is deforestation necessary for development
Debate Round Forfeited
parimienosh has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
|Voting Style:||Open||Point System:||7 Point|
|Updated:||2 months ago||Status:||Debating Period|
|Viewed:||483 times||Debate No:||96558|
Debate Rounds (3)
And as a follow-up, I will be presenting several arguments of my own as to which deforestation is somewhat necessary for development.
1. It gives lots of people, who would otherwise be jobless, employment, which in turn increases their standard of life etc.
2. It supplies the economy with raw materials, such as pulp for paper, wood for chairs, desks, etc.
3. It gives room for grazing land and land for crops, which can give someone a job, which increases their standard of life (particularly in 3rd world countries)
4. Some forests are full of plants and trees which are not native to the area, which destroy animal habitats and other plant life, such as Ageratina Adenophora.
5. In relation to points 1,2 and 3, deforestation gives many communities the opportunity to make positive changes in their lives, like building a community.
6. Deforestation often occurs to make communications or transportation easier, which improves an areas accessibility, which in turn helps their economy etc.
7. It gives room for things such as offices, hospitals, schools or whatever to be built, which help a community a lot more than a bit of forest.
8. On a very small scale, such as practiced by the native people of the amazon, deforestation leaves the ground more fertile, so crops can be grown. (However this is only done on completely different patches, with years between when they deforest the same patch again.)
9. Often, it helps the transport of a valuable material, such as oil, which is clearly much more beneficial than a few thousand trees.
Yes it can supply raw materials for paper, but for desks and chairs, they are being made out of plastic and metal now so that part of the argument is void.
Providing room for crops? What about the vast farm land that is in the Western section of the United States? That is plenty of land for crops and farming purposes.
Deforestation more times than not is removing habitats for animals, causing their species to slowly die out. The Tasmanian Tiger, Sea Mink, Caribbean Monk Seal and others have been wiped out due to deforestation. 1
A community would use deforestation to build the community? It would help expand but it would dwindle their natural resources drastically if they would just cut down trees to build houses and soon be left with nothing.
Sure it can give room for things to be built, but theres already a lot of unused space but people still choose to cut down trees to make room when theres already room provided.
A lot of natives have tended to protect the trees and amazon, saving the wild life.
Transportation, thats what highways and airplanes are for, clearing out trees for more roads wouldn't be beneficial with very safe and fast means of transportation are provided.
Socially, there is disregard or ignorance of intrinsic value, lack of ascribed value, lax forest management and deficient environmental law that allow deforestation to occur on a large scale, In many countries, deforestation is causing extinction, changes in climate, desertification and displacement of indigenous people.
If deforestation occurs, the process of reforestation is something that would take time to occur.
"Regions deforested typically incur significant adverse soil erosion and degrade into wasteland" -My oppenent
That is a very against statement, and you are FOR deforestation so this is confusing to me. It seems that you're changing your stance.
Deforestation, as stated before, destroys animal habitats and like you said yourself, degrades into wasteland.
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click thelink at the top of the page.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.