- "Our forests are dying" - here's our manifesto
- Satellite images show expanding fire at South American tri-border area | Euronews
- Brazil Says Oil in Spill along Northeast Beaches Not Brazilian
- Want more news?
"Our forests are dying" - here's our manifesto
I know that at Pantanal much more wildlifes can been seen than Amazon. But except the animals, are there any differences between them? Do I need to go to both and stay at each place for around 3 nights? Or I'd better take a 7d 6n tour? The Amazon is a jungle thick tropical forest. Why don't you look at some videos on YouTube that might show you the differences? Some people do both, some do one or the other.
- The Where, the Why, and the How: 75 Artists Illustrate Wondrous Mysteries of Science.
- Image Clarity: High-Resolution Photography.
- The Christmas Wars (PLUS: The Bird Wars).
- Paths of Providence.
It does cost a lot, so usually it's people who are quite well-off who do both. Many of the activities will be the same. The people I've known who have done the Pantanal first and then the Amazon seem to prefer the Amazon, but I only talk to them in the middle of the jungle, when they're under its spell; I sometimes wonder what everyone thinks after they've gone home.
Satellite images show expanding fire at South American tri-border area | Euronews
Of all those trips my favourites were the Pantanal and Manu Peru Of course a lot of that is down to luck.. We did the pantanal while in brazil and Cuyabeno amazon jungle while in Ecuador. Both are amazing. The jungle is more than just animals its about being in an extremely wild place, floating down rivers with strange sounds and having to keep an eye out for glimpses of animals but also being fascinated by things like huge insects, birds, fish etc The pantanal is a very large flat grassland area - almost like going to a farming area - so in my opinion not as visually stunning an environment as the jungle but very impressive for viewing animals - croc's, otters, capivara etc.
I found that post really irritating.
Brazil Says Oil in Spill along Northeast Beaches Not Brazilian
I don't know why people think they should be taken on a jungle trek that is off the path--is that what they would expect in the US or Europe? Why should the jungle be less valued in Brazil than in those places? Because really, that is what they are saying.
Well-worn paths protect the jungle from tourists. On the other hand, the blogger is irritated because the family they visited was cooking an armadillo. He thinks these animals ought to be protected And yet he scoffs at the family visit as being artificial and uncomfortable? The guides I know are only willing to take tourists caiman-catching if they know them well and are VERY confident about them. This guy seems to have pestered his guide into doing something he wasn't really comfortable with. Granted, the guide could have said "no", but the blogger sounds like he was insistent.
Spear-fishing, while it is more commonly done than caiman-catching, is also a fairly risky activity. The blogger does not understand the jungle. I will agree that sometimes people are underwhelmed because they are expecting something different--but usually that expectation comes from a place of incredible privilege and self-centeredness. And I have a pretty good feeling that if the blogger HAD gone to the Pantanal instead, he would have found a lot to complain about there Feels like he is exploiting the people - but not the animals??
As I said for us the jungle was about being surrounded by nature - how wild it is - and appreciating things you normally would not insects, birds etc. This topic has been locked by a moderator. All rights reserved.
Conventional logging, the piecemeal expansion of agricultural land for soybean and cattle ranching, drought and localized climate change, migration and urbanization, and the massive infrastructure and hydroelectric projects pursued by administrations on the left and right have all contributed to the destruction of nearly 20 percent of the Amazon in just five decades. This complex array of factors behind the disappearance of vital primary forests across South America, Amazonian and otherwise, requires hard thinking about how other countries, international and non-governmental organizations, and individuals can respond effectively.
go to link The stakes are extremely high. But it is vital as a source of unique biodiversity, a regulator for the global climate, and a huge carbon sink. Protecting the Amazon and its adjacent forests is the keystone of any serious effort to mitigate the worst effects of global climate change. If national governments refuse the terms, such funds could be channelled through local governments, as nine Brazilian states have recently suggested, or through trusted multilateral organizations, local communities, and home-grown NGOs.
Meanwhile, serious progress on rewilding and decarbonizing among global north economies will strengthen their limited moral authority when it comes to helping other countries protect their forests, as well as benefiting the global climate. As individuals, eating less or no red meat—a major motor for the destruction of forests worldwide, both for cattle and animal feed—is also an option. But conscientious Western consumers may have less leverage than they think.
Want more news?
The U. Dissecting complicated supply chains and bogus, industry-set sustainability certificates for products including palm oil, charcoal, and hardwoods is also important, but harder to scale up into society-wide change. In this context, trade agreements like the decades-in-the-making E. France and Ireland have signaled that the deal will not go ahead unless Brazil honors its commitments to the environment. Yet if South America is instead forced to deepen its trading relationship with China or the U.
European diseases and invasions decimated the Indigenous civilizations of the Amazon. Today, after centuries of settlement and state-sponsored colonization, the Amazon basin is home to some 30 million people spread across a handful of major cities and hundreds of smaller towns, villages, and Indigenous reserves.
This predominantly poor, Afro-descendant and mixed-heritage population will only grow. How can their material demands, channelled by governments keen to extract political and financial benefit from developing the rainforest, be balanced with the need to protect the Amazon? A potential clue can be found in the history of the rainforest, which a thousand years ago was no pristine, virgin forest, but rather home to multiple and complex urban societies. To travel through the Amazon today is to see remnants of ancient geoengineering everywhere, from thick banks of terra preta fertile anthropogenic soil to the fruit and palm trees themselves which—a growing scientific consensus holds—were planted and domesticated by pre-Columbian peoples.
The biome comfortably sustained several million people in the centuries prior to without combusting or collapsing. This careful coexistence between human society and the environment relied on methods and knowledge still preserved by Indigenous peoples across the rainforest today. If their voices are foregrounded, a glimmer of a way forward might be found. Improving the efficiency of land already devoted to agricultural production and encouraging reforestation on low-yield land, strengthening community-led fire prevention , and incentivizing migration away from the Amazon basin by creating opportunities elsewhere, can play a role.
And above all, Indigenous peoples in properly demarcated and protected reserves are proven to be the most effective guardians against man-made fires and deforestation by other means.
- The Bum Bandit.
- The Amazon is burning. Europe must not shy away from its responsibility | WWF?
- The UnStoppables: Tapping Your Entrepreneurial Power.
- Peak Performance Every Time.
High-tech support from outside can sometimes be useful here. Such suggestions may sound utopian at best, or like a technocratic fix at worst. Turning the clock back to a radically low-consumption society is likely to prove unpopular and unfeasible. But there is willingness among Indigenous representatives, and even sectors of agribusiness , to experiment with new thinking and unusual forms of cooperation.
Native delegates from across the Amazon and the Americas traded ideas on how to defend the natural world and secure a sustainable way of life.