Park Writing 100.012
Hyun Young Park
Paper #3
Professor Sessolo
Writing 100
Humans continue the deforestation for their benefits. As much as forests “of amazing
diversity and productivity” provide benefits, clearing the land also provides benefits such as
roads and urban areas, and farms and pastures. It comes a lot more beneficial when it comes to a
large area, or 7% of the Earth’s dry land. A wide space can provide the world’s most critical
materials such as fuel and timber. However, global problems, such as extinction of animals and
plants, futile soil, and social conflict, arise as humans continue to clear the land. Tropical
Deforestation written by Rebecca Lindsey, a technical writer at Natural Astronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), accurately lists the negative effects and consequences of deforestation.
According to the text, half of the species population lives on tropical forest. Because
certain species live in certain regions, extinction comes to those species when deforestation
happens. Though this article acknowledges benefits deforestation brings, it emphasizes the
negative biodiversity impacts through sentences such as “Their specialization makes them
vulnerable to extinction.” For example, Abies bracteata only lives in Evergreen forest “between
the Tropic of Cancer (North) and Tropic of Capricorn (South) where the area is wet and warm,
“under the Sun’s most direct rays.” Abies bracteata will extinct when Evergreen forest is cleared.
According to the author, “In addition to the species lost when an area is totally deforested, the
plants and animals in the fragments of forest that remain also become increasingly vulnerable,
sometimes even committed, to extinction.”
Park Writing 100.012
This biodiversity argument that repeatedly appears in the very first paragraph of the
article shows the author’s prior value in preserving tropical forest biodiversity. This argument is
directly speaking to my chosen issue of deforestation, because the fact that deforestation harms
biodiversity is not doubtable. She chose languages like “vulnerable to extinction” and
“devastating” to make this sound more crucial. In addition, Lindsey notes that hot winds caused
by removal of trees not only kill, but also extinct plants and animals. “The edges of the
fragments dry out and are buffeted by hot winds; mature rainforest trees often die standing at the
margins. Cascading changes in the types of trees, plants, and insects that can survive in the
fragments rapidly reduce biodiversity in the forest that remains.”
Bearing in mind that deforestation impacts species and soil, Lindsey also recognizes
humans living in the forest. The number of native people living in the forest is unpredictable.
Noting with deep concern, she further explores the worst-case scenario of killing millions of
native people who “make their living through subsistence agriculture, hunting and gathering, or
through low-impact harvesting of forest products like rubber or nuts” in paragraph 6. She also
draws attention to the violent conflict that is caused by “loggers, colonizers, and refugees.”
The author’s deep concern and caring heart are shown very well in this paragraph. When
explaining aid regencies and governments trying to find consensus to “what level of human
presence…is compatible with conservation goals, how to balance the needs of indigenous
peoples… and whether establishing large, pristine, uninhabited protected areas…should be the
highest priority of conservation efforts in tropical forests,” she proclaims for the first time in this
article that native people’s safety “should be the highest priority of conservation efforts in
Park Writing 100.012
tropical forests.” This article also speaks effectively to my argument due to author’s choice of
caring words.
Calling all relevant negative impacts deforestation brings, Lindsey also stresses
deforestation’s positive influence toward the global markets. According to Lindsey, forest is
storage of a lot of resources. We can get as much resources from the forest, such as latex, cork,
fruit, nuts, timber, fibers, spices, natural oils, resins, and medicines, as we can get from
deforestation. Calling from the third paragraph of the article, the author notes that “Hidden in
the genes of plants, animals, fungi, and bacteria that have not even been discovered yet may be
cures for cancer and other diseases or the key to improving the yield and nutritional quality of
foods.” Author’s use of “affirming” languages such as “may be cures for cancer and other
diseases” makes this article stronger, in that this proves this article is non-biased.
In addition, Lindsey’s skill of citing trustworthy organizations such as government or
non-profit organizations puts force into the article because their records are official. Lindsey
guides that according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, there are more resources in
the forest that can provide the 10 billion earth’s population. In second paragraph, she says that
“Genetic diversity in the planetary gene pool is crucial for the resilience of all life on Earth to
rare but catastrophic environmental events, such as meteor impacts or massive, sustained
volcanism.” I believe that this approach of quoting official organizations puts trust into the
article.
Park Writing 100.012
Overall, arguments are put together in a way that acknowledges and criticizes at the same
time. While Lindsey argues that deforestation brings negative biodiversity and social impacts,
she agrees with the benefits deforestation brings into human’s life. She also quotes official
organizations whose claims are real, and cannot be changed. Lindsey’s approach of
“acknowledging” and “quoting” encourages credibility into the article. However, her use of
strong rhetorical words such as “devastating” and “should be” clearly sets her side. Lindsey’s
consistent use of specific rhetorical choices stresses the negative impacts of deforestation.