Forest DebateAs a member of the Ese’Eja Tribe, the Tombopata Forest is sacred to my tribe and all indigenous populations. I believe we can all come to an agreement on the best way to utilize the Tombopata Forest while also protecting it. The primary concerns of my tribe are losing our lands and our rights to hunt and fish the lands, preserving the biodiversity of the forest, and finding some type of employment to make a little extra income. I believe by transforming the Tombopata Forest into a national park, the Peruvian government can profit from ecotourism while allowing my tribe to live on these lands and protect the environment.My tribe and I suggest that the Peruvian government take control of the Tombopata Forest and transform it into a protected national park. Doing this creates numerous benefits for the Peruvian government. It allows them to protect the forest from poachers and illegal timber harvesters while generating revenue from all the tourists. “The net present value of ecotourism controlled land is given by the producer surplus (profits plus fixed costs of ecotourism lodges): US$ 1,158 ha -1, which is higher than all currently practiced alternatives, including unsustainable logging, ranching, and agriculture.” (Kirkby etal. 2010). It will also stimulate economic development for the country. Now let me give you the reasons why my tribe should be allowed to stay on the land.My tribe knows these forests very well. We will be able to assist the government in identifying scenic landmarks and establishing trails. Also, by having indigenous people living on indigenous lands creates a kind of culture that tourists would pay good amounts of money to witness. By allowing my tribe to live on these lands, the Peruvian government gains knowledgeable employees and my tribesmen have an opportunity to receive some income. The final and most important reason for transforming the forest into a national park is to protect the environment. The impact of human activities on natural habitat is the most important factor that contributes to global declines in biodiversity (Sax and Gaines 2003). Allowing mining and farming in the Tombopata Rainforest would be detrimental to the biodiversity of the forest. By creating a protected national forest, the government will be able to identify areas where animals may be endangered and find ways to protect these animals. It will also allow the government to protect these forests from illegal lumber harvesters and poachers. By turning Tombopata Forest into a protected reserve, the Peruvian government stimulates economic development, generates profits from ecotourism, and also protects the forest from poachers, farmers, and miners. By allowing my tribe to live on these lands, the government gains experienced employees to run the national park while my tribe receives the opportunity to receive additional income. This proposal is the most economically and environmentally beneficial for my tribe and the country of Peru.BibliographyForest DebateKirkby, Christopher A., Renzo Giudice-Granados, Brett Day, Kerry Turner, Luz Marina Velarde-Andrade,Agusto Dueñas-Dueñas, Juan Carlos Lara-Rivas, and Douglas W. Yu. "The Market Triumph of Ecotourism: An Economic Investigation of the Private and Social Benefits of Competing Land Uses in the Peruvian Amazon." Ed. Brock Fenton. PLoS ONE 5.9 (2010): E13015.Sax, D.F. and S. D. Gaines. 2003. “Species diversity; From global decreases to local increases. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18:
View Full Document
Unlocking...