One last chance

AS startling as it may sound, there is a place on earth untouched by human contact and the modern world. It is in Ecuador and is called the Yasuní National Park. It is inhabited by two of the world’s last, uncontacted tribes: the Tagaeri and the Taromenane. A proposal has been reported recently, which makes for interesting study in the state of life in our time. Oil has been discovered in this place, which is worth a massive amount of money and might possibly be used by the government of Ecuador to enhance the lives of the nation’s population if properly used. On the other hand, if the oil is extracted, the environmental, social and cultural costs could be beyond worth and taken together will constitute a form of virginity, irreplaceable and possessed of an otherness, which is all the more precious for its loss or retention.
A former government and oil industry insider, who is now a university professor, Alberto Acosta, is championing a proposal known as Plan A. This involves leaving the oil perpetually untouched in return for a payment of, “Roughly half of the value of the 960m barrels of oil – around $3.6 billion”. He says he has lied in the past to protect the reserves in question and that elements within the oil industry are attempting to do him down publicly because of this and in doing so generate support for Plan B, which would see the oil sold as it generally is in these situations. This would see the rainforest in question drained of its valuable resources at the expense of wildlife, human culture and possibly some extremely precious resources of a medical nature. The thought of such drug-development potential has not been ignored by the government of Ecuador but it is not nearly as lucrative as the earnings available if the oil rights are sold. In areas such as this, natural substances exist, which could be synthesised, copied or harvested with massive benefits to the human race. If they are destroyed and disposed of to make way for the harvesting of oil, they may not be found again.
In a universe as hostile as our own to have a place such as this so needlessly destroyed seems extremely shortsighted, especially when the following list, published in The Guardian, is considered fully. “One 6km2 patch of Yasuní – chosen by scientists almost at random – was found to have 47 amphibian and reptile species, 550 bird and 200 mammal species living there. Another patch of land in the park breaks all the world records for bats and insects. More tree species grow in a single hectare of rainforest in Yasuní than in all of North America. A single hectare of rainforest there may contain as many as 100,000 insect species and most of the 2,000 species of fish known to live in the rivers of the Amazon region are believed to be there. There have been more species of frogs and toads recorded in the park than are native to the United States and Canada combined; more insect species have been found living on one tree than in all of the United States; more birds seen there than in all Europe.”
Some describe the Plan A and B offer as blackmail by Ecuador. Opinion is massively and bitterly divided but the concept and the issues it raises are worth considering. What people are seeking in the oil reserves are in short supply, as are the people, animals and wilderness, which will be destroyed if the oil is extracted. What people are seeking to allow the place to be saved or destroyed is money, a concept born of human beings baser nature. Internationally, we see on a daily basis how easily money can be brought into existence and disappear just as easily. The argument that it holds any intrinsic value is shaky at best and just wrong if seriously considered. This wilderness on the other hand has a value beyond our wildest imaginations. If the opportunity to save it in exchange for money is offered then surely the decision should be an easy one. Even if repeated payments are needed to maintain the integrity of the national park, these should be offered.
There is a strong and very understandable line of thinking expressed regarding the reasons Ecuador is seeking money from the rest of the world to protect this place. Should they not just ensure it remains a sanctuary for the sake of mankind? By all means, this is a fair question but it fails to acknowledge that Ecuador is trapped in terrible poverty and has no choice but to partake in the international community and, as a result, the economic status quo. When a nation is trapped in such a situation, it seems harsh to criticise it for making an effort to escape.
Certainly, more information about this situation will emerge in the weeks and months ahead but it is a fascinating case study of the clash between the desire for fuel and the need to preserve the planet. Some countries have stated that they are willing to consider the proposal, which may lead others to follow suit. This said, it is impossible to know what deals will be taking place in backrooms and what money will be changing hands before this story reaches a conclusion.
The people of Ecuador are said to be 90% in favour of leaving the area unspoilt but as so often is the case, the voice of the people may be lost in the noise of money filling coffers. As the world reels from crisis to economic crisis, it will be interesting to see who has learned the lessons that the current economic system is not a positive thing and that destroying unspoiled wilderness for the sake of short term gain might not be the best option after all.