Carbon and Climate Change: Climate Change

MAAP #225: Carbon in the Amazon (part 4): Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories

Posted on by Matt Finer
Figure 1. Total aboveground carbon change, Amazon protected areas & Indigenous territories 2013-2022. Data: Planet, ACA/MAAP.

We continue our ongoing series about carbon in the Amazon.

In part 1 (MAAP #215), we introduced a new dataset (Planet’s Forest Carbon Diligence) with wall-to-wall estimates for aboveground carbon at an unprecedented 30-meter resolution between 2013 and 2022. In part 2 (MAAP #217), we highlighted which parts of the Amazon are currently home to the highest (peak) carbon stocks. In part 3 (MAAP #220), we showed key cases of carbon loss (deforestation) and gain across the Amazon.

A key finding from this series is that the Amazon biome is teetering between a carbon source and sink. That is, historically the Amazon has functioned as a critical sink, with its forests accumulating carbon if left undisturbed. However, relative to the 2013 baseline, the Amazon flipped to a source during the high deforestation, drought, and fire seasons of 2015-2017. It then rebounded as a narrow carbon sink in 2022.

Here, in part 4, we focus on the importance of aboveground carbon in protected areas and Indigenous territories, which together cover 49.5% (414.9 million hectares) of the Amazon biome (see Figure 1).

We find that, as of 2022, Amazonian protected areas and Indigenous territories contained 34.1 billion metric tons of aboveground carbon (60% of the Amazon’s total). Importantly, in the ten years between 2013 and 2022, they functioned as a significant carbon sink, gaining 257 million metric tons.

With this data, we can also analyze aboveground carbon for each protected area and Indigenous territory. For example, Figure 1 illustrates aboveground carbon loss vs. gain for each protected area and Indigenous territory during the 10-year period of 2013 – 2022 (see details below).

Below, we further explain and illustrate the key findings.

Amazon-wide & Country-level Results

Amazonian protected areas and Indigenous territories currently cover nearly half (49.5%) of the Amazon biome, but contain 60% of the aboveground carbon. Together they contained 34.1 billion metric tons of aboveground carbon as of 2022, gaining 257 million metric tons since 2013, thus functioning as a carbon sink (Figure 2).1,2 

In contrast, areas outside of protected areas and Indigenous territories (424 million hectares) contained 22.6 billion metric tons of aboveground carbon as of 2022, losing 255 million metric tons since 2013, thus functioning as an overall carbon source.

Thus, the carbon sink function of protected areas and Indigenous territories narrowly offsets the emissions in the rest of the Amazon.

We emphasize that the protected areas and Indigenous territories functioned as a significant carbon sink (p-value = 0.01), while the outside areas were not a significant source (p-value= 0.15).

Regarding results by country, protected areas and Indigenous territories were significant carbon sinks in Colombia, Brazil, Suriname, and French Guiana (Guyana gained carbon but not significantly). In contrast, they were significant carbon sources in Bolivia and Venezuela (Peru and Ecuador lost carbon but not significantly).

Figure 2. Amazon aboveground carbon 2013-2022, within vs. outside protected areas and Indigenous territories. Data: Planet, ACA/MAAP.

Individual Protected Area & Indigenous Territory Results

Figure 1 (see above) illustrates total aboveground carbon loss vs. gain for each protected area and Indigenous territory during the 10-year period of 2013 – 2022. 

Overall, we found 1,103 areas that served as significant carbon sinks (dark green) during this period (238 protected areas and 865 Indigenous territories). These areas are concentrated in the northern and central Amazon. See Annex 1 for a list of specific areas that were significant carbon sinks.

It is important to note that deforestation pressures currently threaten several of these significant carbon sinks, including Chiribiquete National Park and Nukak-Maku Indigenous Reserve in Colombia, Sierra del Divisor National Park in Peru, and Canaima National Park in Venezuela.

In contrast, we found 1,439 areas (156 protected areas and 1,283 Indigenous territories) that served as significant carbon sources. It is important to note that some areas with little documented deforestation, such as Alto Purus National Park, may have carbon loss from natural causes.

Figure 3. Total aboveground carbon stocks in each protected area and Indigenous territory. Data: Planet, ACA/MAAP.

Figure 3 offers the most recent snapshot of total aboveground carbon stocks in each protected area and Indigenous territory.

It presents data for 2022 categorized into three groups of High, Medium, and Low. Note that the highest carbon totals (over 330 million metric tons) are concentrated across the large designated areas of the northern Amazon.

These High and Medium carbon areas may be considered to have the highest overall conservation value purely in terms of total carbon.

See Annex 1 for specific areas with the highest carbon stocks as of 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4. Aboveground carbon density in each protected area and Indigenous territory (2022). Data: Planet, ACA/MAAP

Finally, Figure 4 also displays the most recent data (2022) in each protected area and Indigenous territory, but standardized for area (aboveground carbon/hectare).

Note that the highest carbon totals (over 50 metric tons per hectare) are more evenly concentrated across the Amazon.

These High and Medium carbon areas may be considered to have the highest carbon conservation value per hectare.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Policy Implications:
Unlocking the Climate Value of Protected Areas and Indigenous Territories in the Amazon

Policy and finance for tropical forests as a climate solution have largely focused on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+). These efforts have made important strides in slowing and directing finance to tackle forest loss, particularly in high-deforestation regions. However, this emphasis on avoided emissions overlooks a critical component of the global carbon cycle: the carbon sink function (gaining of carbon over time) of primary tropical forests — which this analysis using Planet’s Forest Carbon Diligence data show is both measurable and significant.

This omission leaves a major flux in the carbon system—ongoing carbon sequestration in old-growth forests—outside the scope of existing market or non-market incentives. Critically, many of these carbon-absorbing forests are already located within established protected areas and indigenous territories. These areas are globally recognized for their importance in biodiversity conservation and for the stewardship provided by Indigenous Peoples and local communities. 

As global attention increasingly turns to engineered carbon removal strategies such as BECCS (Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) and Direct Air Capture, there is an urgent need to recognize that Amazonian forests are already performing this function—naturally and at scale. Yet the value of Protected Areas and Indigenous territories as a potent carbon sink is neither monetized nor rewarded under current frameworks, unless they can demonstrate that they are under threat from deforestation or degradation in order to access REDD+ finance. An emerging exception is the High Integrity Forests Investment Initiative (HIFOR), which recognizes the value of carbon sequestration in old-growth forests, but does not generate tradable credits for each ton absorbed.5 The Tropical Forests Forever Fund (TFFF) proposed by Brazil for adoption at COP 30, would also reward forest countries at a rate of approximately US$ 4.00/year for every hectare of tropical forest they protect, regardless of whether they are under threat.6

To date, however, protected areas and Indigenous territories, despite their proven climate contribution, often lack the financial support necessary to ensure long-term effectiveness and resilience. As a result, they often face chronic underfunding,7 limiting their long-term effectiveness and resilience. Policy innovation is needed to close this gap and integrate the carbon sink function of mature forests into funding mechanisms for forest protection. Doing so would unlock meaningful incentives for the continued, long-term stewardship of these high-carbon ecosystems and would ensure that one of the planet’s most effective natural climate solutions receives the attention and resources it deserves.

Annex 1

Specific areas that were significant carbon sinks include:

Otishi, Sierra del Divisor, Güeppí-Sekime and Yaguas National Parks, Matsés, and Pucacuro National Reserves, Ashaninka Communal Reserve, and Cordillera Escalera and Alto Nanay- Pintuyacu Chambira Regional Conservation Area, Matses, Pampa Hermosa, and Yavarí – Tapiche Indigenous Reserves, and Kugapakori, Nahua, Nanti Territorial Reserve in Peru;

Amacayacu, Chiribiquete, Cahuinari, Rio Pure, and Yaigoje Apaporis National Parks, Nukak Natural Reserve, Amazonas Forest Reserve, and Putumayo and Nukak-Maku, Yaigoje Rio Apaporis and Vaupes Indigenous Reserve in Colombia;

Campos Amazônicos, Juruena, Mapinguari, Nascentes do Lago Jari, Serra do Divisor, and Montanhas do Tumucumaque National Parks, Amanã, Aripuanã, Crepori, Tapajós, and Tefé National Forests in Brazil, Itaituba and Jatuarana National Forests, and Alto Rio Negro, Baú, Aripuanã, Aripuanã, Apyterewa, Mundurucu, and Vale do Javari Indigenous Territories in Brazil.

Achuar Indigenous Territory and Zona Intangible Tagaeri – Taromenane in Ecuador; Manuripi Heath National Reserve and Takana, Takana II, and Yuracare Indigenous Reserves in Bolivia; Central Suriname and Sipaliwini Nature Reserves in Suriname; Canaima National Park in Venezuela; and Parc Amazonien de Guyane National Park in French Guiana, 

Specific areas with the highest carbon stocks, as of 2022, include:

Alto Purús, Manu, Sierra del Divisor, and Cordillera National Parks in Peru; Chiribiquete National Park in Colombia; Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Pico da Neblina, Jaú, and Juruena National Parks and Yanomami, Menkragnoti, Kayapó, Mundurucu, and Vale do Javari Indigenous Territories in Brazil; Caura and Canaima National Parks in Venezuela; and Parc Amazonien de Guyane National Park in French Guiana;

Methodology

We analyzed Planet Forest Carbon Diligence, a cutting-edge new dataset from the satellite-based company Planet, featuring a 10-year historical time series (2013 – 2022) with wall-to-wall estimates for aboveground carbon density at 30-meter resolution.3,4

One notable caveat of this data is that it does not distinguish aboveground carbon loss from natural vs human-caused drivers, so additional information may be incorporated to understand the context of each area. 

Based on these data, annual aboveground carbon values ​​were estimated in Amazonian protected areas and Indigenous territories to obtain a time series for 2013-2022. In addition, the Mann-Kendall test was used to analyze trends in the generated time series.

Our data source for protected areas and Indigenous territories is from RAISG (Amazon Network of Georeferenced Socio-Environmental Information), a consortium of civil society organizations in the Amazon countries. This source (accessed in December 2024) contains spatial data for 5,943 protected areas and Indigenous territories, covering 414.9 million hectares across the Amazon.

We determined that many of these areas (4,000) did not include creation date metadata, prohibiting any time-series control for that variable. Instead, we used the most current extent of protected areas and Indigenous territories as a proxy for those that existed from 2013 to 2022.

There was substantial overlap between protected areas and Indigenous territories, but we accounted for this to avoid double counting of the overlapping areas.

The aboveground carbon values for protected areas and Indigenous territories were calculated for each country and then summed across the Amazon.

The remaining areas were combined into the category of “Outside protected areas and Indigenous territories” and also calculated for each country and summed across the Amazon.

Our geographic range for the Amazon is a hybrid designed for maximum inclusion: biogeographic boundary (as defined by RAISG) for all countries, except for Bolivia and Peru, where we use the watershed boundary, and Brazil, where we use the Legal Amazon boundary. Our area estimate for this definition of the Amazon biome is 839.2 million hectares.

Notes

1 Breaking down the results by category, protected areas contained nearly 21.1 billion metric tons of aboveground carbon as of 2022, gaining over 204 million metric tons since 2013, while Indigenous territories contained over 16.8 billion metric tons of aboveground carbon as of 2022, gaining over 132 million metric tons since 2013. Note that protected areas and Indigenous territories overlap in many areas.

2 Standardizing for area (that is, calculating the results per hectare), protected areas and Indigenous territories contained 82.2 metric tons of aboveground carbon per hectare as of 2022, gaining a net 0.6 metric tons per hectare since 2013. In contrast, areas outside of protected areas and Indigenous territories contained 53.2 metric tons of aboveground carbon per hectare as of 2022, losing a net 0.6 metric tons per hectare since 2013.

3 Anderson C (2024) Forest Carbon Diligence: Breaking Down the Validation and Intercomparison Report. https://www.planet.com/pulse/forest-carbon-diligence-breaking-down-the-validation-and-intercomparison-report/

4 In terms of the limitations of Planet’s Forest Carbon Diligence data, Duncanson et al (2025) recently wrote a Letter in Science focused on spatial resolution for forest carbon maps. Given the natural constraint of the size of a tree, they discuss the challenge of pixel-level validation below 5 meters for forest carbon monitoring. The authors state that spatial resolution should at minimum exceed the crown diameter of a typical large tree, which is about 20 meters for tropical forests. In this sense, the 30-meter product exceeds this limitation.

Duncanson et al (2025) Spatial resolution for forest carbon maps. Science 387: 370-71.

5 WCS High Integrity Forest Investment Initiative (HIFOR): The Science Basis

6 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-04-04/too-big-to-fell-brazil-takes-trees-to-wall-street?cmpid=BBD040425_GR

7 UNEP-WCMC, IUCN, and NGS. (2022). Protected Planet Report 2022. Cambridge, UK: UNEP-WCMC.

Acknowledgments

Through a generous sharing agreement with the satellite company Planet, we have been granted access to this data across the entire Amazon biome for the analysis presented in this series.

We thank colleagues from the following organizations for helpful comments on this report: Planet, Conservación Amazónica – ACCA, Conservación Amazónica -ACEAA, Gaia Amazonas, Ecociencia, and Instituto del Bien Común.

We especially thank colleagues at Conservación Amazónica – ACCA for help with the 10-year data analysis.

This report was made possible by the generous support of the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD)

Citation

Bodin B, Finer M, Castillo H, Mamani N (2025) Carbon in the Amazon (part 4): Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories. MAAP: 225.

MAAP Synthesis #3: Deforestation in the Andean Amazon (Trends, Hotspots, Drivers)

Posted on by dcadmin
Satellite image of the deforestation produced by United Cacao. Source: DigitalGlobe (Nextview)

MAAP, an initiative of the organization Amazon Conservation, uses cutting-edge satellite technology to monitor deforestation in near real-time in the megadiverse Andean Amazon (Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, and Bolivia).

The monitoring is based on 5 satellite systems: Landsat (NASA/USGS), Sentinel (European Space Agency), PeruSAT-1, and the companies Planet and DigitalGlobe. For more information about our innovative methodology, see this recent paper in Science Magazine.

Launched in 2015, MAAP has published nearly 100 high-impact reports on the major Amazonian deforestation issues of the day.

Here, we present our third annual synthesis report with the objective to concisely describe the bigger picture: Deforestation trends, patterns, hotspots and drivers across the Andean Amazon.

Our principal findings include:

Trends: Deforestation across the Andean Amazon has reached 4.2 million hectares (10.4 million acres) since 2001. Annual deforestation has been increasing in recent years, with a peak in 2017 (426,000 hectares). Peru has had the highest annual deforestation, followed by surging Colombia (in fact, Colombia surpassed Peru in 2017). The vast majority of the deforestation events are small-scale (‹5 hectares).

Hotspots: We present the first regional-scale deforestation hotspots map for the Andean Amazon, allowing for spatial comparisons between Peru, Colombia, and Ecuador.  We discuss six of the most important hotspots.

Drivers: We present MAAP Interactive, a dynamic map with detailed information on the major deforestation drivers: gold mining, agriculture (oil palm and cacao), cattle ranching, logging, and dams. Agriculture and ranching cause the most widespread impact across the region, while gold mining is most intense southern Peru.

Climate Change. We estimated the loss of 59 million metric tons of carbon in the Peruvian Amazon during the last five years (2013-17) due to forest loss. In contrast, we also show that protected areas and indigenous lands have safeguarded 3.17 billion metric tons of carbon.

I. Deforestation Trends

Image 1 shows forest loss trends in the Andean Amazon between 2001 and 2017.*  The left graph shows data by country, while the right graph shows data by forest loss event size.

Image 1. Annual forest loss by country and size. Data: Hansen/UMD/Google/USGS/NASA, UMD/GLAD, Global Forest Watch, MINAM/PNCB, RAISG.

Trends by Country

Over the past 17 years (2001-2017), deforestation has surpassed 4.2 million hectares (10.4 million acres) in the Andean Amazon (see green line). Of this total, 50% is Peru (2.1 million hectares/5.2 million acres), 41% Colombia (1.7 million hectares/4.27 million acres), and 9% Ecuador (887,000 acres/359,000 hectares). This analysis did not include Bolivia.

Since 2007, there has been an increasing deforestation trend, peaking during the past two years (2016-17). In fact, 2017 has the highest annual forest loss on record with 426,000 hectares (over one million acres), more than double the total forest loss in 2006.

Peru had the highest average annual Amazonian deforestation between 2009 and 2016. The past four years have the highest annual deforestation totals on record in the country, with peaks in 2014 (177,566 hectares/439,000 acres) and 2016 (164,662 hectares/406,888 acres). According to new data from the Peruvian Environment Ministry, there was an important decline in 2017 (155,914 hectares/385,272 acres), but it is still the fourth highest annual total on record.

There has been a surge of deforestation in Colombia during the past two years. Note that in 2017, Colombia surpassed Peru with a record high of 214,700 hectares (530,400 acres) deforested.

Deforestation is also increasing in Ecuador, with highs of 32,000 hectares (79,000 acres) in 2016 and 55,500 hectares (137,000) acres in 2017.

For context, Brazil has had an average deforestation loss rate of 639,403 hectares (1.58 million acres) over the past several years.

* Data: Colombia & Ecuador: Hansen/UMD/Google/USGS/NASA; Peru: MINAM/PNCB, UMD/GLAD. While this information includes natural forest loss events, it serves as our best estimate of deforestation resulting from anthropogenic causes.  It is estimated that the non-anthropic loss comprises approximately 3.5% of the total loss. Note that the analysis does not include Bolivia.

Trends by Size

The pattern related to the size of deforestation events in the Andean Amazon remained relatively consistent over the last 17 years. Most noteworthy: the vast majority (74%) of the deforestation events are small-scale (‹5 hectares). Only 2% of deforestation events are large-scale (>100 hectares). The remaining 24% are medium-scale (5-100 hectares).

These results are important for conservation efforts.  Addressing this complex situation – in which most of the deforestation events are small-scale – requires significantly more attention and resources.  In addition, while large-scale deforestation (usually associated with agro-industrial practices) is not that common, it nonetheless represents a serious latent threat, due to the fact that only a small number of agro-industrial projects (for example, oil palm) are able to rapidly destroy thousands of acres of primary forest.

II. Deforestation Hotspots

Image 2: Deforestation hotspots 2015-2017. Data: Hansen/UMD/Google/USGS/NASA.

We present the first regional-scale deforestation hotspots map across the Andean Amazon (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru).  Image 2 shows the results for the past three, 2015 – 2017.

The most critical zones (“high” deforestation density) are indicated in red. They include:

A. Central Peruvian Amazon: Over the last 10 years, this zone, located in the Ucayali and Huánuco regions, has consistently had one of the largest concentrations of deforestation in Peru (Inset A).  Its principal drivers include oil palm and cattle grazing.

B. Southern Peruvian Amazon: This zone, located in the Madre de Dios region, is impacted by gold mining (Inset B1), and increasingly by small- and medium-scale agriculture along the Interoceanic Highway (Inset B2).

C. Central Peruvian Amazon: A new oil palm plantation located in the San Martín region has been identified as a recent large-scale deforestation event in this zone (Inset C).

D. Southwestern Colombian Amazon: Cattle grazing is the principal deforestation driver documented in this zone, located in the departments of Caquetá and Putumayo (Inset D).

E. Northern Colombian Amazon: There is expanding deforestation along a new road in this zone, located in the department of Guaviare (Inset E).

F. Northern Ecuadoran Amazon: This zone is located in the Orellana province, where small- and medium-scale agriculture, including oil palm, is the principal driver of deforestation (Inset F).

 

 

III. Drivers of Deforestation     

MAAP Interactive (screenshot)

One of the main objectives of MAAP is to improve the availability of precise and up-to-date information regarding the current drivers (causes) of deforestation in the Andean Amazon.  Indeed, one of our most important advances has been the use of high-resolution imagery to identify current deforestation drivers.

In order to improve the analysis and understanding of the identified drivers, we have created an Interactive Map that displays the spatial location of each driver associated with every MAAP report.  An important characteristic of this map is the ability to filter the data by driver, by selecting the boxes of interest.

Image 3 shows a screenshot of the Interactive Map.  Note that it contains detailed information on these principal drivers: gold mining, oil palm, cacao, small-scale agriculture, cattle pasture, logging roads, and dams.  It also includes natural causes such as floods, forest fires, and blowdowns.  In addition, it highlights deforestation events in protected areas.

Below, we discuss the principal drivers of deforestation and degradation in greater detail.

 

 

 

 

Agriculture – oil palm, cacao, and other crops

Image 4: Interactive Map, agriculture. Data: MAAP.

Image 4 shows the results of the interactive map when applying the agriculture-related filters.

Legend:
Oil palm (bright green)
Cacao (brown)
Other crops (dark green)

Agricultural activity is one of the principal causes of deforestation in the Andean Amazon.

The majority of agriculture-related deforestation is caused by small- and medium-scale plantations (‹50 hectares).

Deforestation for large-scale, agro-industrial plantations is much less common, but represents a critical latent threat.

 

 

 

 

 

Large-scale Agriculture

We have documented five major deforestation events produced by large-scale plantations since 2007:  four of these occurred in Peru (three of which are related to oil palm and one to cacao) and one in Bolivia (resulting from sugar cane plantations).

First, between 2007 and 2011, two large-scale oil palm plantations caused the deforestation of 7,000 hectares on the border between Loreto and San Martín (MAAP #16).  Subsequent plantations in the surrounding area caused the additional deforestation of 9,800 hectares.

It is importnat to note that the Peruvian company Grupo Palmas is now working towards a zero deforestation value chain and has a new sustainability policy (see Case C of MAAP #64).

Next, between 2012 and 2015, two other large-scale oil palm plantations deforested 12,000 hectares in Ucayali  (MAAP #4, MAAP #41).

Between 2013 and 2015, the company United Cacao deforested 2,380 hectares for cacao plantations in Loreto (MAAP #9, MAAP #13, MAAP #27, MAAP #35).

Deforestation from large-scale agriculture decreased in Peru between 2016 and 2017, but there was one notable event: an oil palm plantation of 740 hectares in San Martín (MAAP #78).

Another notable case of deforestation related to large-scale agriculture has been occurring in Bolivia, where a new sugarcane plantation has caused the deforestation of more than 2,500 hectares in the department of La Paz.

Additionally, we found three new zones in Peru characterized by the deforestation pattern produced by the construction of organized access roads which have the potential of becoming large-scale agriculture areas (MAAP #69).

Small and Medium-scale Agriculture

Deforestation caused by small- and medium-scale agriculture is much more widespread, but it is often difficult to identify the driver from satellite imagery.

We have identified some specific cases of oil palm in Huánuco, Ucayali, Loreto, and San Martín (MAAP #48, MAAP #26, MAAP #16).

Cacao and papaya are emerging drivers in Madre de Dios.  We have documented cacao deforestation along the Las Piedras River (MAAP #23, MAAP #40) and papaya along the Interoceanic Highway (MAAP #42).

Corn and rice cultivation appear to be turning the area around the town of Iberia into a deforestation hotspot (MAAP #28).  In other cases, we have documented deforestation resulting from small- and medium-scale agriculture, though it has not been possible to identify the type of crop (MAAP #75, MAAP #78).

Additionally, small-scale agriculture is possibly a determining factor in the forest fires that degrade the Amazon during the dry season (MAAP #45, MAAP #47).

The cultivation of illicit coca is a cause of deforestation in some areas of Peru and Colombia.  For example, in southern Peru, the cultivation of coca is generating deforestation within the Bahuaja Sonene National Park and its surrounding areas.

Cattle Ranching

Image 5: Interactive Map, cattle ranching. Data: MAAP.

By analyzing high-resolution satellite imagery, we have developed a methodology for identifying areas deforestated by cattle ranching.*

Image 5 shows the results of the Interactive Map when applying the “Cattle pasture” filter, indicating the documented examples in Peru and Colombia.

Legend:
Cattle ranching (orange)

Cattle ranching is the principal driver of deforestation in the central Peruvian Amazon (MAAP #26, MAAP #37, MAAP #45, MAAP #78). We also identified recent deforestation from cattle ranching in northeastern Peru (MAAP #78).

In the Colombian Amazon, cattle ranching is one the primary direct drivers in the country’s most intense deforestation hotspots (MAAP #63, MAAP #77).

* Immediately following a major deforestation event, the landscape of felled trees is similar for both agriculture and cattle pasture.  However, by studying an archive of images and going back in time to analyze older deforestation cases, it is possible to distinguish between the drivers.  For example, after one or two years, agriculture and cattle pasture appear very different in the images. Ther former tends to have organized rows of new plantings, while the latter is mostly grassland.

 

 

 

Gold Mining

Image 6: Interactive Map, gold mining. Data: MAAP.

Image 6 shows the results of the Interactive Map when applying the “Gold mining” filter.

Legend:
Gold Mining (yellow)
*With dot indicates within protected area

The area that has been most impacted by gold mining is clearly the southern Peruvian Amazon, where we estimate the total deforestation of more than 63,800 hectares. Of this, at least 7,000 hectares have been lost since 2013.  The two most critical zones are La Pampa and Alto Malinowski in Madre de Dios (MAAP #87, MAAP #75, MAAP #79).  Another critical area exists in Cusco in the buffer zone of the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve, where mining deforestation is now less than one kilometer from the boundary of the protected area (MAAP #71).

It is important to highlight two important cases in which the Peruvian government has taken effective actions to halt illegal mining within protected areas (MAAP #64).  In September 2015, illegal miners invaded Tambopata National Reserve and deforested 550 hectares over the course of a two-year period.  At the end of 2016, the government intensified its interventions and the invasion was halted in 2017. In regards to Amarakaeri Communal Reserve, in June 2015 we revealed the mining invasion deforestation of 11 hectares.  Over the course of the following weeks, SERNANP and ECA Amarakaeri implemented measures and rapidly halted the illegal activity.

Other small gold-mining fronts are emerging in the northern and central Peruvian Amazon (MAAP #45, MAAP #49).

In addition, we have also documented deforestation linked to illegal gold-mining activities in the Puinawai National Park in the Colombian Amazon.

Logging

Image 7: Interactive Map, logging roads. Data: MAAP.

In MAAP #85 we proposed a new tool to address illegal logging in the Peruvian Amazon: utilize satellite imagery to monitor construction of logging roads in near real-time.

Image 7 shows the results of the Interactive Map when applying the “Logging roads” filter.

Legend:
Logging Road (purple)

We estimate that 2,200 kilometers of forest roads have been constructed in the Peruvian Amazon during the last three years (2015-2017).  The roads are concentrated in southern Loreto, Ucayali, and northwestern Madre de Dios.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Roads

Image 8: Interactive map, roads. Data: MAAP.

It has been well-documented that roads are one of the most important drivers of deforestation in the Amazon, particularly due to the fact that they facilitate human access and activities related to agriculture, cattle ranching, mining, and logging.

Image 8 shows the results of the Interactive Map when applying the “Roads” filter.

Legend:
Road (gray)

We have analyzed two controversial proposed roads in Madre de Dios, Peru.

The Nuevo Edén – Boca Manu – Boca Colorado road would traverse the buffer zone of two protected areas: Amarakaeri Communal Reserve and Manu National Park (MAAP #29).

The other, the Puerto Esperanza-Iñapari road, would traverse the Purús National Park and threaten the territory of the indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation who live in this remote area (MAAP #76).

 

 

 

 

Hydroelectric dams

Image 9 shows the results of the Interactive Map when applying the “Dams” filter.

Legend:
Hydroelectric Dam (light blue)

To date, we have analyzed three hydroelectric dams located in Brazil.  We have documented the loss of 36,100 hectares of forest associated with flooding produced by two dams (San Antonio and Jirau) on the Madeira River near the border with Bolivia (MAAP #34).  We also analyzed the controversial Belo Monte hydroelectrical complex located on the Xingú River, adn estimate that 19,880 hectares of land have been flooded. According to the imagery, this land is a combination of forested areas and agricultural areas (MAAP #66).

Additionally, we show a very high-resolution image of the exact location of the proposed Chadín-2 hydroelectric dam on the Marañón River in Peru (MAAP #80).

Hydrocarbon (oil and gas)

Image 10: Interactive map, hidrocarbon. Data: MAAP.

Image 10 shows the results of the Interactive Map when applying the “Hydrocarbon“ filter.

Legend:
Hydrocarbon (black)

Our first report on this sector focused on Yasuní National Park in the Ecuadorian Amazon.  We documented the direct and indirect deforestation amounts of 417 hectares (MAAP #82).

We also show the location of recent deforestation in two hydrocarbon block in Peru: Block 67 in the north and Blocks 57 in the south.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Climate Change

Tropical forests, especially the Amazon, sequester huge amounts of carbon, one of the main greenhouse gases driving climate change.

In MAAP #81, we estimated the loss of 59 million metric tons of carbon in the Peruian Amazon during the last five years (2013-17) due to forest loss, especially deforestation from mining and agricultural activities. This finding reveals that forest loss represents nearly half (47%) of Peru’s annual carbon emissions, including from burning fossil fuels.

In contrast, in MAAP #83 we show that protected areas and indigenous lands have safeguarded 3.17 billion metric tons of carbon, as of 2017. That is the equivalent to 2.5 years of carbon emissions from the United States.

The breakdown of results are:
1.85 billion tons safeguarded in the Peruvian national protected areas system;
1.15 billion tons safeguarded in titled native community lands; and
309.7 million tons safeguarded in Territorial Reserves for indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation.

Citation

Finer M, Mamani N (2018) Deforestation in the Andean Amazon (Trends, Hotspots, Drivers). MAAP Synthesis #3.

MAAP #83: Climate Change Defense: Amazon Protected Areas and Indigenous Lands

Posted on by dcadmin
Base Map. Data: Asner et al 2014, MINAM/PNCB, SERNANP, IBC

Tropical forests, especially the Amazon, sequester huge amounts of carbon, one of the main greenhouse gases driving climate change.

Here, we show the importance of protected areas and indigenous lands to safeguard these carbon stocks.

In MAAP #81, we estimated the loss of 59 million metric tons of carbon in the Peruvian Amazon during the last five years (2013-17) due to forest loss, especially deforestation from mining and agricultural activities.

This finding reveals that forest loss represents nearly half (47%) of Peru’s annual carbon emissions, including from burning fossil fuels.1,2

In contrast, here we show that protected areas and indigenous lands have safeguarded 3.17 billion metric tons of carbon, as of 2017.3,4

The Base Map (on the right) shows, in shades of green, the current carbon densities in relation to these areas.

The breakdown of results are:
1.85 billion tons safeguarded in the Peruvian national protected areas system;
1.15 billion tons safeguarded in titled native community lands; and
309.7 million tons safeguarded in Territorial Reserves for indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation.

The total safeguarded carbon (3.17 billion metric tons) is the equivalent to 2.5 years of carbon emissions from the United States.5

Below, we show several examples of how protected areas and indigenous lands are safeguarding carbon reservoirs in important areas, indicated by insets A-E.

A. Yaguas National Park

The following Image A shows how three protected areas, including the new Yaguas National Park, are effectively safeguarding 202 million metric tons of carbon in the northeastern Peruvian Amazon. This area is home to some of the highest carbon densities in the country.

Image 83a. Yaguas. Data: Asner et al 2014, MINAM/PNCB, SERNANP

B. Manu National Park, Amarakaeri Communal Reserve, CC Los Amigos

The following Image B shows how Los Amigos, the world’s first conservation concession, is effectively safeguarding 15 million metric tons of carbon in the southern Peruvian Amazon. Two surrounding protected areas, Manu National Park and Amarakaeri Communal Reserve, safeguard an additional 194 million metric tons. This area is home to some of the highest carbon densities in the country.

Image 83b. Los Amigos-Manu-Amarakaeri. Data: Asner et al 2014, MINAM/PNCB, SERNANP, ACCA

C. Tambopata National Reserve, Bahuaja Sonene National Park

The following Image C shows how two important natural protected areas, Tambopata National Reserve and Bahuaja Sonene National Park, are helping conserve carbon stocks in an area with intense illegal gold mining activity.

D. Sierra del Divisor National Park, National Reserve Matsés

Image 83d. Data: Asner et al 2014, MINAM/PNCB, SERNANP

The following Image D shows how four protected areas, including the new Sierra del Divisor National Park, and adjacent National Reserve Matsés are effectively safeguarding 270 million metric tons of carbon in the eastern Peruvian Amazon.

This area is home to some of the highest carbon densities in the country.

E. Murunahua Indigenous Reserve

The following Image E shows the carbon protected in the Murunahua Indigenous Reserve (for indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation) and the surrounding titled native communities.

Imagen 83e. Datos: Asner et al 2014, MINAM/PNCB, SERNANP

References

1  UNFCCC. Emissions Summary for Peru. http://di.unfccc.int/ghg_profile_non_annex1

2  No incluye las emisiones por la degradación de bosques

3 Asner GP et al (2014). The High-Resolution Carbon Geography of Perú. Carnegie Institution for Science. ftp://dge.stanford.edu/pub/asner/carbonreport/CarnegiePeruCarbonReport-English.pdf

4 Sistema de Áreas Naturales Protegidas del Perú, que incluye áreas de administración nacional, regional, y privado. Datos de las tierras indígenas son de Instituto de Bien Común. Datos de pérdida forestal son de la Programa Nacional de Conservación de Bosques para la Mitigación del Cambio Climático (MINAM/PNCB).

5 UNFCCC. Emissions Summary for United States. http://di.unfccc.int/ghg_profile_annex1

Citation

Finer M, Mamani N (2017). Climate Change Defense: Amazon Protected Areas and Indigenous Lands. MAAP: 83.

Acknowledgments

This report was made possible by the generous support of the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD).