URGENT ALERT! Mangrove International Action Needed for Reversing Brazil’s Forest Code
Manifest for Brazilian mangroves
Recent amendments to Brazilian Forest Code (BFC)
threatens the country’s status as the second largest mangrove area in the world
(1). Contrary to major
scientific advisory (2–18) and public opinion (19), government made legal
for shrimp farmers and salt producers to convert tidal wetland ecosystems into
ponds. Changes are being encouraged throughout the country considering BFC is a
Federal regulation and applies nationally. In the Amazon biome (which comprises
the coasts of the States of Amapá, Pará and Maranhão), where 60% of Brazilian
mangroves are located(20), 10% of these systems
can be converted. Along the rest of the shoreline, 35% can be converted.
Additionally, this regulation also assures amnesty to transgressors that
occupied these areas until July 22, 2008.
threatens the country’s status as the second largest mangrove area in the world
(1). Contrary to major
scientific advisory (2–18) and public opinion (19), government made legal
for shrimp farmers and salt producers to convert tidal wetland ecosystems into
ponds. Changes are being encouraged throughout the country considering BFC is a
Federal regulation and applies nationally. In the Amazon biome (which comprises
the coasts of the States of Amapá, Pará and Maranhão), where 60% of Brazilian
mangroves are located(20), 10% of these systems
can be converted. Along the rest of the shoreline, 35% can be converted.
Additionally, this regulation also assures amnesty to transgressors that
occupied these areas until July 22, 2008.
Assessmentsmade prior to the consolidation of shrimp farming industry in Brazil revealed
that the country had already had lost 50,000 ha between the years of 1985 and
2000 due to diverse causes(21). Nevertheless, it is
estimated that shrimp farming industry alone is responsible for the conversion
of another 50,000 ha of the country’s tidal wetland ecosystems into ponds (22, 23), mainly on salt flats (24).
Despite the increasing growth rate of shrimp farming in
Brazil during the past decade (from 7,000 to 90,000 tonnes per year
production), its CO2 emissions — resulting from both land conversion
and shrimp production — have not been included in Brazil’s emission statistics (2, 25), thereby
underestimating the country’s share in the responsibility of climate change
mitigation.
Brazil during the past decade (from 7,000 to 90,000 tonnes per year
production), its CO2 emissions — resulting from both land conversion
and shrimp production — have not been included in Brazil’s emission statistics (2, 25), thereby
underestimating the country’s share in the responsibility of climate change
mitigation.
Salt flat conversions outlined in the BFC could lead to
staggering mangrove losses and hugely increase CO2 emissions,
considering that these systems possibly store an equivalent to roughly 2.5 times annual
global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (26). Considering only
shrimp farms that have already been installed in the country, these land
conversions correspond to 1.5% of all Brazilian marine wetlands, or only 0.03%
of the national territory; however, they alone account for 1% of the total
Brazilian yearly CO2 emissions (2, 27).
staggering mangrove losses and hugely increase CO2 emissions,
considering that these systems possibly store an equivalent to roughly 2.5 times annual
global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (26). Considering only
shrimp farms that have already been installed in the country, these land
conversions correspond to 1.5% of all Brazilian marine wetlands, or only 0.03%
of the national territory; however, they alone account for 1% of the total
Brazilian yearly CO2 emissions (2, 27).
Considering Brazil’s mangrove coverage, which makes it a
critical player on the mitigation of the CO2 effects and climate
change stabilization, we
ask for international support to help in reversing this horrible political
decision. Join us by exerting any type of pressure, either by divulgating this
absurd decision or by writing straight to our government representatives
(contact info attached).
critical player on the mitigation of the CO2 effects and climate
change stabilization, we
ask for international support to help in reversing this horrible political
decision. Join us by exerting any type of pressure, either by divulgating this
absurd decision or by writing straight to our government representatives
(contact info attached).
Thank you very much.
“Instituto
Bioma Brasil (IBB) and Contributors”
Bioma Brasil (IBB) and Contributors”
Authors who
contributed to this article:
contributed to this article:
André
Rovai (UFSC / IBB)
Rovai (UFSC / IBB)
Paulo
Pagliosa (UFSC)
Pagliosa (UFSC)
Alessandra
Fonseca (UFSC)
Fonseca (UFSC)
Ricardo
Menghini (MPSP)
Menghini (MPSP)
Yara
Schaeffer-Novelli (IOUSP / IBB)
Schaeffer-Novelli (IOUSP / IBB)
Gilberto
Cintron-Molero (FWS)
Cintron-Molero (FWS)
Clemente
Coelho-Júnior (UPE / IBB)
Coelho-Júnior (UPE / IBB)
Renato
almeida (UFRBA / IBB)
almeida (UFRBA / IBB)
Marília
Cunha Lignon (UNIFESP / IBB)
Cunha Lignon (UNIFESP / IBB)
Literature cited:
1. M. Spalding, M. Kainuma, L. Collins, World Atlas of Mangroves (Earthscan,
London, UK, 2010), p. 319.
London, UK, 2010), p. 319.
2. P. R. Pagliosa, A. S. Rovai, A. L.
Fonseca, Carbon mismanagement in Brazil, Nature
Climate Change 2, 764–764
(2012).
Fonseca, Carbon mismanagement in Brazil, Nature
Climate Change 2, 764–764
(2012).
3. A. S. Rovai, R. P. Menghini, Y.
Schaeffer-Novelli, G. Cintrón-Molero, C. Coelho-Jr, Protecting Brazil’s coastal
wetlands, Science 335, 1571–1572 (2012).
Schaeffer-Novelli, G. Cintrón-Molero, C. Coelho-Jr, Protecting Brazil’s coastal
wetlands, Science 335, 1571–1572 (2012).
4. J. P. Metzger et al., Brazilian Law:
Full Speed in Reverse?, Science 329, 276–277 (2010).
Full Speed in Reverse?, Science 329, 276–277 (2010).
5. A. G. Nazareno, Call to veto Brazil’s
forest-code revisions, Nature 481, 29 (2012).
forest-code revisions, Nature 481, 29 (2012).
6. Y. Schaeffer-Novelli, A. S. Rovai, C. Coelho-Jr, R. P.
Menghini, R. Almeida, in Código Florestal
e a Ciência: o que nossos legisladores ainda precisam saber, (Comitê Brasil
em Defesa das Florestas e do Desenvolvimento Sustentável, Brasília DF, 2012),
pp. 18–27.
Menghini, R. Almeida, in Código Florestal
e a Ciência: o que nossos legisladores ainda precisam saber, (Comitê Brasil
em Defesa das Florestas e do Desenvolvimento Sustentável, Brasília DF, 2012),
pp. 18–27.
7. F. Michalski, D. Norris, C. A. Peres,
No Return from Biodiversity Loss, Science
329, 1282 (2010).
No Return from Biodiversity Loss, Science
329, 1282 (2010).
8. F. R. Silva, V. H. M. Prado, D. C.
Rosa-Feres, Value of Small Forest Fragments to Amphibians, Science 332, 1033–1033
(2011).
Rosa-Feres, Value of Small Forest Fragments to Amphibians, Science 332, 1033–1033
(2011).
9. L. F. Toledo, S. P. Carvalho-e-Silva,
C. Sánchez, M. A. Almeida, C. F. B. Haddad, The review of the Brazilian Forest
Act: harmful effects on amphibian conservation, Biota Neotropica 10,
35–38 (2010).
C. Sánchez, M. A. Almeida, C. F. B. Haddad, The review of the Brazilian Forest
Act: harmful effects on amphibian conservation, Biota Neotropica 10,
35–38 (2010).
10. L. Cassati, Changes in the Brazilian
Forest Code: potential impacts on the ichthyofauna, Biota Neotropica 10,
31–34 (2010).
Forest Code: potential impacts on the ichthyofauna, Biota Neotropica 10,
31–34 (2010).
11. P. F. Develey, T. Pongiluppi,
Potential impacts of the changes proposed in the Brazilian Forest Code on
birds, Biota Neotropica 10, 43–46 (2010).
Potential impacts of the changes proposed in the Brazilian Forest Code on
birds, Biota Neotropica 10, 43–46 (2010).
12. A. V. L. Freitas, Potential impacts of
the proposed Brazilian Forest Act on native butterflie, Biota Neotropica 10,
53–58 (2010).
the proposed Brazilian Forest Act on native butterflie, Biota Neotropica 10,
53–58 (2010).
13. V. L. Imperatriz-Fonseca, P.
Nunes-Silva, Bees, ecosystem services and the Brazilian Forest Code, Biota Neotropica 10, 59–62 (2010).
Nunes-Silva, Bees, ecosystem services and the Brazilian Forest Code, Biota Neotropica 10, 59–62 (2010).
14. J. G. Tundisi, T. M. Tundisi,
Potencial impacts of changes in the Forest Law in relation to water resources, Biota Neotropica 10, 67–76 (2010).
Potencial impacts of changes in the Forest Law in relation to water resources, Biota Neotropica 10, 67–76 (2010).
15. K. T. Ribeiro, L. Freitas, Potential
impacts of changes to Brazilian Forest Code in campos rupestres and campos de
altitude, Biota 10, 239–246 (2010).
impacts of changes to Brazilian Forest Code in campos rupestres and campos de
altitude, Biota 10, 239–246 (2010).
16. O. A. V. Marques, C. Nogueira, M.
Martins, R. J. Sawaya, Potential impacts of changes in the Brazilian Forest
Code on reptiles, Biota Neotropica 10, 39–42 (2010).
Martins, R. J. Sawaya, Potential impacts of changes in the Brazilian Forest
Code on reptiles, Biota Neotropica 10, 39–42 (2010).
17. M. Galleti et al., Forest legislative
changes and their impacts on mammal ecology and diversity in Brazil, Biota Neotropica 10, 47–52 (2010).
changes and their impacts on mammal ecology and diversity in Brazil, Biota Neotropica 10, 47–52 (2010).
18. P. H. S. Brancalion, R. R. Rodrigues,
Agricultural land reduction due to the compliance with the current Forest Code:
a study case of sugarcane production in the State of São Paulo, Biota Neotropica 10, 63–66 (2010).
Agricultural land reduction due to the compliance with the current Forest Code:
a study case of sugarcane production in the State of São Paulo, Biota Neotropica 10, 63–66 (2010).
19. Datafolha, What Brazilians think about the “new” Forest Law proposal,
(Brasília,
2011;http://d3nehc6yl9qzo4.cloudfront.net/downloads/10_may_2011_datatafolha_cf_doc.pdf).
20. P. W. M. Souza-Filho, Costa de manguezais de macromaré da
Amazônia: cenários morfológicos, mapeamento e quantificação de áreas usando
dados de sensores remotos, Revista
Brasileira de Geofísica 23,
427–435 (2005).
Amazônia: cenários morfológicos, mapeamento e quantificação de áreas usando
dados de sensores remotos, Revista
Brasileira de Geofísica 23,
427–435 (2005).
21. FAO, The world’s mangroves 1980-2005 (Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United States, Rome, 2007), p. 77.
of the United States, Rome, 2007), p. 77.
22. G. A. Daldegan, M. Matsumoto, A. Chatwin, in XIII Simpósio Brasileiro de Sensoriamento
Remoto, (INPE, Florianópolis, SC, 2007), pp. 851–857.
Remoto, (INPE, Florianópolis, SC, 2007), pp. 851–857.
23. MMA, Panorama da
conservação dos ecossistemas costeiros e marinhos no Brasil A. P. L. .
Prates, M. A. Gonçalves, M. R. Rosa, Eds. (MMA/SBF/GBA, Brasília DF, ed. 1st,
2010), p. 148.
conservação dos ecossistemas costeiros e marinhos no Brasil A. P. L. .
Prates, M. A. Gonçalves, M. R. Rosa, Eds. (MMA/SBF/GBA, Brasília DF, ed. 1st,
2010), p. 148.
24. A. G. Zitello, thesis, Duke University
(2007).
(2007).
25. M. S. Copertino, Add coastal
vegetation to the climate critical list, Nature
473, 255 (2011).
vegetation to the climate critical list, Nature
473, 255 (2011).
26. J. Siikamäki, J. N. Sanchirico, S. L.
Jardine, Global economic potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from
mangrove loss., Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, 14369–74 (2012).
Jardine, Global economic potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from
mangrove loss., Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, 14369–74 (2012).
27. MCT, Segunda comunicação
nacional do Brasil à Convenção-Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre mudança do clima
(Brasília, 2010; http://www.mct.gov.br/clima), p. 280.
nacional do Brasil à Convenção-Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre mudança do clima
(Brasília, 2010; http://www.mct.gov.br/clima), p. 280.
Attachments:
Info about Presidency of Brazil
President:
Dilma Rousseff
Address:
Palácio do Planalto
Praça dos Três Poderes,
Palácio do Planalto, Anexo I, Ala B, sala 107
Palácio do Planalto, Anexo I, Ala B, sala 107
Cep: 70150900
Phone:
+55 61
3411.1200
3411.1200
+55 61
3411.1201
3411.1201
Fax:
+55 61
3411.2222
3411.2222
E-mail:
sicplanalto@planalto.gov.br
Electronic messages can also be sent at:
Sample Letter:
President of Brasil January
16,2013
16,2013
Dilma Rousseff
Palácio do Planalto
Praça dos Três Poderes,
Palácio do Planalto, Anexo I, Ala B, sala 107
Palácio do Planalto, Anexo I, Ala B, sala 107
Cep: 70150900
Dear Honorable President Rousseff,
I wish to draw your attention to a dangerous revision to your
country’s coastal regulations that are troubling me now. Recent amendments to Brazilian Forest Code
(BFC) threaten your country’s mangrove forests and will, if implemented,
adversely affect the status of Brazil as the second largest mangrove area in
the world. Because of this ill-conceived amendment, I am very concerned for the
future of all of Brazil’s coastal wetlands, including the mangroves and their
associated inter-tidal wetland areas- the mud flats and salt flats, sea grass
beds and coral reefs.
country’s coastal regulations that are troubling me now. Recent amendments to Brazilian Forest Code
(BFC) threaten your country’s mangrove forests and will, if implemented,
adversely affect the status of Brazil as the second largest mangrove area in
the world. Because of this ill-conceived amendment, I am very concerned for the
future of all of Brazil’s coastal wetlands, including the mangroves and their
associated inter-tidal wetland areas- the mud flats and salt flats, sea grass
beds and coral reefs.
Assessments made prior to the consolidation of shrimp farming
industry in Brazil revealed that the country had already lost 50,000 ha between
the years of 1985 and 2000 due to diverse causes. Nevertheless, it is estimated
that shrimp farming industry alone is responsible for the conversion of another
50,000 ha of the country’s tidal
wetland ecosystems into ponds,
mainly on salt flats, which will be the last refuge for the mangroves to
colonize as the sea level rises as is now occurring at a much moré rapid rate
than earlier predicted. Loss of these intertidal areas to expanding shrimp farm
development will mean loss of future mangroves that would otherwise have
colonized those same sites.
industry in Brazil revealed that the country had already lost 50,000 ha between
the years of 1985 and 2000 due to diverse causes. Nevertheless, it is estimated
that shrimp farming industry alone is responsible for the conversion of another
50,000 ha of the country’s tidal
wetland ecosystems into ponds,
mainly on salt flats, which will be the last refuge for the mangroves to
colonize as the sea level rises as is now occurring at a much moré rapid rate
than earlier predicted. Loss of these intertidal areas to expanding shrimp farm
development will mean loss of future mangroves that would otherwise have
colonized those same sites.
For the sake of combating climate change
and restoring your country’s coastal wetlands and wild fisheries, I ask that you please reconsider this troubling
amendment and act now to reverse this earlier decision.
and restoring your country’s coastal wetlands and wild fisheries, I ask that you please reconsider this troubling
amendment and act now to reverse this earlier decision.
For the Mangroves And the Mangrove Communities!
Alfredo Quarto,
Executive Director
Mangrove Action Project