Originally Posted by https://abitoftheworld.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/debate-on-deforestation
Problem 1: I think there should be a halt on all deforestation, as it harms the air, and the energy required to fell vast areas of trees is wasteful.
Against 1: But why is there that deforestation? There are reasons for it, and it’s not all for waste. Sometimes, the land is needed, to nurture the growing population in some countries. Perhaps a few people need to put the land to use, perhaps even to build new homes. Deforested land is usually used for building farms, ranches, or converting forestland to urban use. Besides, this practice could be merely regeneration harvest.
Problem 2: Copious amounts of land are put to waste. Do we really need so much land? Possibly we do, but what of the trees stripped of their life force? They can no longer cleanse the air in that area after they have been felled. What use is put into them? In areas where copious amounts of deforestation happens, the tree density is at a much larger scale.
Against 2: Again, the land cleared is used for farming, quite necessary to feed the population. The land is used for pastures, plantations or even settlements. The trees cut down are not put to waste, mostly, they are used for timber in construction. One of the reasons deforestation occurs, is because charcoal is essential to support the country’s financial needs. Fuel is important, outlining the necessity to fell trees.Problem 3: In some parts of the world, deforestation is done using fire. Is there any use to the land then? The smoke pollutes the air, and burnt trees definitely cannot be used for timber. Is the land still bountiful then? Perhaps burning is a quick and efficient way to get rid of trees fast, but a single spark can incinerate a whole rainforest. The burning of trees contributes heavily to the amount of carbon dioxide released into the air, thus speeding up the process of global warming.
Against 3: Sometimes, deforestation cannot be helped. Can overpopulation truly be controlled? That is usually the cause for deforestation, as the land cleared is needed to provide for the people. Some other causes for deforestation include: corruption of government institutions, distribution of wealth and power, industrial needs, and urbanization. Most people, have no alternative but to deforest.
Problem 4: Deforestation is a major cause for loss of habitat, and extinction. Many of the animals needed to balance the ecosystem are killed, or starved my deforestation. This provokes them to venture near human settlements. When the ecosystem is ruptured, it will eventually lead back to us. Animals, in more ways than you can imagine, support the existence of the world. If they were wiped out, some plant life that need those animals to reproduce, will wither and die. Without the fertilizer we collect from the feces of certain animals, the land can no longer support us. The killings of secondary predators even, is an unspeakable risk to the future. How will the fragility of the ecosystem balance out, without secondary predators such as jaguars and eagles, to keep the other animal populations in check? The population of pests and poisonous animals will greatly increase this way. (Ever heard the story about the mongooses and the snakes in Hawaii? The mongooses were and introduced species to the islands, meant to keep away the snakes, but instead, they became pests themselves, wiping out many species of native birds. In some places there, the songs of birds cannot be heard anymore. But introduced species are a different story.)
Against 4: Are humans not more important than animals? The immediate need to survive is far greater than a chain of events that may or may not happen in the future. Are the many animals really that important? What of the people that will become extinct without the land cleared from deforestation? How do the lives of animals affect the lives of humans? There are other ways to grow things than using natural fertilizer, though they may not be organic. Many of these predators also attack humans, and once they become used to living alongside urban places, they must be killed. Is this not a way to exterminate them? In fact, prey for the secondary predators is becoming scarce. Do we really have to worry about herbivores overpopulating and becoming pests?
