News
Deforestation in Myanmar Continues Despite Government Efforts
Mahout sits atop an elephant which carries a log at Kabyin Lwin, northern Sagaing division, Myanmar.(AP Photo/ Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
.
PINLEBU – The hills of northern Myanmar’s Sagaing region were so legendarily thick with forests that in the days of kings, condemned criminals were ordered into the woods as a death sentence. Today illegal logging has left vast swaths of bare patches, with only a handful of old-growth stands.
Despite a temporary ban on all logging by the Southeast Asian country’s new government, the Associated Press found in a trip to the remote region that loggers are still cutting down some of the remaining old trees. The AP also saw loggers illegally chopping up the wood from already felled trees for transportation and sale. Piles of such wood have been confiscated by the government, but villagers said officials can be bribed to let it through.
A worker marks logs before transporting at a yard in Wuntho, northern Sagaing division, Myanmar. (AP Photo/ Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
Massive amounts of teak, rosewood and other hardwoods have been illegally cut and exported from Myanmar since 2011. Much of that wood was stripped from the Sagaing region, floated on the Irrawaddy River and transported to neighboring China and India.
Myanmar has lost more than a quarter of its forests since 1990, according to the U.N. The losses have been greatest in the north, in Sagaing and neighboring Shan and Kachin states. The pace of deforestation had increased under the last government, though it banned timber exports in 2014.
“Logging companies usually chop down trees more than they actually are permitted,” said Min Min, a farmer and environmental activist who previously worked transporting illegally cut logs. “According to my experience, I’ve never seen the government take action against the companies chopping down any size of trees they wanted.”
Four activists in Sagaing told The Associated Press that logging appeared to be continuing on a small scale despite the temporary ban, based on truckloads of lumber they have seen being transported. This is the rainy season in Myanmar, and an off period for the illegal timber trade in any case.
Environmental activists who aim to combat illegal logging, walk past tree stumps and dead trees in what use to be a forest in Chaung Gwet, in northern Sagaing division, Myanmar. (AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
Those arrested have included members of Myanmar’s military, which no longer rules the country but remains powerful. Burmese media reported last week that nearly three tons of rosewood were seized from a military vehicle in Sagaing.
This summer, AP reporters rode jeeps and motorbikes for 20 hours over rough, muddy roads to reach villages in northern Sagaing, meeting former illegal loggers, local villagers and elephant keepers. Despite its remoteness, vast swaths of hillsides and valleys were bald patches.
Young trees, perhaps 10 years old, stand near the stumps of ancestors that were clearly many times larger. A few villages have managed to cling to old-growth stands in small community forests, but that is all.
“We used to be so afraid of coming to the forest alone because it was too forested,” said Aung Moe Kyaw, a local environmental activist. “Now, as you see, it is bald and no more big trees. The big trees are all gone now.”
Logging in Sagaing has traditionally been done with the help of elephants, and while that work has continued, heavy equipment is used much more commonly.
Environmental activist who aims to combat illegal logging, stands next to a tree stump at a recently raided illegal logging site in what use to be a forest in Chaung Gwet, in northern Sagaing division, Myanmar. (AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
“If the logging was only done by the government and pulled logs by elephant, deforestation wouldn’t be that bad,” said Than Lwin, an elephant trainer, showing off two of the six elephants that work hauling felled tree trunks that weigh up to five tons. “We see that logging companies are chopping down trees as much as they want.”
Mountains of recently cut illegal timber worth millions of dollars lie in villages across the region; most of the timber the AP team saw was rosewood, coveted in China and elsewhere for its natural red color. Activists say the wood has been seized by the government mostly since late 2015, but that loggers commonly have been able to get it back by bribing officials.
The AP team traveling witnessed loggers cutting wood outside Katha, a Sagaing town that is a transit hub for the trade. An activist traveling with the journalists said the logging was illegal and contacted forest department officials, who detained the loggers and seized their equipment.
The wood-cutting operation had been set up near a mountain far from the nearest village. Because exporting lumber rather than raw timber is not illegal, clandestine wood-cutting is a way to circumvent the law.
Villagers learned of the operation and informed the activist. The leader of the logging crew looked nervous when the activists and journalists arrived. When asked where he got the timber, he said his brother recently gave him the leftover logs, and that they were only for home use.
Workers cut illegally logged timber in Katha, northern Sagaing division, Myanmar. (AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
Local environmental activists working under the EU Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade, which supports efforts to combat illegal logging in developing countries, say much illegally cut timber is hauled to Katha, transported on the Irrawaddy and sent on various paths through Kachin state and the Mandalay region before it reaches China’s western Yunan province. They say bribes allow illegal loads to pass official gates.
Min Min said a former boss would bribe police and forest department officials ahead of time, so that when Min Min arrived at the gate, the officials would let him go without checking his truck.
“The officials protect us for giving bribes, and sometimes they even come with us on the truck to show us the way to get to our final destination,” he said.
Myo Min, national director of the forestry department, said Thursday the government is trying to stop corruption.
“There are many individual bribery cases but not all staff from the forest department is involved,” he said. “… We have taken action against bribe-taking staff in the past and are still working on it now.”
Myanmar police referred questions about corruption to the forestry department.
Myo Min said the department has taken action against staff in the Katha district in the past. But the district’s director, Soe Tint, denied that officials have cooperated in illegal logging.
“Because of the Chinese demand for hardwood, there could be illegal logging cooperation among businessmen,” he said.
Workers saw illegally logged timber in Katha, northern Sagaing division, Myanmar. (AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
How big is Myanmar’s smuggling? From 2011 to 2014, Myanmar reported $2.83 billion in exports of hardwood in the rough, while trading partners reported imports of $5.57 billion. Illegal logging is likely to account for some of that $2.74 billion discrepancy. Other timber-cutting is probably absent from any country’s record-keeping.
India and China are by far the biggest consumers. From 2011 to 2015, the two countries collectively imported about six times more Myanmar teak and rosewood than the rest of the world combined.
“Most of illegal timber is transported to China through Kachin state,” said Khon Ja of the activist group Kachin Peace Network. “We have witnessed how they (illegal loggers) bribe military officers and civil officers throughout the way when they carried out the illegal timber.
“It is an unnecessarily great loss. The valuable natural resources are sold for a penny,” she added.
From 2010 to 2015, Myanmar had the third-largest forest loss in the world, equivalent to an annual loss of 546,000 hectares (2,100 square miles), according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.
Government forest commissioner Soe Tint said his workers are often threatened or even harmed by the illegal loggers and they frequently ask for backup from police. (AP Photo/ Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
In 2011, Myanmar’s longtime military rulers gave way to a military-backed but quasi-civilian government led by President Thein Sein that ruled until earlier this year. That government is credited with initiating a series of political reforms and helping the country emerge from decades of international isolation, but one side effect of that new openness was that Myanmar’s vast natural resources became easier to exploit.
“The worst period was under President Thein Sein’s administration,” said Than Hlaing, a Sagaing regional lawmaker. “The government itself was cooperating with the businessmen. The illegal logging was widespread in our region.”
Since 2014, the government has banned the export of raw timber logs to protect old-growth forests. In May, the new elected government led by Aung San Suu Kyi announced a nationwide logging ban for this fiscal year, which ends March 31.
The forest department compound in Katha is now home to a fleet of trucks, buses and vans that the government has seized from illegal loggers since late last year.
Trees are loaded to train carriages for transportation in the background of a street market at Wuntho, northern Sagaing division, Myanmar. (AP Photo/ Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
Myo Min, the forestry director, said last month that the government has seized more than 16,000 tons of illegally cut logs since April, when the current government took office and that more than 1,000 criminal cases have been filed in that time. He said that continues work that began toward the end of previous government, which seized 30,000 tons of logs and filed more than 2,200 criminal cases in its last fiscal year.
At least some illegal loggers are being prosecuted, including one whom AP reporters met in Wuntho village shortly after his release from prison, where he had spent four months.
Corruption and weak law enforcement remain obstacles.
“The illegal loggers are so smart and professional, as they have been doing it for a long time,” said Min Naung, a Lower House lawmaker and a member of the Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation Committee. “They know how to transport illegal logs when and where, and they definitely know the weaknesses of the government. They know how to avoid being arrested.”
He said some officials are still taking bribes, “even if it’s less,” and that the forest department lacks muscle. “They don’t have enough people to seize logging sites and people because it can be dangerous for them, and they have no weapons but pens,” he said.
Schoolchildren walk past a timber yard in Wuntho, northern Sagaing division, Myanmar. (AP Photo/ Gemunu Amarasinghe)
.
A forest department worker in Sagaing was recently killed by illegal loggers. “We could do nothing about it and we were really sad what happened to him. We couldn’t protect him,” Min Naung said.
Soe Tint, the forest official, said that although the killing was the first of its kind in the district, his workers are often threatened or even harmed, and they frequently ask for backup from police.
Though local villagers have sometimes taken part in illegal logging, they say they’ve received virtually none of the proceeds. And they say the biggest operators rely on loggers from other regions.
Even by the standards of Myanmar, one of Asia’s poorest countries, northern Sagaing is impoverished and remote. The roads are too poor for most people to travel frequently. Villagers are heavily dependent on farming, but they lack irrigation, and harvest food from the forest outside of the growing season. Villages typically have only a primary school, so further education is out of the question for most children.
“It has been always difficult for us to stop illegal loggers,” said Aung Moe Kyaw, the activist. “They have a good deal with the authorities from different levels and they benefit from it, but villagers who live by the forests are so poor.”
At the same time, he said, simply having members of Parliament pay attention to the issue is an improvement.
“If the new government could protect these forests for a few years,” he said, “it would actually give the chance for these forests to live.”
A recent report indicates that since Trudeau’s announcement of his gun buyback program four years ago, almost none of the banned firearms have been surrendered.
The federal government plans to purchase 2,063 firearm models from retailers following the enactment of Bill C-21, which amends various Acts and introduces certain consequential changes related to firearms. It was granted royal assent on December 15 of last year.
This ban immediately criminalized the actions of federally-licensed firearms owners regarding the purchase, sale, transportation, importation, exportation, or use of hundreds of thousands of rifles and shotguns that were previously legal.
The gun ban focused on what it termed ‘assault-style weapons,’ which are, in reality, traditional semi-automatic rifles and shotguns that have enjoyed popularity among hunters and sport shooters for over a century.
In May 2020, the federal government enacted an Order-in-Council that prohibited 1,500 types of “assault-style” firearms and outlined specific components of the newly banned firearms. Property owners must adhere to the law by October 2023.
Trudeau’s Buyback Hasn’t Happened
“In the announcement regarding the ban, the prime minister stated that the government would seize the prohibited firearms, assuring that their lawful owners would be ‘grandfathered’ or compensated fairly.” “That hasn’t happened,” criminologist Gary Mauser told Rebel News.
Mauser projected expenses ranging from $2.6 billion to $6.7 billion. The figure reflects the compensation costs amounting to $756 million, as outlined by the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO).
“The projected expenses for gathering the illegal firearms are estimated to range from $1.6 billion to $7 billion.” “This range estimate increases to between $2.647 billion and $7 billion when compensation costs to owners are factored in,” Mauser stated.
Figures requested by Conservative MP Shannon Stubbs concerning firearms prohibited due to the May 1, 2020 Order In Council reveal that $72 million has been allocated to the firearm “buyback” program, yet not a single firearm has been confiscated to date.
In a recent revelation, Public Safety Canada disclosed that the federal government allocated a staggering $41,094,556, as prompted by an order paper question from Conservative Senator Don Plett last September, yet yielded no tangible outcomes.
An internal memo from late 2019 revealed that the Liberals projected their politically motivated harassment would incur a cost of $1.8 billion.
Enforcement efforts Questioned
By December 2023, estimates from TheGunBlog.ca indicate that the Liberals and RCMP had incurred or were responsible for approximately $30 million in personnel expenses related to the enforcement efforts. The union representing the police service previously stated that the effort to confiscate firearms is a “misdirected effort” aimed at ensuring public safety.
“This action diverts crucial personnel, resources, and funding from tackling the more pressing and escalating issue of criminal use of illegal firearms,” stated the National Police Federation (NPF).
The Canadian Sporting Arms & Ammunition Association (CSAAA), representing firearms retailers, has stated it will have “zero involvement” in the confiscation of these firearms. Even Canada Post held back from providing assistance due to safety concerns.
The consultant previously assessed that retailers are sitting on almost $1 billion worth of inventory that cannot be sold or returned to suppliers because of the Order-In-Council.
“Despite the ongoing confusion surrounding the ban, after four years, we ought to be able to address one crucial question.” Has the prohibition enhanced safety for Canadians? Mauser asks.
Illegally Obtained Firearms are the Problem
Statistics Canada reports a 10% increase in firearm-related violent crime between 2020 and 2022, rising from 12,614 incidents to 13,937 incidents. In that timeframe, the incidence of firearm-related violent crime increased from 33.7 incidents per 100,000 population in 2021 to 36.7 incidents the subsequent year.
“This marks the highest rate documented since the collection of comparable data began in 2009,” the criminologist explains.
Supplementary DataData indicates that firearm homicides have risen since 2020. “The issue lies not with lawfully-held firearms,” Mauser stated.
Firearms that have been banned under the Order-in-Council continue to be securely stored in the safes of their lawful owners. The individuals underwent a thorough vetting process by the RCMP and are subject to nightly monitoring to ensure there are no infractions that could pose a risk to public safety.
“The firearms involved in homicides were seldom legally owned weapons wielded by their rightful owners,” Mauser continues. The number of offenses linked to organized crime has surged from 4,810 in 2016 to a staggering 13,056 in 2020.
“If those in power … aim to diminish crime and enhance public safety, they ought to implement strategies that effectively focus on offenders and utilize our limited tax resources judiciously to reach these objectives,” he stated.
Related News:
Millennials in Canada Have Turned their Backs on Justin Trudeau
Millennials in Canada Have Turned their Backs on Justin Trudeau
Google is so closely associated with its key product that its name is a verb that signifies “search.” However, Google’s dominance in that sector is dwindling.
According to eMarketer, Google will lose control of the US search industry for the first time in decades next year.
Google will remain the dominant search player, accounting for 48% of American search advertising revenue. And, remarkably, Google is still increasing its sales in the field, despite being the dominating player in search since the early days of the George W. Bush administration. However, Amazon is growing at a quicker rate.
Google’s Search Dominance Is Unwinding
Amazon will hold over a quarter of US search ad dollars next year, rising to 27% by 2026, while Google will fall even more, according to eMarketer.
The Wall Street Journal was first to report on the forecast.
Lest you think you’ll have to switch to Bing or Yahoo, this isn’t the end of Google or anything really near.
Google is the fourth-most valued public firm in the world. Its market worth is $2.1 trillion, trailing just Apple, Microsoft, and the AI chip darling Nvidia. It also maintains its dominance in other industries, such as display advertisements, where it dominates alongside Facebook’s parent firm Meta, and video ads on YouTube.
To put those “other” firms in context, each is worth more than Delta Air Lines’ total market value. So, yeah, Google is not going anywhere.
Nonetheless, Google faces numerous dangers to its operations, particularly from antitrust regulators.
On Monday, a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that Google must open up its Google Play Store to competitors, dealing a significant blow to the firm in its long-running battle with Fortnite creator Epic Games. Google announced that it would appeal the verdict.
In August, a federal judge ruled that Google has an illegal monopoly on search. That verdict could lead to the dissolution of the company’s search operation. Another antitrust lawsuit filed last month accuses Google of abusing its dominance in the online advertising business.
Meanwhile, European regulators have compelled Google to follow tough new standards, which have resulted in multiple $1 billion-plus fines.
Pixa Bay
Google’s Search Dominance Is Unwinding
On top of that, the marketplace is becoming more difficult on its own.
TikTok, the fastest-growing social network, is expanding into the search market. And Amazon has accomplished something few other digital titans have done to date: it has established a habit.
When you want to buy anything, you usually go to Amazon, not Google. Amazon then buys adverts to push companies’ products to the top of your search results, increasing sales and earning Amazon a greater portion of the revenue. According to eMarketer, it is expected to generate $27.8 billion in search revenue in the United States next year, trailing only Google’s $62.9 billion total.
And then there’s AI, the technology that (supposedly) will change everything.
Why search in stilted language for “kendall jenner why bad bunny breakup” or “police moving violation driver rights no stop sign” when you can just ask OpenAI’s ChatGPT, “What’s going on with Kendall Jenner and Bad Bunny?” in “I need help fighting a moving violation involving a stop sign that wasn’t visible.” Google is working on exactly this technology with its Gemini product, but its success is far from guaranteed, especially with Apple collaborating with OpenAI and other businesses rapidly joining the market.
A Google spokeswoman referred to a blog post from last week in which the company unveiled ads in its AI overviews (the AI-generated text that appears at the top of search results). It’s Google’s way of expressing its ability to profit on a changing marketplace while retaining its business, even as its consumers steadily transition to ask-and-answer AI and away from search.
Google has long used a single catchphrase to defend itself against opponents who claim it is a monopoly abusing its power: competition is only a click away. Until recently, that seemed comically obtuse. Really? We are going to switch to Bing? Or Duck Duck Go? Give me a break.
But today, it feels more like reality.
Google is in no danger of disappearing. However, every highly dominating company faces some type of reckoning over time. GE, a Dow mainstay for more than a century, was broken up last year and is now a shell of its previous dominance. Sears declared bankruptcy in 2022 and is virtually out of business. US Steel, long the foundation of American manufacturing, is attempting to sell itself to a Japanese corporation.
SOURCE | CNN
(VOR News) – A ruling that prohibits emergency abortions that contravene the Supreme Court law in the state of Texas, which has one of the most stringent abortion restrictions in the country, has been upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. The United States Supreme Court upheld this decision.
The justices did not provide any specifics regarding the underlying reasons for their decision to uphold an order from a lower court that declared hospitals cannot be legally obligated to administer abortions if doing so would violate the law in the state of Texas.
Institutions are not required to perform abortions, as stipulated in the decree. The common populace did not investigate any opposing viewpoints. The decision was made just weeks before a presidential election that brought abortion to the forefront of the political agenda.
This decision follows the 2022 Supreme Court ruling that ended abortion nationwide.
In response to a request from the administration of Vice President Joe Biden to overturn the lower court’s decision, the justices expressed their disapproval.
The government contends that hospitals are obligated to perform abortions in compliance with federal legislation when the health or life of an expectant patient is in an exceedingly precarious condition.
This is the case in regions where the procedure is prohibited. The difficulty hospitals in Texas and other states are experiencing in determining whether or not routine care could be in violation of stringent state laws that prohibit abortion has resulted in an increase in the number of complaints concerning pregnant women who are experiencing medical distress being turned away from emergency rooms.
The administration cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in a case that bore a striking resemblance to the one that was presented to it in Idaho at the beginning of the year. The justices took a limited decision in that case to allow the continuation of emergency abortions without interruption while a lawsuit was still being heard.
In contrast, Texas has been a vocal proponent of the injunction’s continued enforcement. Texas has argued that its circumstances are distinct from those of Idaho, as the state does have an exemption for situations that pose a significant hazard to the health of an expectant patient.
According to the state, the discrepancy is the result of this exemption. The state of Idaho had a provision that safeguarded a woman’s life when the issue was first broached; however, it did not include protection for her health.
Certified medical practitioners are not obligated to wait until a woman’s life is in imminent peril before they are legally permitted to perform an abortion, as determined by the state supreme court.
The state of Texas highlighted this to the Supreme Court.
Nevertheless, medical professionals have criticized the Texas statute as being perilously ambiguous, and a medical board has declined to provide a list of all the disorders that are eligible for an exception. Furthermore, the statute has been criticized for its hazardous ambiguity.
For an extended period, termination of pregnancies has been a standard procedure in medical treatment for individuals who have been experiencing significant issues. It is implemented in this manner to prevent catastrophic outcomes, such as sepsis, organ failure, and other severe scenarios.
Nevertheless, medical professionals and hospitals in Texas and other states with strict abortion laws have noted that it is uncertain whether or not these terminations could be in violation of abortion prohibitions that include the possibility of a prison sentence. This is the case in regions where abortion prohibitions are exceedingly restrictive.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which resulted in restrictions on the rights of women to have abortions in several Republican-ruled states, the Texas case was revisited in 2022.
As per the orders that were disclosed by the administration of Vice President Joe Biden, hospitals are still required to provide abortions in cases that are classified as dire emergency.
As stipulated in a piece of health care legislation, the majority of hospitals are obligated to provide medical assistance to patients who are experiencing medical distress. This is in accordance with the law.
The state of Texas maintained that hospitals should not be obligated to provide abortions throughout the litigation, as doing so would violate the state’s constitutional prohibition on abortions. In its January judgment, the 5th United States Circuit Court of Appeals concurred with the state and acknowledged that the administration had exceeded its authority.
SOURCE: AP
SEE ALSO:
Could Last-Minute Surprises Derail Kamala Harris’ Campaign? “Nostradamus” Explains the US Poll.
-
News3 years agoLet’s Know About Ultra High Net Worth Individual
-
Entertainment2 years ago
Mabelle Prior: The Voice of Hope, Resilience, and Diversity Inspiring Generations
-
Health3 years agoHow Much Ivermectin Should You Take?
-
Tech2 years agoTop Forex Brokers of 2023: Reviews and Analysis for Successful Trading
-
Lifestyles2 years agoAries Soulmate Signs
-
Movies2 years agoWhat Should I Do If Disney Plus Keeps Logging Me Out of TV?
-
Health3 years agoCan I Buy Ivermectin Without A Prescription in the USA?
-
Learning2 years agoVirtual Numbers: What Are They For?