Global hunger for soybeans 'destroying Brazil's Cerrado savanna' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-46022184
It's one of the most biodiverse places in world - 40% of animal and plant species there can be found nowhere else on the planet.
WWF says an area the size of Greater London disappeared every two months between 2013 and 2015, making the Cerrado one of the most endangered ecosystems on the planet.
[...]
In my understanding, there is something of the type ‘factious declarations’: "deforestation in the Amazon is diminishing".
Believed it, in a sequence of 10 news, for example, the deforestation would have been reduced to zero.
In August 2018, the SAD [in Portughese, deforestation alarm system] detected 545 square kilometres of deforestation in the Legal Amazon, with an increase of 199 compared to August of 2017, when deforestation totaled 182 square kilometers.
In August 2018, deforestation occurred in Pará (37), Mato Grosso (20), Amazonas (19), Rondônia (16), Acre (7), Roraima (1) and Tocantins (1). Degraded forests in Legal Amazon totaled 118 square kilometers in August 2018, showing a reduction of 70 compared to August of 2017, when the forest degradation detected totaled 392 square kilometers. In August 2018 the degradation was detected in the States of Mato Grosso (89), Pará (10) and Rondônia (1).
Geography of Deforestation
In August 2018, the majority (55) of deforestation occurred in private areas or under various stages of possession. The remainder of the deforestation was registered in the agrarian reform Settlements (23), protected areas (18) and indigenous lands (4).
Be careful when reading reports from everywhere about nature conservation in Brazil. Insane news are being spread as disgraceful for the possibility of a former Brazilian army Captain may win elections for Brazil presidency; as if the former leftwing government was really wonderful for the Amazon preservation!
Mammals represent the largest-bodied elements of the world’s surviving megafauna and provide several key ecosystems services, yet their populations are often under steep decline throughout the tropics. Anthropogenic defaunation is one the most important contemporary threats to modern mammal faunas. Although the Atlantic Forest biome of South America shows several clear signs of defaunation, the extent to which this biome has lost its mammal fauna remains poorly understood. Here, we collate and analyze a comprehensive body of secondary data to quantitatively assess the spatial patterns of defaunation of all medium- to large-bodied Atlantic Forest mammals which were then classed by morpho-ecological traits. We used a Defaunation Index, which was scaled-up to the entire biome using kriging interpolation, to examine the integrity of site-specific mammal faunas. We further use environmental and socioeconomic predictors to explain the drivers of defaunation. Our results show high levels of defaunation (>0.5) for most of the Atlantic Forest. Apex predators, other carnivores, large-bodied mammals and large herbivores were among the most defaunated functional groups. Remaining native vegetation cover, forest fragment size, and the largest neighboring forest remnant were the main negative predictors of defaunation. We conclude that medium- to large-bodied Atlantic Forest mammals are under high levels of threat due to historical population losses that continue today. A conservation action plan thus becomes imperative to prevent this biome from becoming an even “emptier forest”, severely compromising patterns of diversity, ecological processes and ecosystem functioning.
The world’s most used weedkiller damages the beneficial bacteria in the guts of honeybees and makes them more prone to deadly infections, new research has found.
Previous studies have shown that pesticides such as neonicotinoids cause harm to bees, whose pollination is vital to about three-quarters of all food crops. Glyphosate, manufactured by Monsanto, targets an enzyme only found in plants and bacteria.
However, the new study shows that glyphosate damages the microbiota that honeybees need to grow and to fight off pathogens. The findings show glyphosate, the most used agricultural chemical ever, may be contributing to the global decline in bees, along with the loss of habitat.
“We demonstrated that the abundances of dominant gut microbiota species are decreased in bees exposed to glyphosate at concentrations documented in the environment,” said Erick Motta and colleagues from University of Texas at Austin in their new paper. They found that young worker bees exposed to glyphosate exposure died more often when later exposed to a common bacterium.
Other research, from China and published in July, showed that honeybee larvae grew more slowly and died more often when exposed to glyphosate. An earlier study, in 2015, showed the exposure of adult bees to the herbicide at levels found in fields “impairs the cognitive capacities needed for a successful return to the hive”.
“The biggest impact of glyphosate on bees is the destruction of the wildflowers on which they depend,” said Matt Sharlow, at conservation group Buglife. “Evidence to date suggests direct toxicity to bees is fairly low, however the new study clearly demonstrates that pesticide use can have significant unintended consequences.”
Prof Dave Goulson, at the University of Sussex, said: “It now seems that we have to add glyphosate to the list of problems that bees face. This study is also further evidence that the landscape-scale application of large quantities of pesticides has negative consequences that are often hard to predict.”
However, Oliver Jones, a chemist at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia, said: “To my mind the doses of glyphosate used were rather high. The paper shows only that glyphosate can potentially interfere with the bacteria in the bee gut, not that it actually does so in the environment.”
A spokesman for Monsanto said: “Claims that glyphosate has a negative impact on honey bees are simply not true. No large-scale study has found any link between glyphosate and the decline of the honeybee population. More than 40 years of robust, independent scientific evidence shows that it poses no unreasonable risk for humans, animal, and the environment generally.”
The new research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that some of the key beneficial bacteria in bees’ guts have the enzyme that is targeted by glyphosate. It also found that the ability of newly emerged worker bees to develop a normal gut biome was hampered by glyphosate exposure.
Harm to gut bacteria by glyphosate exposure has also been shown in a pilot study in rats. “Gut bacteria play a vital role in maintaining good health, in organisms as diverse as bees and humans,” said Goulson. “The finding that these bacteria are sensitive to the most widely used pesticide in the world is thus concerning.”
The weedkiller, sold as Roundup, won a shortened five-year lease in the EU in 2017. In 2015, the World Health Organisation’s cancer agency, the IARC, declared glyphosate “probably carcinogenic to humans,” although several international agencies subsequently came to opposite conclusions. Monsanto insists glyphosate is safe.
Eduardo Pereira dos Santos Brazil Bakary Kujabi Gambia Ismaila Bah Gambia Francisco Munguia Guatemala Dominador Lucas Philippines Suresh Oraon India Lando Perdicos Philippines Florencio Pérez Nájera Guatemala Alejandro Hernández García Guatemala Katison de Souza Brazil Ramón Choc Sacrab Guatemala Adrián Tihuilit Mexico Beverly Geronimo Philippines Shanmugam India Snowlin India Tamilarasan India Kanthiah India Gladston India Maniraj India
Significant levels of the weedkilling chemical glyphosate have been found in an array of popular breakfast cereals, oats and snack bars marketed to US children, a new study has found.
Tests revealed glyphosate, the active ingredient in the popular weedkiller brand Roundup, present in all but two of the 45 oat-derived products that were sampled by the Environmental Working Group, a public health organization.
Nearly three in four of the products exceeded what the EWG classes safe for children to consume. Products with some of the highest levels of glyphosate include granola, oats and snack bars made by leading industry namesQuaker, Kellogg’s and General Mills, which makes Cheerios.
One sample of Quaker Old Fashioned Oats measured at more than one part per million of glyphosate. This is still within safe levels deemed by the Environmental Protection Agency, although it it currently working on an updated assessment.
The EWG said the federal limits are outdated and that most of the products it tested exceed a more stringent definition of safe glyphosate levels.
“I grew up eating Cheerios and Quaker Oats long before they were tainted with glyphosate,” said EWG’s president, Ken Cook. “No one wants to eat a weedkiller for breakfast, and no one should have to do so.” Cook said the EWG will urge the EPA to limit the use of glyphosate on food crops but said companies should “step up” because of the “lawless” nature of the regulator under the Trump administration.
“It is very troubling that cereals children like to eat contain glyphosate,” said Alexis Temkin, an EWG toxicologist and author of the report. “Parents shouldn’t worry about whether feeding their children heathy oat foods will also expose them to a chemical linked to cancer. The government must take steps to protect our most vulnerable populations.”
The findings follow a landmark decision in a San Francisco court last week to order that Monsanto pay $289m in damages to Dewayne Johnson, a 46-year-old former groundskeeper. A jury deemed that Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller caused Johnson’s cancer and that it had failed to warn him about the health risks of exposure.
Monsanto, which said it will appeal against the verdict, has said glyphosate has been used safely for decades. In 2015, the EPA said that glyphosate has a low toxicity for people but could cause problems for some pets if they consume the chemical.
However, the World Health Organization has called glyphosate a “probable carcinogen” and authorities in California list it as a chemical “known to the state to cause cancer”.
In April, internal emails obtained from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that scientists have found glyphosate on a wide range of commonly consumed food, to the point that they were finding it difficult to identify a food without the chemical on it. The FDA has yet to release any official results from this process.
There was no indication that the claims related to products sold outside the US.
US farmers spray about 200m pounds of Roundup each year on their crops, including corn, soybeans, wheat and oats. It can also be used on produce such as spinach and almonds.
A General Mills spokeswoman said: “Our products are safe and without question they meet regulatory safety levels. The EPA has researched this issue and has set rules that we follow, as do farmers who grow crops including wheat and oats.”
A Kellogg’s spokesman said: “Our food is safe. Providing safe, high-quality foods is one of the ways we earn the trust of millions of people around the world. The EPA sets strict standards for safe levels of these agricultural residues and the ingredients we purchase from suppliers for our foods fall under these limits.”
Quaker Oats continues to “proudly stand by the safety and quality of our Quaker products”, a spokesman said.
But Cook said that General Mills and Quaker Oats are “relying on outdated safety standards”.
“Our view is that the government standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency pose real health risks to Americans – particularly children, who are more sensitive to the effects of toxic chemicals than adults,” he said.
It is a landmark deal that has been more than two decades in the making.
Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan - all bordering the Caspian Sea - have agreed in principle on how to divide it up.
Their leaders signed the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea in the Kazakh city of Aktau on Sunday.
It establishes a formula for dividing up its resources and prevents other powers from setting up a military presence there.
It is an important step in the easing of regional tensions, but the deal over the world's largest inland body of water matters for several reasons.
Here's what you need to know about the hotly disputed Caspian Sea.
1. Its legal status has been complicated
It would be reasonable to assume that the Caspian Sea is, well, a sea. But at the heart of this long-running dispute is whether or not the 370,000 sq km (143,000 sq mile) body of landlocked water should be considered a lake.
Until the dissolution of the Soviet Union (USSR) in 1991, that's what it was known as and shared between the USSR and Iran.
But the arrival on the scene of new countries complicated this issue, with ensuing claim and counterclaim.
Iran had argued it was a lake and not a sea, but none of the four other countries agreed.
This binding document sets rules on how countries can use the world's oceans. It covers areas such as the management of natural resources, territorial rights, and the environment. And it is not limited to littoral states, meaning others can seek access to its resources.
But if it is defined as a lake, then it would have to be divided equally between all five.
Sunday's agreement goes some way to settling this dispute.
The signed convention gives the body of water a "special legal status" which means it is not defined as a sea or a lake, Russian officials said.
The surface water will be in common usage, meaning freedom of access for all littoral states beyond territorial waters.
But the seabed - which is rich in natural resources - will be divided up.
2. Who wins and who loses?
It's difficult to say, as the final text of the deal is yet to be published.
Another key factor is that seabed boundaries are yet to be negotiated (although now it's the subject of bilateral agreements - not multilateral as before).
But because the deal does not define the Caspian as a lake, Iran - which has the smallest coastline - is viewed as a potential loser.
Iranian social media users have accused the government in Tehran of "selling off" the Caspian Sea on Sunday.
However, Iran - which is currently under growing political and economic pressure from the West - might see some political benefits in securing the clause that bars any armed presence on the Caspian other than that of the five littoral states.
Had the Caspian been defined as a lake, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan - who have established an early claim over large areas of the Caspian - stood to lose out under such a split.
So the basis of all previous disagreements stems from who gets access to what. This is important because...
3. It is rich in oil and gas
The Caspian Sea is highly-prized for its vast oil and gas reserves.
It's estimated there are 50 billion barrels of oil and nearly 300 trillion cubic feet (8.4 trillion cubic metres) of natural gas beneath its seabed.
That is why disagreements over how to divide some of its huge oil and gas fields have been numerous - and acrimonious. On occasion, warships have been deployed to scare off contractors hired by rival countries.
The disagreement over its legal status has also prevented a natural gas pipeline being built across the Caspian between Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. This would have allowed Turkmen gas to bypass Russia on its way to Europe.
Russia - a major exporter of gas and oil to Europe - has previously objected to this.
International oil companies that rushed to the Caspian in the 1990s have now pulled out.
But there is a possibility this could be explored further following Sunday's deal.
4. It provides the world's caviar
The Caspian Sea has a number of different species of sturgeon, the fish that yields the highly prized delicacy caviar.
Between 80-90% of the world's caviar is sourced from the Caspian, but the numbers have been falling over the past few decades.
