Gestão direta de floresta pública na Amazônia brasileira: reflexões a partir da Floresta Estadual do Antimary, estado do Acre

Abstract

O artigo discute a gestão direta de florestas públicas na Amazônia brasileira, em especial no estado do Acre. Toma-se como estudo de caso a Floresta Estadual do Antimary. Baseado em uma metodologia histórico-descritiva, o artigo reconstitui o movimento sociopolítico do Acre que culminou com a proposição de criação de reservas florestais para gestão direta pelas coletividades locais. Analisa-se a experiência da gestão de Antimary e as suas contribuições para a gestão de florestas públicas, principalmente o método denominado “gestão direta da floresta”. O artigo demonstra que a exploração florestal realizada no Antimary não pode ser considerada de gestão direta em toda sua essência. O Estado adota um modelo de exploração florestal que não condiz com a legislação ambientale, consequentemente, atua sem mecanismos regulatórios definidos para o alcance de resultados positivos. A experiência de Antimary mostra que muitos desafios ainda ameaçam a gestão direta como modelo de gestão de florestas públicas.

Local environmental governance, public policies and deforestation in Amazonia

“…Over the last two decades, the green areas have decreased badly mostly because of corporate farming and ranching (Kaimowitz et al , 2004; Miranda, 2005), and because of unplanned and/or unlawful settlements, slash‐and‐burning practices, and sawmill and rogue logging industry expansion (Laurance et al , 2004; Walker et al , 2000). As for the land tenure, the main issues are: the legal status of the land, land conflicts (Pinto, 1980; Kohlhepp, 2002; Hall, 2000), failure of settlements with deforestation and social conflicts related to land disputes, such as happened in the Carajás programme (Hall, 1989), industry of expropriation, of invasion, migration flows (Fearnside, 1993. 2001), and scams for public land appropriation known in Brazil as “ grilagem ” (Pinto, 1980; de Lima, 2002).…”

“…As for the land tenure, the main issues are: the legal status of the land, land conflicts (Pinto, 1980; Kohlhepp, 2002; Hall, 2000), failure of settlements with deforestation and social conflicts related to land disputes, such as happened in the Carajás programme (Hall, 1989), industry of expropriation, of invasion, migration flows (Fearnside, 1993. 2001), and scams for public land appropriation known in Brazil as “ grilagem ” (Pinto, 1980; de Lima, 2002). Legal Amazonia counts with nearly 42 percent of its area under the status of being protected (Barreto et al , 2009), amounting to more than 2.1 million of square kilometers, which includes 301 conservation units, 307 indigenous territories, and the quilombola (Brazilian Afro‐descendants community lands) as well as the military zones (Brasiliense, 2008).…”

“…The first idea was to populate the forest in order to prevent other countries of intruding into the area (Stone, 1985). With this purpose, the government implemented several mega projects aimed at building dams and hydroelectric plants with colossal environmental impacts and “unlearned lessons for development” (Fearnside, 2000), roads, and mining to promote the expansion of corporate ranching and farming, and settlements in isolated areas were encouraged (Pinto, 1980; Stone, 1985; Barbosa, 2000). Road construction had huge environmental impact on Amazonia opening it up to easy access and exploration, settlements, and subsequent extensive deforestation (Stone, 1985; Lessa, 1991), “northwestward from Cuiabá proceeds one of the world's more remarkable roads: 877 miles of red dirt, hacked by machete and bulldozer through arid sertão (desert) and dense jungle to Porto Velho” (Stone, 1985, p. 86).…”