Give credit where due

Give credit where due
Kaieteur News, 18 December 2007
When scientists first began to talk about global warming, there were
the skeptics who were convinced that the talk about global warming was
nothing but hot air. How could a few people notice things that no other
noticed? And besides, if there was indeed global warning, the process
was so slow that all of us on this planet would be dead before the
situation became critical.

Then more and more people began to take note. They started to record
other evidence, including the change in the lifestyle of some creatures
of the sea and in the end it became clear that there was a distinct
warming of the globe and that it was occurring at a pace far faster
than earlier estimates suggested.

Things have reached the stage where there are international forums
discussing the issue. All the world leaders have attributed this change
in the climate and as a consequence the severity of hurricanes and
other storms, to the deforestation of the planet.

For some time, man had come to realize that once the earth had a
vibrant shade of green then it was healthy. The foliage merely consumed
all the carbon dioxide and other emissions, but most of all the gas
responsible for global warming, carbon dioxide.

What is amazing is that at one time scientists predicted that the world
would have killed itself by merely producing too much people. Back then
and not so long ago they argued that people would have to be housed and
in housing them the planet would have had to sacrifice land for food.

Immediately the fastest growing nations took steps to curtail the
trend. China , for example, decided to limit every family to one child.
India opted for a programme of mass sterilization. And both these
countries have done much to ensure that the population remains
ridiculously low.

They have used technology to determine the gender of their
children—aborting girls in preference of boys. Today, some societies in
these countries are complaining that there is a drastic shortage of
women. The result of this is that there would be fewer pregnancies as
the years go by. There may also be more murders as men fight for what
is going to be much needed scarce resource.

But that apart, the threat to the world is really coming from what many
see as being the pursuit of development. It is coming from the major
industries that rely heavily on fossil fuels which lead to deadly
emissions. Not only do these industries pollute the atmosphere, they
also contribute to the numerous ailments that the people who live in
the vicinity suffer.

However, the world knows that there is a cure for the world's ills and
that cure rests in the conservation of whatever forest there is. In
many countries it is illegal to fell trees. New Jersey has a law that
stipulates that before you cut a tree you have to seek permission and
permission is only granted if the tree poses a threat to life and
property.

Guyana has no such problem. Trees abound to the extent that a survey
conducted in 2001 ranked Guyana fifth in the world in clean air. It is
such that people who come here actually pronounce that one can smell
the difference. They always comment on how fresh the air is here.

What is unfortunate is that we do not know how fresh our air is because
we are accustomed to it and we take it for granted.

The developed world recognizes how important Guyana 's forest is but
they seem disinclined to compensate us for maintaining the forest—the
very forest that represents an integral part to saving the world.

Brazil had its forest and in pursuit of development it conducted a
massive land clearing exercise to the point that the Indians who lived
there had to be relocated. The relocation was not easy. People died and
today the global environmentalists talk of Chico Mendez, the man who
lost his life because he tried to protect the forest. Gunmen shot him
down.

Observers, commenting on the disappearance of the Brazilian forest,
noted the effect on the planet and they begged that the land-clearing
programme be stopped. Guyana never reached that stage. Instead, we
allotted our rainforest to a programme of conservation.

We are a poor country and we could use that forest to enhance our
social and financial status but we have chosen to do otherwise.
However, we want to be compensated for our efforts and we should.

We recently participated in a conference in Bali , Indonesia and we
made our case. We made the world recognize our importance. It is now
for the world to acknowledge that recognition.

But mere recognition is not enough. There must be some financial
arrangement that would be equivalent to what we would have earned from
the exploitation of the forest although there are those who say that
the compensation should be far greater.

Perhaps it should be because their very life depends in some part to
what we do.