Daewoo now farming Madagascar 1.3m hectares!!!!

[emessis]

I don't even know what to say.


"Hey, we're not growing enough food for ourselves in our own country, let's go take over HALF of another country (for free!), hack down its native vegetation and plant....corn! Aren't we smart!"

 

[Rocky]

it looks like they are farming in sambava/tamatave areas...hopefully it doesnt completely destroy that locale

 

[Dave Weldon]

Howdy All,

(Reuters) "Madagascar: South Korea corn deal not sealed yet" [Fri 21 Nov 2008, 12:34 GMT]

...but it doesn't look good either .

http://africa.reuters.com/business/news/usnJOE4AK0IS.html

 

[ChrisnLisa]

I am so angry right now I don't even know what to say. F-Daewoo and all their sh--ty products!

 

[Marc10edora]

I wonder what types of locales will be affected from this? Do you think they could relocate them?

 

[chequepoint]

Do you think that of all the animals on madagasgar, they're going to be concerned with preserving the specific color phase of an animal that thrives all over the island because of its value you to you as a pet? Is your world view that narrow?

When land goes away, animals die. If they relocate all the animals to other parts of the island, there will still be an increased competition for resources and in the end, the same amount of animals will die, only with the added twist that we've now caused devastation all over the island instead of in a few isolated areas.

This deal means a massive increase to their GDP, and thats all they see. Any attempt at appeasing the green police will be by rounding up the high profile endangered animals in the area, setting up reserves elsewhere, giving them to zoos, etc. and thats best case. But only the high profile (cute, cuddley, etc). Ignoring the fact that the real loss is in all the plants, insects, and other tiny building blocks of the ecosystem going away.

I can pretty much assure you that saving one color of panther chameleon is not going to be on the agenda. That will be up to the captive breeders here most likely.

 

[Marc10edora]

Do you think that of all the animals on madagasgar, they're going to be concerned with preserving the specific color phase of an animal that thrives all over the island because of its value you to you as a pet? Is your world view that narrow?

When land goes away, animals die. If they relocate all the animals to other parts of the island, there will still be an increased competition for resources and in the end, the same amount of animals will die, only with the added twist that we've now caused devastation all over the island instead of in a few isolated areas.

This deal means a massive increase to their GDP, and thats all they see. Any attempt at appeasing the green police will be by rounding up the high profile endangered animals in the area, setting up reserves elsewhere, giving them to zoos, etc. and thats best case. But only the high profile (cute, cuddley, etc). Ignoring the fact that the real loss is in all the plants, insects, and other tiny building blocks of the ecosystem going away.

I can pretty much assure you that saving one color of panther chameleon is not going to be on the agenda. That will be up to the captive breeders here most likely.

I was thinking about more of the rare breeds that are close to endangerment like Parsonii and some leaf chams. It makes me wonder if there is any conservation effort going on because of this. I've heard of relocation projects in different parts of madagascar because of local farming. But I wonder if they can do a project this big and on time?

 

[desultadox]

Don't chameleons sell for more than corn? lol. Anyway, sounds like a good time to start a Sambava/Tamatave breeding project $$$. ;p In all seriousness though, this is pretty sad.

 

[chequepoint]

I was thinking about more of the rare breeds that are close to endangerment like Parsonii and some leaf chams. It makes me wonder if there is any conservation effort going on because of this. I've heard of relocation projects in different parts of madagascar because of local farming. But I wonder if they can do a project this big and on time?

Well those aren't locales, they're species. Giant difference. Answer probably remains the same.

I'm not sure what relocation accomplishes. When you trash an area for farming, you're destroying one area. When you trash one area for farming, and then move a bunch of animals into an area where they weren't before... you're destroying two areas.

 

[Sang]

YOu gotta take in alot more then that.

OK, say they do bull doze the 1.3 million hectares of land. OK now you got all this corn. they will use the cheapest most effective pesticides to keep there crops alive.

IN TURN.

INsects eat this. before they die, they move on.. chameleons all over the island eat them. BUT NOW because of how the process of a food chain and bio accumulation, the concentration levels that the chameleon would have normally taken in is 10x greater because its eaten 10 bugs that have all had the pesticide.. so its gettin this massive does of pesticides.. this will affect ther endocrine/nervous system.

it could completly wipe out a chameleon species/ or a TON of different species other then chameleons. you honestly think korea will regulate the type of pesticides used?

 

[chequepoint]

Thats what I'm saying. Worrying about an individual species of chameleon is pointless, the true devastation is going to happen at a much smaller level that will destroy or heavily modify the entire ecosystem. By agreeing to let this happen, they've agreed to kill everything. They'll move a few high profile endangered species to somewhere else, and the rest will die.

There is no solution. Korea couldn't buy it if it wasn't for sale. Madagascar is doing what they want with their land. Its not like the united states is a shining beacon of wildlife preservation, so we've got no room to judge really. Its just sad for the world.

 

[Eric Adrignola]

Its not like the united states is a shining beacon of wildlife preservation, so we've got no room to judge really. Its just sad for the world.

Actually, we are. Compared to most other countries, we go way out of our way for our wildlife resources. The truly sad fact is that for most of the Western world, there is almost NOTHING left to conserve.

People will do what they have to do to survive. You can never blame them for that. I mean, how delicious can gorilla meat be? They are just surviving. and when you make decisions like that every day, or when people are so poor that they're maybe going to die soon from starvation, it's hard to make them see any importance in a nasty lizard. Yes, it sucks. What makes this situation especially poor is a nation that is NOT struggling (Korea) is taking advantage of the poor nation. But, historically, it's not so bad. At least they're paying them something.

 

[Sang]

I thought it was mentioneed that korea was getting this land for nothing, or for practically nothing.

THe matter is with topics like bushmeat , there is always another choice. sure it may be the easiest, but i don't think these people understand they will be or are destroying there lively hood.

once these resources ar egone th people will be in aganozing pain from their mistakes.

 

[THECHAMMAN]

The truly sad fact is that for most of the Western world, there is almost NOTHING left to conserve.

when you say this, do you mean that we have killed everything, or that we've done such a good job at conserving wildlife.

 

[Sang]

what he is sayin is that we have destroyed so much of the the western side, we are just now trying to fix things. many species are close to extinction, if not already extinct.

 

[sandrachameleon]

... Its not like the united states is a shining beacon of wildlife preservation, so we've got no room to judge really. Its just sad for the world.

Very True.

Actually, we are. Compared to most other countries, we go way out of our way for our wildlife resources.

You've got to be kidding. You dont really believe that, do you? Even the bald eagle was endagered until recently in the USA, and this is an animal the USA has used as one of its primary symbols. The USA is not a good environmental stuard.

But neither are most countries. People as a whole seem to forget that we too are animals, dependant on the planet and on the rest of the biosphere, and that we are NOT the most important thing in the world. Somehow people seem to have the idea the planet was made for us to use, rather than respecting that we are but a part of one big system. What is (may be) happening in Madagascar is just another example.

 

[Sang]

Alright so i just read up.

here is the deal. they payed 12 dollars 12 DOLLARS A ACRE.. WTH ...something like 6 billion more dollards they plan on pumping into madagasar to build power plants, irrigation and other facilities.

NoW honestly if that was what it cost for an acre. i would have bought 10---or hell maybe a 1k, it'd be worth paying off knowing that that much land would stay in tact.

and yes, they do plan on bulldozing all 1.3 million hectares of land.

half of madagascar for 39 million..and the local farmers were happy to get it... HALF OF MADAGASCAR....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081123/wl_time/08599186114500

 

[Marc10edora]

The end of the world is near. Now I really gotta save up my money for that madagascar trip before it is too late.

 

[Eric Adrignola]

Very True.



You've got to be kidding. You dont really believe that, do you? Even the bald eagle was endagered until recently in the USA, and this is an animal the USA has used as one of its primary symbols. The USA is not a good environmental stuard.
.

Absolutly not kidding. Of course, I speak of the way things are going NOW, not what's happened in the past. (Just got to look at an 1800's buffalo hunt to see how bad things could be) Conservation in the US is working extremely well, for the most part. Most species that are or were endangered are doing relativly well. The biggest danger is habitat loss. Most ecosystems which were in decline are no longer in decline. In fact, due to proper resource management, many species are rebounding. The bald eagle and alligator are two good examples.

Sure, up until recently, people in the US were cutting down and shooting everything they came across. Not so much anymore.

I've worked in the environment and natural resource field, and I've done endangered species work. Where we stop habitat loss, it really helps prevent further extinctions.

The vast majority of people in this country appreciate our natural resources, and understand that they must be protected and managed. The same is not to be said of many other countries. We are very fortunate to be able to live and conserve our environment. Most people in African nations can't afford to look ahead - the fact that their game may go extinct, and will ruin their way of life - that means nothing if you and your family die today.

We have the luxury of being able to care about things other than ourselves.

And something else to consider - to most people, they, and their family, are in fact the most important thing in the world. People can be expected to act as such. If I had to, I'd kill the last panda to feed my family, if it came to it. I'm sure most people living in the jungles of central Africa would do the same. The truly sickening and sad thing is they are pretty much on their way to doing that (though with gorillas, of course).

 

[danielle609]

Absolutly not kidding. Of course, I speak of the way things are going NOW, not what's happened in the past. (Just got to look at an 1800's buffalo hunt to see how bad things could be) Conservation in the US is working extremely well, for the most part. Most species that are or were endangered are doing relativly well. The biggest danger is habitat loss. Most ecosystems which were in decline are no longer in decline. In fact, due to proper resource management, many species are rebounding. The bald eagle and alligator are two good examples.

Sure, up until recently, people in the US were cutting down and shooting everything they came across. Not so much anymore.

I've worked in the environment and natural resource field, and I've done endangered species work. Where we stop habitat loss, it really helps prevent further extinctions.

The vast majority of people in this country appreciate our natural resources, and understand that they must be protected and managed. The same is not to be said of many other countries. We are very fortunate to be able to live and conserve our environment. Most people in African nations can't afford to look ahead - the fact that their game may go extinct, and will ruin their way of life - that means nothing if you and your family die today.

We have the luxury of being able to care about things other than ourselves.

And something else to consider - to most people, they, and their family, are in fact the most important thing in the world. People can be expected to act as such. If I had to, I'd kill the last panda to feed my family, if it came to it. I'm sure most people living in the jungles of central Africa would do the same. The truly sickening and sad thing is they are pretty much on their way to doing that (though with gorillas, of course).

I agree with you, Eric, 100%.

I do believe that as a whole the US has made some imporvements to help the environment. I know recently here, in Michigan, Granholm invested quite a bit of money to help save turtles. Granted most people were pissed off by it, but I thought it was a good idea...but then I am a reptile fan, and most aren't.