The Rights and Wrongs of Brazil's Forest Monitoring Systems

• Published in: Conservation letters Vol. 10; no. 4; pp. 495 - 496
• Main Authors: Rajão, Raoni, Moutinho, Paulo, Soares, Laura
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Washington John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.07.2017; Wiley
• Subjects: Carbon accounting; Communication; Deforestation; Ecosystems; Forest degradation; Forests; Greenhouse gases; Land degradation; Logging; LULUCF, PRODES; Monitoring systems; Presidential elections; satellite‐based monitoring; Brazil; Cerrado Biome
• ISSN: 1755-263X; 1755-263X
• DOI: 10.1111/conl.12350

Richard's et al. ignore the existence of other monitoring systems developed by the Brazilian government over the last decade. [...]while PRODES still have a central role, the government has also at its disposal DETER to detect in near real‐time large plots of forest degradation, DETEX for selective logging, DEGRAD for forest degradation, DETER‐B for small plots of forest degradation and TerraClass for the monitoring of the increase and loss of secondary forests and other land uses (see Table for a full list; Diniz et al. ; Almeida et al. ). Richards et al. are also incorrect in suggesting that Brazil accounts only for the GHG from clear‐cut deforestation detected by PRODES. Nonetheless Brazil has substantial room for improvement in aspects that have not been mentioned by Richards et al. Since 2003, the country has reached an outstanding level transparency with the regular publication of deforestation data on the internet and was cited as the “envy of the world” in relation to the monitoring of the Amazon (Kintisch : 536; Rajão and Georgiadou ).