r foreign invaders and, by moving the people, this thread was not eliminated but its constant threat was greatly downgraded. In order to get more people in these regions, the authorities gave ownership of the land to newcomers that simply had to clear the trees on it. The government also built roads and schools to attract even more people for their “the land without people to the people without land “-campaign (2). Now there is a growing problem with the inhabitants, nobody really seems to know who owns the land, and disputes are often settled by violence. Often, owners don’t register their land on purpose just to circumvent the possibility of restriction by the authorities. This uncertainty and violence about ownership rights lead in turn to the increase of cattle ranching in the region, since cattle herds can be moved on if someone else claims and takes the land. The government also had firms pouring into this region and setting up giant cattle ranches by offering tax breaks to the companies. The same tenure of insecurity also means that the chances for plantation forestry, however sensible in theory, do not stand a chance in practice. Besides, it would take trees at least 20 years to grow and return a profit, while there is always a chance of accidental fires that might destroy the whole investment.On an other political note, the tough laws of the early 1990s (prohibiting landowners from logging more than 50% of their land) were also softened (down to 20%), and deforestation reached an all-time high in the Brazilian Amazon in 1995 (29,000square kilometers - an area of about the size of Belgium). The government estimates that 80% of the timber in the region is harvested illegally, but IBAMA, Brazil’s powerless environment agency which lacks financial support, managed 1997 to collect only 6% of the fines it levied. As for Brazil’s industry, commercial logging is one big cause of deforestation and...
