Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_j4gfglw wrote

[removed]

260

iocan28 t1_j4ggcem wrote

No kidding. It’s a tragic loss for the country and the planet, but the poverty of the country only makes things worse. Exploitation of their natural resources is really the only thing left for a country like Honduras, and it’s come to this situation that can’t be fixed for generations if at all.

110

RKU69 t1_j4lrpnj wrote

The first line of the article:

>Honduras lost 10% of its forests between 2010 and 2021, denounced Friday President Xiomara Castro, while inaugurating an environmental protection program.

More important context is that prior to the election of Castro, Honduras was run by an authoritarian right-wing government that was brought into power by a coup in 2009.

So yes, hopefully things will now change.

13

nooblevelum t1_j4gkhh7 wrote

They are a poor country trying to develop. What do you expect them to do?

−105

MeanManatee t1_j4ibsfg wrote

This doesn't help them develop. The only ones who profit from deforestation like this are a tiny minority of cattle barons. The average Honduran doesn't benefit from losing their forest.

72

[deleted] t1_j4gsly5 wrote

[deleted]

−23

internet_chump t1_j4h2y3e wrote

500,000 of the 1.9 million hectares lost was from insect-borne disease and drought-caused forest fires. That isn't making money for anyone.

The vast majority of the rest isn't for a timber industry, it's for cattle ranching. As we've seen in Brazil, a large beef industry doesn't equate to a bump in GDP.

Of course Honduras can decide it's own future and use it's natural resources how it pleases, but slash and burn style cattle ranching isn't likely to help Honduras generate wealth, nor is it going to be sustainable.

38

NetworkLlama t1_j4h4o6x wrote

This is a big part of the reason that I'm rooting for cultured meat to be successful. So much of the world's forests and bundles are being cut down for ranching.

On the other hand, that success will probably lead to millions of jobs being lost with no straightforward replacement.

8

NoCommunication4350 t1_j4hf565 wrote

Lumber and cattle barons aren't doing this to help develop the country. Stop infantilizing poorer countries.

23

arseniobillingham21 t1_j4gyo1j wrote

I mean, in the US, we replant. It creates a sustainable logging industry.

8

PenguinSunday t1_j4gz8uv wrote

We also replant monocultures, which does not a healthy forest make

18

arseniobillingham21 t1_j4h0a7i wrote

Source on that? I can’t find anything.

−4

PenguinSunday t1_j4h17in wrote

I live next to lands owned by Weyerhaeuser. They're all pine and nothing else. For acres and acres.

Monoculture in America: a system that needs diversity

11

arseniobillingham21 t1_j4hc131 wrote

I found that article too, but thats about farms, which is not the same. And also, lots of natural forests have the same trees for the most part. Where I live it’s all Douglas Fir for the most part, and if you go a couple hours east, it’s all red pine. And you have to be careful about introducing new species in to a forest. New species can bring in new pests that could decimate the species that’s already there, or it could possibly take over. I’m not saying we shouldn’t strive for diversity in forests, but I can’t find any sources that it’s been an issue.

2

PenguinSunday t1_j4hdh84 wrote

No, they don't... farming is farming, whether it's trees or radishes. If you read the article, you'd see that pests are actually a huge danger because there aren't species that protect each other. It only takes one disease or really bad pest to wipe out an entire monoculture forest. The Pine Beetle has shown us that.

1

arseniobillingham21 t1_j4hphbk wrote

I just read it, and it doesn’t mention that introducing new species of trees is an option. It mainly talks about how certain species are now affected because they used to be protected by colder temperatures, but the warming climate is making them vulnerable now. And it also talks about how the beetles biology is changing. And it also talks about how it’s a huge problem for National Parks, which are natural forests, not replanted ones. Again, I’m not saying it’s a bad thing to have diverse forests, but you can’t just go start planting different species of trees. Introducing new tree species to a forests, to possibly reduce pests, can have unintended consequences, and completely decimate an ecosystem.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/rmrs/science-spotlights/invasive-native-tree-species

Most of the forests I’ve seen in the west are naturally mostly one species. So they replant that same species. I don’t see a problem with that. If you’re cutting down a diverse forest, then yes you should replant the same species you’re cutting down. But those aren’t super common out here in the west. And the sources you’re providing don’t actually say what you’re saying they do. I think thinning is a better solution.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/features/thinning-forest-trees

And as long as you’re gonna compare a forest to a farm, you’re not gonna plant wheat in the middle of a corn field. You have the farm divided up in to different sections, each with their own species, almost like a forest.

3

PenguinSunday t1_j4hr4cd wrote

Monocropping is a pretty big reason for soil degradation and crop failures due to pests and diseases. Regenerative farming with multiple crops helps to protect then from pests and replenish the soil. The problem is that diverse forests were clearcut then replanted with only a single type of tree. The forests in my home aren't supposed to be only pine, but Weyerhaeuser kind of forced it, so that's all there is on the lands they own.

1

arseniobillingham21 t1_j4htcx2 wrote

I mean I’m not gonna stand here and defend Weyerhaeuser, and they definitely shouldn’t be replanting only one species if it was more diverse before. That’s one of those things that can’t be changed until somebody is brave enough to stand up to the logging industry and force them to do the things they should. My point was, you shouldn’t take a forest that’s one species(many of which are naturally that way, not because of clearcutting), and just start introducing new ones.

2

PenguinSunday t1_j4i90rs wrote

It's definitely about what is appropriate for each area, you're right.

1

baxterstate t1_j4gkmte wrote

I have high hopes that the new President, Xiomara Castro, elected a year ago is aware of the problems and will begin to turn them around.

100

Sodi920 t1_j4hfy4e wrote

I really doubt that a wannabe authoritarian populist will get anything meaningful done if the other Central American countries with one of those are anything to go by.

49

TomApollo t1_j4jn5xg wrote

You have too much hopes, that lady isn't doing shit for the country, just making her family rich. Shame that the first woman president turned out to be such incompetent.

16

ZeroPride t1_j4iwhzl wrote

Well, yeah. First lines of the linked article:

>Honduras lost 10% of its forests between 2010 and 2021, denounced Friday President Xiomara Castro, while inaugurating an environmental protection program. > >“The total loss of forests during these last years of the dictatorship, from 2010 to 2021, was 696,562 hectares, representing 10% of our forests,” said the president, referring to the governments of Porfirio Lobo (2010-2014) and Juan Orlando Hernández (2014-2018 and 2018-2022).

The article is written rather poorly, though.

8

Stinkyclamjuice15 t1_j4h41mc wrote

They won't be happy until this planet is sucked dry and we're all living in moxie fed domes

14

gingimli t1_j4hyas8 wrote

But just think of the plus side, a few people got to live very lavishly for their 80 years on Earth. Surely that was worth destroying the planet for the entirety of future generations.

15

TheOriginalNutter t1_j4hyf8g wrote

Super cities. Everything you need within 15 mins bike ride of your home.

Insects, easy to farm. Full of protein! Chitin is a problem, but forget about that...

Personally, I am looking forward to a world where I don't own anything but am happy. Where the elites travel the world on private planes whilst I enjoy am allowed to go abroad once every 5 years.

9

calm_chowder t1_j4ivozm wrote

Going abroad once every 5 years would be a huge bump up for most people.

15

blackluck64 t1_j4jvcfr wrote

Pretty much. The entire planet will be used to support one species. A surprising number of people seem totally okay with that which leads to the inevitable conclusion that human beings are really just smart bacteria.

4

thebadpixel t1_j4hnayi wrote

Yeah, this sucks, but I can’t help but be reminded of the forests that used to stand in the US before whole states were clear cut to fuel the economy and make the US what it became today. You’ve all seen the photos of massive redwoods cut by two smiling guys holding a 20 foot saw. Imagine at that time if other countries had pressured the US to stop cutting those old growth forests. Would we have listened? Hell no. So, with that in mind, how do we (we who already clear cut our great forests) convince a poorer nation like Honduras to stop cutting their forests? How much are those remaining forests worth to the rich nations? The oil nations got rich off their resources. Honduras should get equally rich off of preserving the lungs of the world.

13

decorama OP t1_j4ho989 wrote

We know much more today about the consequences of the damage we make to our forests than we did in the 1800s.

It would be ideal if countries banded together to preserve natural resources.

18

thebadpixel t1_j4hpfch wrote

My point is, if other countries had come to us in the 1800's and told us what we were doing was really bad, would we have listened? Anytime outside countries are telling a country not to make money off of the resources they can see out their window... it's a hard sell.

In this case, they're clearing for cattle ranches. I doubt all that beef is staying in Honduras. It needs to be made more profitable to leave the trees standing.

7

dxrey65 t1_j4ieato wrote

If someone from here, which was once a thriving city in a forested wetland, stopped by to let us know what happens when you abuse the environment, maybe someone would listen?

But the problem is people trash what they have, and don't listen until it's too late. People not caring is the real problem, not the people who have made mistakes and who try to educate others so not everyone has to screw up.

3

sudeepharya t1_j4iq9sk wrote

Itinfuriates me as an American the US dictates nuclear and atomic policy while they are the only country on earth to drop one and then another one on Japan.

Yet here we are.

−2

TheOriginalNutter t1_j4hxy8o wrote

This post requires some positive vibes.

So, how about this? The world has actually been getting greener and greener for the last 30 years.

Source :

https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004

6

RKU69 t1_j4lrwmu wrote

This post requires some positive vibes, such as opening the article and reading in the first line that this is about a speech made by the President of Honduras, where she is inaugurating new environmental protections to stem and reverse the deforestation of the previous ten years.

0

TheOriginalNutter t1_j4lyt1e wrote

Did you read all of the article like I did?

No. Now go and read it.

0

RKU69 t1_j4m3wv4 wrote

Yes, that's what I'm telling you.

1

foxrun89 t1_j4hzxuu wrote

It’s going to be a weird looking world once they all die off

2

decorama OP t1_j4immc5 wrote

I understand your resignation on the issue, but please, try to help fight this sort of thing where you can. Locally or nationally, every little bit helps.

4

foxrun89 t1_j4inbho wrote

I spent most of my young life trying to do that with a master’s in marine science. It’s not worth it anymore. The changes would’ve had to happen a long time ago. It’s over now. Part of the joke while I was in school was that we were studying a dying a planet.

3

Always_Nat_1 t1_j4iy5nh wrote

We can still mitigate damage. It might be too late to stop it entirely but it’s not too late to do anything.

6

Khalaio t1_j4h40b3 wrote

Hope for Honduras 🇭🇳

Aka, The Deapths

1

Zippier92 t1_j4hccqk wrote

What us the plant based scene in Central America- seems timely to lead the area and save the diversity.

1

F5PPu6kGqj t1_j4i1shj wrote

> He regretted that in Honduras the forests are deforested, especially by extensive cattle ranching, migratory agriculture and are affected by forest fires.

Not looking good for the future.

0

soljaboss t1_j4l1djd wrote

That's horrendous, Honduras.

1

lamby284 t1_j4w1sd1 wrote

Why doesn't it say what their cause of deforestation is? Who is using the land and for what?

1

theporcupineking t1_j4jaul5 wrote

I thought this was a picture of broccoli and now I want broccoli dipped in ranch.

0

Ambitious-Tart-2070 t1_j4lyqqu wrote

Countries that are considered part of the advanced economy were allowed to exploit not only their own resources but those of other poorer nations as well. No one was upset enough to offer them reparations, yet when they decide to make money off of their land, people from wealthy nations are upset.It’s funny how climate change is a concern when some of the poorest and most exploited countries try to change their fate.

0

boinzy t1_j4hjcnp wrote

Did they check under the bed?

−2

Realitybytes_ t1_j4hgvpy wrote

Or on a positive note, Honduras gained 10% more land to build on... because that's how these countrys report this shit.

−3

RobinsShaman t1_j4hiyas wrote

Or....Honduras able to preserve 90% of its Forest land for past 11years. celebrate!!!

−6

soljaboss t1_j4l28bd wrote

Harvard wants to know your location

[ X ] Allow [ ] Don't Allow

Submit

1

RobinsShaman t1_j4i5zci wrote

Sorry. Please dm me and I will send you a beautiful wooden table made from Honduras wood.

−4

DuckDuckJeeper t1_j4h6y2h wrote

Hurricanes Eta and Iota alone did pretty much all of the damage but of course, those facts might distract from an otherwise inflammatory article.

−10

boatdude420 t1_j4hdt13 wrote

I highly doubt that. Hurricanes don’t destroy forests.

10

DuckDuckJeeper t1_j4i8v9s wrote

Let me tickle your doubts:

https://cnr.ncsu.edu/news/2020/10/hurricanes-are-killing-trees-why-thats-a-problem/#:~:text=In%20addition%20to%20flooding%2C%20hurricane,off%20tree%20leaves%20and%20branches.

−3

boatdude420 t1_j4qp4z8 wrote

That doesn’t prove deforestation. Sure, some trees are uprooted by storms but storms aren’t going to wreck millions of acres of forest.

1

The-Bill-B t1_j4h41a6 wrote

I don’t know a lot about deforestation, but seems like 10% over 11 years doesn’t sound too terrible.

−22

MeanManatee t1_j4ic6cb wrote

You din't need to know anything about deforestation because a beginners grasp of math would tell you how bad this is.

6

decorama OP t1_j4ingmd wrote

So you're good with their grandchildren having now forest whatsoever. Got it.

5

soljaboss t1_j4l1ltt wrote

You are right, at first glance it doesnt sound like much but it is unfortunately.

2

Energy_Turtle t1_j4h8nqq wrote

I was thinking the same. If they keep it up with 10% of the remaining forest over each ~10 year period, then that's pretty good for a developing nation. Sad to lose it but what the hell are Hondurans supposed to do?

−17