires is not a new process — it’s spiking now, but it’s been a pretty steady development across the years. It’s easy to blame Brazilian ranchers and lawmakers (and they certainly do have their part of the blame), but the reality of it is that without international demand, this problem would be greatly reduced.

For instance, 19% of all soy used in the European Union comes from Brazil, as does 10% of the continent’s beef. Asia’s appetite for beef has surged in recent years, and the US is also a major importer of Brazilian meat. It should come as no surprise, then, that every single consumer shares a tiny part of the blame — and if we want to stop the Amazon from burning, we need to shift our diets.

The Future of Farming Is In the Past

The massive use of chemicals in farming, both fertilizers and pesticides, is good for the chemical companies, but not good for the soil, pollinators or people.  Regenerative farming  isn’t a new concept, but the discussion over exactly what it means are just starting.

Regenerative farming is having a moment because scientists believe it can help transfer massive quantities of carbon from the atmosphere to the soil. With pressure mounting to address the climate crisis, on presidential campaign trails and otherwise, regenerative agriculture may prove a significant and permanent upheaval to traditional farming methods.

The challenge, according to those who support the concept, is that “regenerative” itself lacks a clear definition. Although several certification schemes exist, they differ on how it should be implemented and evaluated. And the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which oversees the organic standards, has so far stayed out of the fray.

Most proponents agree regenerative agriculture involves tilling the soil less (or avoiding it altogether), as well as planting cover crops, growing a diverse array of crops, and managed grazing. But some say these are just a baseline, and should be part of a greater sustainable farming system that goes beyond soil health.

Just Pour on More Chemicals

The massive kill off of insects including critical pollinators is clearly facilitated by glyphosate herbicides.  By the way, they also pose a major health hazard to humans.  Europe is clearly ahead in phasing out this dangerous chemical.

Use of glyphosate will be banned in Germany from the end of 2023, after a phased effort to reduce its application by farmers.

The ban, agreed by the Cabinet on Wednesday, is part of an insect conservation program from Environment Minister Svenja Schulze.

It includes a "systematic reduction strategy," which would initially prohibit use of the chemical in domestic gardens and allotments, and on the edge of farmers' fields.

Germany's move comes after lawmakers in Austria passed a bill banning all use of the weedkiller, making the country the first to do so. Some 20 French mayors banned it from their municipalities last month — in defiance of their national government.

The German chemical giant Bayer — which acquired Monsanto last year in a mammoth $62.5 billion deal — says studies and regulators have deemed glyphosate and Roundup safe for human use.

However, some 18,000 people have brought legal action against the firm since the takeover. They claim that the use of glyphosate has caused them to develop various types of cancer. What do EU countries think?

The chemical has also been linked with a decline in pollinating insect species like bees and butterflies.

Make Ireland Green Again

Imagine what this planet’s forest looked like before humans invented the axe. Ireland has made great strides in restoring its forests over the decades, but has now committed to a major effort to  plant 440 million trees over the next 20 years.

Over the centuries, Ireland went from having an initial forest cover of 80 percent to just one percent in 1929. Ouch. Humankind has been rough on trees. According to the Agriculture and Food Development Authority, Ireland is the only country in Europe where such complete forest destruction took place.

Since then, the country has slowly been increasing its forest cover. In 2012, the National Forest Inventory (NFI) estimated that the area of forest was 731,650 hectares or 10.5 percent of the land area.

Even though Ireland's forest cover is estimated to be at its highest level in over 350 years, it still lags notably behind the European average of over 30 percent. Given the crucial role that trees play in helping to fend off the climate crisis, what's a tree-sparse country to do?

Plant more trees. Which is exactly what the country is planning to do. The Irish Times reports that 22 million trees will be planted every year over the next two decades for a total of 440 million new trees by 2040.

Trump Axes Another Forest

Remember when Trump massively reduced the size of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument?  Who needs nature when we can use Federal lands for cattle and mining?  Here’s another forest that is being destroyed. Where are the loud voices demanding that this destruction be halted?

Machine tracks in the sand frame the site near Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, a harbinger of its vanishing solitude. The federal government plans to remove an unprecedented number of trees here, it says to reduce fire risk, improve habitat for greater sage grouse, and increase forage for cattle and a world-renowned trophy-hunting deer herd.

And it plans to do it fast. The Bureau of Land Management failed to conduct a thorough environmental analysis of the project that considered the impacts of cutting trees on the climate, said scientists who appealed to a federal review board to stop it. If approved, the effort could define how the nation’s most sensitive public lands are managed for a generation.

Grand Staircase was set aside in 1996 in part for scientists to study “perhaps the richest floristic region in the Intermountain West,” according to the presidential proclamation that created it. The little-known BLM tree-removal proposal is part of an effort by the agency to cut tens of thousands of acres of pinyon-juniper woodland across the Colorado Plateau, Great Basin, and into the Pacific Northwest. Removing more forest portends far-reaching consequences for the ecological diversity of America’s public lands.