• deus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    As nice as it sounds, I don’t think it’s feasible. The Amazon is absolutely massive and not very populated. The logistics of keeping armed guards all around the protected areas sounds like a nightmare. The only way I can see deforestation actually stopping is if cattle, soy and wood stop being lucrative businesses somehow.

    • CarbonIceDragon
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, couldn’t policies be attempted to at least make the business less lucrative in protected areas specifically? For example, if a protected area burns down, having a policy of occasionally inspecting that bit of burned land and confiscating any cattle found grazing there, to make illegally cleared land more risky to use?

      • deus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s probably closer to what they actually try to do, which is much more reasonable but still requires a lot of resources. The problem is, there’s a lot of money behind these criminals and not a lot of political good will towards preservation (right-wingers here basically think the forest stands in the way of our progress, so less environmental protections = more jobs and development, somehow) so getting funds to protect our forests is usually an uphill battle.