Amazon bill not a scam

From: Erorganic@aol.com
Date: Tue Jun 27 2000 - 07:22:02 EDT

Hello Ron Kathy and all,

Appreciate this kind of informative response regarding issues.

Thank you,

Eric Kindberg

Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:03:56 -0500
From: Ronald Nigh <danamex@mail.internet.com.mx>
Subject: Amazon bill not a scam

The message circulating concerning the Amazon bill before the Brazilian
congress is not a scam, as the following information clarifies. Funny how
its always they same names on this list who are so quick to try and
discredit (without bothering to look into it) anyone concerned about the
environment, the healthiness of their food or other such issues. The
message is always the same; nothing is wrong, people blowing the whistle
are worry warts or crazies. Business and usual, just go to sleep.
Stay awake folks, there's actually a lot going on.

This is cross posted from Environment Latin America Net:

>From: "J.Timmons Roberts" <timmons@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu>
Subject: Brazilian forests bills, PROYECTO OFICIAL PARA DEFORESTAR

As Ron and others have noted, we really needed more background info on the
bill to "cut half the Amazon."

So I've been checking with David Fletcher, who writes "Brazil Digest", an
excellent online update on Brazilian politics.

Here are some details he's provided to my questions:

1. What was it called? "The bill was(is) called the Novo Código
Florestal."

2. How bad was it? "VERY BAD; would allow up to 80% of land to be
cleared."

3. What's its current status? "The proposal is in limbo, until the
Congress reconvenes in november, after the elections. Cardoso continues
reissuing the forest code (in the original form,
 before the [conservative] bloco ruralista ripped it apart in the Chamber
committee). So,
 for the time being, no sweat."

4. Which side was President Cardoso on? "On the good guys' side, of
course; however there were runors of "horse trading" vis--vis the important
vote on the minimum wage?"

5. Do you think such a campaign for letters or sign-on petitions is
likely to help? "Better to wait until it comes back on the agenda in late
Oct./November?"

            Timmons

I encourage people interested in Brazilian politics to contact David at:
David Fleischer <fleischer@uol.com.br>

Ronald Nigh
Dana, A.C.
Mexico, D.F. & San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas
Tel. y FAX 525-666-73-66 (DF)
      529-678-72-15 (Chiapas)
danamex@mail.internet.com.mx

The Brazilian Rainforest proposal is discussed here:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/petition/brazil.htm

It appears to have been a sincere, but misguided, effort launched by
an individual in Brazil.

The bottom line is
1. Email petitions are almost always useless (signatures are easily
forged) and this petition does not say to whom it will be given or
what the recipient is supposed to do upon receipt.
2. The proposed law was shelved on May 18, although it could be revived.

The site gives a number of links to more information on the rainforest
proposal 

-- 
****************************************
Kathy Brunetti, Senior Land and Water Analyst
California Department of Pesticide Regulation
830 K Street,  Sacramento, California, USA 95814
voice (916) 324-4100,  FAX (916) 324-4088
<brunetti@empm.cdpr.ca.gov>
Our Web site: http://www.cdpr.ca.gov

To Unsubscribe:  Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".  If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 03 2000 - 12:00:41 EDT