Bush swaps debt for nature

Costa Rica and Guatemala deals could point to common ground on climate crisis 6

The Bush administration, Costa Rica, Conservation International, and The Nature Conservancy will today announce a "debt-for-nature" swap that could herald something bigger in the future. The United States will write off $12.6 million in debt owed it by Costa Rica. In exchange, Costa Rica will protect some of the most valuable rainforest wildlife habitat in the world.

Costa Rican red-eyed tree frog. Photo: obooble via flickr
Photo: obooble

This follows the Bush administration's support for an even bigger swap with Guatemala. Of course, the sums involved and the area conserved are relatively puny compared to the global forest destruction caused by the Bush administration, especially through its support for tropically grown biofuels that require deforestation to be grown.

But the Bush administration has always had two sides to its tropical forest policy. Although it's happy to help Cargill, ADM, and other agrigiants despoil the last remaining tropical forests, it's also expressed quiet backing for carbon ranching -- allowing polluters to get global warming credit for protecting forests instead of cleaning up pollution at their own facilities. They like it because saving carbon through protecting forests is generally a lot cheaper than cleaning up industrial pollution, and we should like it because that means we can keep a lot more carbon out of the atmosphere a lot quicker -- and save the forests, their wildlife, and their indigenous people at the same time.

Of course, the Bush administration's quiet backing of this concept is completely worthless right now until the Bush administration backs strict, mandatory limits on greenhouse-gas pollution. Until they do, polluters will have no incentive to actually go ahead and protect those forests (or clean up their own pollution). But that support -- and today's forest conservation actions -- signals that forest conservation may provide some common ground between Democrats and the White House on stopping the climate crisis.

Glenn Hurowitz is the Washington Director of Avoided Deforestation Partners (www.adpartners.org), an organization dedicated to protecting tropical forests as part of the solution to climate change. His writing has appeared in The New York Times, Politico, The Los Angeles Times, The American Prospect, and many other publications. He is the author of the critically acclaimed book Fear and Courage in the Democratic Party and has worked in a variety of senior positions in the environmental movement and on political campaigns. All his writing at Grist represents his own opinions and no organization should be held responsible for it!

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. Biodiversivist's avatar

    Biodiversivist Posted 5:43 am
    17 Oct 2007

    Now this is a positive signRelieving poverty (sharing wealth) by sending billions of dollars to third world countries to protect forests really appeals to me.

    In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

    Permalink

  2. RowBearTow Posted 10:00 am
    17 Oct 2007

    interesting...This is the same President Bush that has fought so hard to vanquish our roadless areas? It all sounds great, and necessary, but lets not pat ourselves on the back just yet. How about protecting forests and rivers from industry and development here in our own backyard? Well at least I know that next time my favorite hiking spot is swallowed up by urban sprawl, a swath of Costa Rica will persevere.  

    Permalink

  3. Biodiversivist's avatar

    Biodiversivist Posted 10:27 am
    17 Oct 2007

    True thatHe would drill in the ANWR at the drop of a hat.

    In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

    Permalink

  4. jwilliamp Posted 12:22 pm
    17 Oct 2007

    bush bashThis is a great thing and something that we have been supporting for a long time.  Why can't a job well done be recognized as a job well done in preserving something beautiful in a very positive way with opportunities for duplication?  It seems that the core of the article is that President Bush is still the bad guy.  The ADM and Cargill examples have nothing to do with him; talk to your Minnesota legislature if you have a problem with what they are doing.  It is the states that are giving huge subsidies by way of Congress; not the president.  In fact, his ranch is about the most sustainable living area in the US so it is unfair to say that he is against environmental protection.  I say, if the administration receives positive accolades for doing positive things, they are far more likely to repeat them rather than being villified even if they do what is right.  Keep it up Mr. President and do MORE.

    Permalink

  5. GonzoDon Posted 2:35 pm
    17 Oct 2007

    My ten cents' worth$26 million more going for the conservation of Costa Rica's rainforests is a wonderful thing. Thanks for posting this good news; it's difficult to find inspiring environmental news these days so I'm pleased when some is broadcast widely.
    That said, the cynic in me wonders how quickly $26 million dollars-worth of conservation progress (equivalent to less than 10 cents per person in the U.S.) will be undercut by population growth and the corresponding ecological pressures on the surrounding environment in Central America (including population/hunting/harvesting pressures on these very rainforests themselves.)  
    Ten cents from each person in the U.S. for family planning in Latin America might have an even bigger positive impact over the long term.  Just a thought.  
    People who care about the earth obviously need to work on multiple fronts, including this kind of on-the-ground conservation work by wonderful groups like TNC.  But, in my mind, the real 'unsung environmental heroes' in today's world are those who have only one child of their own, or none.

    Permalink

  6. LandMan Posted 10:09 pm
    17 Oct 2007

    kind of coolCosta Rica was planning on defaulting on their debt anyway. This sounds like a way that provided both countries a way to save face, at least it was to the benefit of nature.

    Land_Man

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement