Land Use: Protected Areas

MAAP #226: AI to detect Amazon gold mining deforestation – 2024 update

Posted on by Matt Finer
Intro Image. Amazon Mining Watch interactive map.

As gold prices continue to increase, small-scale gold mining activity also continues to be one of the major deforestation drivers across the Amazon. 

It often targets remote areas, thus impacting carbon-rich primary forests. Moreover, in many cases, we presume that this mining is illegal based on its location within conservation areas (such as protected areas and Indigenous territories) and outside mining concessions.

Given the vastness of the Amazon, however, it has been a challenge to accurately and regularly monitor mining deforestation across all nine countries of the biome, in order to better inform related policies in a timely manner.

In a previous report (MAAP #212) we presented the initial results of the new AI-based dashboard (known as Amazon Mining Watch) designed to address the issue of gold mining and related policy implications. Amazon Mining Watch (AMW) is a partnership between Earth Genome, the Pulitzer Center’s Rainforest Investigations Network, and Amazon Conservation.

This online tool (see Intro Image) analyzes satellite imagery archives to estimate annual mining deforestation footprints across the entire Amazon, from 2018 to 2024 (Note 1). Although the data is not designed for precise area measurements,  it can be used to give timely estimates needed for management and conservation purposes.  

For example, the cumulative data can be used to estimate and visualize the overall Amazon-wide mining deforestation footprint, and the annual data can be used to identify trends and emerging new mining areas. The algorithm is based on 10-meter resolution imagery from the European Space Agency’s Sentinel-2 satellite and produces 480-meter resolution pixelated mining deforestation alerts.

The only tool of this kind to be truly regional (Amazon-wide) in coverage, AMW can also help foster regional cooperation, in particular in transfrontier areas where a lack of interoperability between official monitoring systems might hamper interventions.

The Amazon Mining Watch partnership is currently working to enhance the functionality and conservation impact of the dashboard, AMW will be a one-stop shop platform including real-time visualization of: 1) AI-based detection of mining deforestation across all nine Amazonian countries, with quarterly updates; 2) Hotspots of urgent mining cases, including river-based mining; and 3) the socio-environmental costs of illegal gold mining with the Conservation Strategy Fund (CSF) Mining Impacts Calculator.

Here, we present an update focused on the newly added 2024 data and its context within the cumulative dataset (since 2018).

MAJOR FINDINGS

In  the following sections, we highlight several major findings:

  • Gold mining is actively causing deforestation in all nine countries of the Amazon. This impact is concentrated in three major areas: southeast Brazil, the Guyana Shield, and southern Peru. In addition, mining in Ecuador is escalating.
  • The cumulative mining deforestation footprint in 2024 was over 2 million hectares (nearly 5 million acres) and has increased by over 50% in the past six years.
  • Over half of all Amazon mining deforestation occurred in Brazil, followed by Guyana, Suriname, Venezuela, and Peru.
  • While the cumulative footprint continues to grow, the rate of increase slowed in 2023 and 2024 after peaking in 2022, likely due to increased enforcement in Brazil.
  • Over one-third of the mining deforestation has occurred within protected areas and Indigenous territories, where much of it is likely illegal. We highlight the most impacted areas.
  • These results have important policy implications.
Base Map. Mining deforestation footprints, 2018-2024. Data: AMW, Amazon Conservation/MAAP.

Amazon & National Scale Patterns

The Base Map presents the gold mining footprint across the Amazon, as detected by the AMW algorithm. This data serves as our estimate of gold mining deforestation.

Yellow indicates the accumulated mining deforestation footprint for the years 2018- 2023; that is, all areas that the algorithm classified as a mining site vs other types of terrain, such as forest or agriculture. Red indicates the new mining areas detected in 2024.

Three major Amazon gold mining regions stand out: southeast Brazil (between the Tapajos, Xingu, and Tocantis Rivers), Guyana Shield (Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana), and southern Peru (Madre de Dios).  In addition, Ecuador has emerged as an important mining deforestation front.

 

 

 

 

Graph 1. Amazon mining deforestation footprint. Data: AMW

Graph 1 quantifies the spatial data detected by the AMW algorithm. 

The cumulative mining deforestation footprint in 2024 was 2.02 million hectares (4.99 million acres)

For context, the initial mining deforestation footprint was around 970,000 hectares in 2018, the first year of Amazon Mining Watch data.

Between 2019 and 2024, we estimate that the gold mining deforestation grew by 1.06 million hectares (2.61 million acres).

Thus, over half (52.3%) of the cumulative footprint has occurred in just the past six years.

Note that while the cumulative footprint continues to grow, the rate of increase slowed in 2023 and 2024 after peaking in 2022.

 

 

 

Graph 2 shows that, of the total accumulated mining (2.02 million hectares), over half has occurred in Brazil (55.3%), followed by Guyana (15.4%), Suriname (12.4%), Venezuela (7.3%), and Peru (7.0%).

Graph 2. Gold mining deforestation across the Amazon, by country. Data: AMW, Amazon Conservation/MAAP

Graph 3 digs deeper into the AMW data, revealing additional trends between years. This data highlights the annual changes in detected mining deforestation. Note the trend across the entire Amazon at the top in green for overall context, followed by each country. Note that Brazil (orange line) accounts for much of the annual mining (over 50%).

In 2024, we documented the new gold mining deforestation of 111,603 hectares (275,777 acres). This total represents a decrease of 35% relative to the previous year 2023 and 45% relative to the peak year 2022.

The countries with the highest levels of new gold mining deforestation in 2024 were 1) Brazil (57,240 ha), 2) Guyana (19,372 ha), 3) Suriname (15,323 ha), 4) Venezuela (9,531 ha), and 5) Peru (6,020 ha). However, all five of these countries saw a major decrease in 2024, between 33% (Brazil and Suriname) and 46% (Peru).

Graph 3. Annual changes in new mining deforestation. Data: AMW
Figure 1. Protected areas & Indigenous territories impacted by mining deforestation. Data: AMW, ACA/MAAP.

Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories

We estimate that 36% of the accumulated mining deforestation in 2024 (over 725,000 hectares) occurred within protected areas and Indigenous territories (Figure 1; Note 2), where much of it is likely illegal.

Notably, the vast majority of this overall mining deforestation in protected areas and Indigenous territories has occurred in Brazil (88%).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2a. Top 10 impacted protected areas & Indigenous territories. Data: AMW, ACA/MAAP.

Figure 2a illustrates the top ten for both protected areas and Indigenous territories, in terms of both accumulated mining deforestation footprint and new mining deforestation in 2024. Figures 2b-d show zooms of the three main mining areas: southeast Brazil (2b), Guyana Shield (2c), and southern Peru (2d).

The top nine most impacted protected areas (in terms of accumulated footprint) are all in Brazil, led by Tapajós Environmental Protection Area. This area has lost over 377,000 hectares, followed by Amanã and Crepori National Forests, Rio Novo National Park, Urupadi, Jamanxim, and Itaituba National Forests, Jamanxim National Park, and Altamira National Forest. The top ten is rounded out by Yapacana National Park in Venezuela.

The three most impacted Indigenous territories are also in Brazil: Kayapó, Mundurucu, and Yanomami. Together, these three territories had a mining footprint of nearly 120,000 hectares. Fourth on the list is Ikabaru in Venezuela, followed by three in southern Peru (San Jose de Karene, Barranco Chico, and Kotsimba) with mining impact of over 17,000 hectares. Rounding out the top ten are Sai Cinza and Trincheira/Bacajá in Brazil, and San Jacinto in Peru.

We also estimate the expansion of over 38,000 hectares of new mining deforestation in protected areas and Indigenous territories in 2024. The protected area with the highest levels of new mining deforestation in 2024 was Tapajós Environmental Protection Area (nearly 19,000 hectares), followed by Amanã and Urupadi National Forests in Brazil, Rio Novo and Jamanxim National Parks in Brazil, Crepori National Forest in Brazil, Campos Amazonicos National Park in Brazil, Yapacan National Park in Venezuela, Guyane Regional Park in French Guiana, and Brownsberg Nature Reserve in Suriname.

Finally, the Indigenous territory with the highest levels of new mining deforestation in 2024 was Kayapó in Brazil (over 2,100 hectares), followed by Ikabaru in Venezuela, Yanomami, Aripuana, and Mundurucu in Brazil, Baramita in Guyana, Kuruáya in Brazil, Isseneru and Kamarang Keng, San Jose de Karene in Peu. It is worth noting that Kayapó, Mundurucu, and Yanomami territories in Brazil all experienced declines in the mining deforestation rate in 2024. For example, Yanomami went from its peak in 2021 to the lowest on record in 2024.

Most impacted areas in eastern Brazilian Amazon

Figure 2b. Most impacted areas in eastern Brazilian Amazon. Data: AMW, Amazon Conservation/MAAP.

Most impacted areas in the Guyana Shield

Figure 2c. Most impacted areas in the Guyana Shield. Data: AMW, Amazon Conservation/MAAP.

Most impacted areas in the southern Peruvian Amazon

Figure 2d. Most impacted areas in the southern Peruvian Amazon. Data: AMW, Amazon Conservation/MAAP.

Conclusion & Policy Implications

Despite a recent downward trend in the rate of gold mining deforestation, the cumulative gold mining deforestation footprint continues to grow across the Amazon.

Our analysis shows that over one-third of this mining occurs within protected areas and Indigenous territories, the vast majority in Brazil. However, since the return of the Lula administration in 2023, Brazil has been ramping up enforcement efforts. This has contributed to the rapid decrease in area lost to mining across the Amazon, given Brazil’s outsized contribution to regional figures. This highlights again the importance of protected areas and Indigenous territories as a crucial policy instrument for the protection of the region’s ecosystems.

Although advances have been made in reducing illegal mining from protected areas in southern Peru, it continues to impact several Indigenous territories (MAAP #208, MAAP #196), particularly those surrounding the government-designated Mining Corridor. In fact, the most affected Indigenous territory in Peru, San Jose de Karene, has already lost over a third of its total area to illegal gold mining.  These territories are part of a regional organization known as FENAMAD, which has been supporting legal actions to help the government make decisions for a rapid response to illicit activities (such as illegal mining) that affect indigenous territories. This process led to five government-led operations between 2022 and 2024, in three communities: Barranco Chico, Kotsimba and San José de Karene (MAAP #208).

In Ecuador, mining deforestation continues to threaten numerous sites, including protected areas and Indigenous territories, along the Andes-Amazon transition zone (MAAP #206, MAAP #221, MAAP #219). An upcoming series of reports will detail these threats.

AMW is an emerging and powerful new tool, but it does have some caveats. One is that any mining activity less than 500 square meters may not be accurately detected. For example, we have been monitoring small-scale mining in several protected areas, such as Madidi National Park in Bolivia and Puinawai National Park in Colombia, that are not yet detected by the algorithm. In these cases, direct real-time monitoring with satellites is still needed. These areas will soon be added to the AMW as mining “Hotspots” (MAAP#197).

This is also the case for river-based mining that does not cause a large footprint on the ground. Imagery with very high resolution has revealed active river barge mining in northern Peru (MAAP #189) and along the Colombia/Brazil border (MAAP#197). These areas will also soon be added to the AMW as mining “Hotspots.”

Gold mining in the Amazon is certain to stay a major issue in the coming years as gold prices continue to skyrocket, reaching over $3,000 an ounce in April 2025, driven by global economic uncertainty. While there are encouraging signs of effective enforcement in Brazil, governments here and across the region will have to compete with this rising financial incentive for mining activities.

Tools such as the Amazon Mining Watch, which will eventually publish quarterly updates of newly detected mining deforestation areas, can help governments, civil society, and local community defenders spot new fronts of gold mining and take action in near real-time. In a feature developed by Conservation Strategy Fund (CSF), it will also evaluate the economic costs of socio-environmental mining damages necessary for communities and managers to declare punitive damages.

The only dashboard of this kind to be fully regional in coverage, the AMW can also help foster regional cooperation, in particular in transfrontier areas where a lack of interoperability between official monitoring systems might hamper interventions that are aimed at combating a phenomenon that is linked to other nature crimes and is mostly controlled by international organized crime. 

In the coming years, the MAAP and AMW teams will continue to publish both quarterly and annual reports of the dynamic mining situation in each country and across the Amazon, in addition to confidential reports directly to governments and community leaders on the most urgent cases.

Notes

1. Note that in this report, we focus on mining activity that causes deforestation. The vast majority is artisanal or small-scale gold mining, but other mining activities have also been detected, such as iron, aluminum, and nickel mines in Brazil and Colombia. Additional critical gold mining areas in rivers that are not yet causing deforestation (such as in northern Peru, southeast Colombia, and northwest Brazil; see MAAP #197), are not included in this report. This information is not yet displayed in Amazon Mining Watch, but future updates will include river-based mining hotspots. 

2. 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.

Acknowledgments

We thank colleagues from partner organizations around the Amazon for helpful comments on the report, including: Earth Genome, Conservación Amazónica (ACCA & ACEAA) & Federación Nativa del Río Madre de Dios y Afluentes (FENAMAD), Fundación EcoCiencia, Fundación para la Conservación y el Desarrollo Sostenible (FCDS), and Instituto Centro de Vida (ICV) & Instituto Socioambiental (ISA).

This report was made possible by the generous support of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

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 #224: Illegal Deforestation in the Colombian Amazon – Chiribiquete National Park & Llanos del Yarí – Yaguará II Indigenous Reserve

Posted on by Matt Finer
Graph 1. Deforestation in the Colombian Amazon, 2013-2024. Data: IDEAM, UMD/GFW

The Colombian Environment Ministry recently announced that, after the country experienced its lowest deforestation in over 20 years in 2023, forest clearing rose 35% in 2024 (Graph 1). In addition, the Ministry reported an increase in medium-sized clearing, indicating relatively organized and funded operations (Note 1).

Over the past 10 years, 60% of the national deforestation has occurred in the Colombian Amazon. As Graph 1 indicates, there was a large increase in 2017 following the peace accords with the guerrilla group FARC, and a subsequent decrease in 2022 and 2023 (Note 2). Initial estimates indicate an increase for 2024 (Note 3). Overall, there have been nearly 1,200,000 hectares of deforestation across the Colombian Amazon over the past 10 years.

Much of the clearing in the Colombian Amazon is likely illegal (Law of 2021), occurring in national protected areas and Indigenous reserves.

Base Map: Focal area of the report. Data: ACA/MAAP, FCDS.

Here, we highlight recent 2024-25 deforestation in two key areas in the core of the Colombian Amazon: Chiribiquete National Park (Parque Nacional Natural Serranía de Chiribiquete) and the adjacent Llanos del Yarí – Yaguará II Indigenous Reserve (Resguardo Indígena Llanos del Yarí – Yaguará II). See the Base Map for additional context.

These areas are affected by several deforestation pressures, such as the expansion of road infrastructure, extensive livestock farming, pasture expansion, land grabbing, and illicit crops (coca). These pressures often interact, with access roads facilitating livestock farming and pasture expansion, which then facilitates land grabbing.

These drivers have led to the deforestation of over 7,100 hectares in Chiribiquete National Park since its most recent expansion in 2018 (see Annex 1).

Most recently, we estimate the deforestation of 525 hectares in Chiribiquete National Park (concentrated in the northern sector) during 2024-25, plus an additional 856 hectares in Llanos del Yarí – Yaguará II Indigenous Reserve. Note that most of the deforestation follows access roads.

Below, we illustrate the key cases of recent deforestation in both areas, highlighting the role of access roads as facilitators of illegal clearing. These case studies feature satellite images and overflight photos.

Any deforestation in these areas is noteworthy not only due to its impacts on primary forests, biodiversity, and Indigenous groups, but also on carbon reserves. In an upcoming report, we reveal that Chiribiquete National Park is one of the Amazon’s most important and significant carbon sinks.

This report was conducted in collaboration with our Colombian partner Foundation for Conservation and Sustainable Development (Fundación para la Conservación y el Desarrollo Sostenible – FCDS), and with financial support from the Overbrook Foundation.

Illegal Deforestation Cases

Zoom 1. Chiribiquete National Park. Data: ACA/MAAP, FCDS.

Chiribiquete National Park: Sector el Camuya

Zoom 1 shows the deforestation of 198 hectares during 2024 and early 2025 (indicated by red circles), along the Tunia-Ajaju road in the northwest sector of Chiribiquete National Park.

This road extends 45.3 kilometers into the park.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 1A. Data: FCDS.

In January 2025, FCDS conducted a low-altitude overflight over this sector (see Photos 1A-C).

These photos bring an added level of spatial resolution and perspective, providing greater insight into the cause of the recent deforestation.

Photo 1A highlights deforestation associated with the opening of access roads in the park.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 1B. Data: FCDS.

Photos 1B-C illustrate more clearly the fresh deforestation for expansion of the agricultural frontier.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 1C. Data: FCDS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zoom 2. Chiribiquete National Park. Data: ACA/MAAP, FCDS.

Chiribiquete National Park: Sector El Palmar

Zoom 2 shows the deforestation of 179 hectares during 2024 and early 2025 (indicated by red circles), along the Cachicamo-Tunia road in the northern sector of Chiribiquete National Park.

This road extends 21 kilometers inside the park.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zoom 3. Chiribiquete National Park. Data: ACA/MAAP, FCDS.

Chiribiquete National Park: Sector Norte

Zoom 3 shows the deforestation of 148 hectares during 2024 and early 2025 (indicated by red circles) along or near new access roads in the northeast sector of Chiribiquete National Park.

We estimate the construction of 15.2 kilometers inside the park during this period (also indicated by red circles).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zoom 4. Yarí – Yaguará II Indigenous Reserve. Data: ACA/MAAP, FCDS.

Yarí – Yaguará II Indigenous Reserve 

Zoom 4 shows the major deforestation of 1,070 hectares during 2024 and early 2025 along or near a new illegal road in the northern part of Yarí – Yaguará II Indigenous Reserve.

This road extends 22 kilometers inside the reserve.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 4D. Data: FCDS.

In January 2025, FCDS conducted a low-altitude overflight over this area, confirming and documenting the new patches of deforestation (see Photos 4D-E).

As noted above, these photos bring an added level of spatial resolution and perspective, providing greater insight into the cause of the recent deforestation.

Both Photos 4D-E indicate the expansion of livestock agricultural activities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 4E. Data: FCDS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Policy Implications

The recent deforestation in protected areas and Indigenous territories described above highlights the shortcomings of several current policies of the State of Colombia, which have failed to stem the expansion of cattle ranching and illicit crops as a first step towards land grabbing and permanent deforestation. Several steps could be taken to overcome that failure:

  • Improved coordination between public entities concerned with law enforcement against drivers of deforestation, shortening investigation processes and leading to more effective and comprehensive responses.
  • The inclusion of targets for the reduction of deforestation and the mitigation of impacts on natural forests in agreements for the cessation of hostilities and the de-escalation of the conflict between the national government and armed groups.
  • Monitoring and regulation of public investments for the expansion of livestock farming by local and national governments, to reduce public incentives for deforestation.

Annex 1.

Annex 1. Data: FCDS

Notes

1 Griffin, O (2025) Colombia deforestation rose 35% in 2024, minister says

https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/colombia-deforestation-rose-35-2024-minister-says-2025-02-20/

2 Based on data from Colombia’s Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies (Instituto de Hidrología, Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales – IDEAM), a government agency of the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development.

3 Based on data from the University of Maryland/Global Forest Watch.

Acknowledgments

This report was conducted in collaboration with our Colombian partner Foundation for Conservation and Sustainable Development (Fundación para la Conservación y el Desarrollo Sostenible – FCDS), and with financial support from the Overbrook Foundation.

MAAP #221: Illegal mining in protected areas of the Ecuadorian Amazon

Posted on by Matt Finer
Base Map. Protected areas in the Ecuadorian Amazon threatened by mining.

In a series of previous reports, we warned about the emergence and expansion of mining deforestation in the Ecuadorian Amazon (MAAP #151, MAAP 182, MAAP #219).

Illegal mining in Ecuador tends to operate in remote areas, such as protected areas.

Furthermore, this activity’s proximity to Colombia and Peru facilitates cross-border flows essential for the gold trade.

Here, we analyze the four protected areas in the Ecuadorian Amazon that are currently threatened by mining activities: Podocarpus and Sumaco Napo-Galeras National Parks, Cofán Bermejo Ecological Reserve, and El Zarza Wildlife Refuge (see Base Map).

The mining is occurring deep within Podocarpus National Park.

In the other three areas (Sumaco Napo-Galeras National Park, Cofán Bermejo Ecological Reserve, and El Zarza Wildlife Refuge), unregulated mining activities are expanding in their buffer zones and starting to penetrate their respective boundaries.

Below, we present a concise analysis of these four affected protected areas, featuring high-resolution satellite imagery.

 

 

 

Podocarpus National Park

We analyzed the illegal mining activities along the Loyola River within Podocarpus National Park. We first detected the mining deforestation of 22 hectares in July 2023. By September 2024, this impact had increased to 50 hectares (124 acres), resulting in an illegal expansion of 125% within the park between 2023 and 2024 (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Mining deforestation on the banks of the Loyola River inside the Podocarpus National Park, July 2023 (left panel) vs August 2024 (right panel).
Figure 1a. Skysat image of mining deforestation of the Loyola River within the Podocarpus National Park,

In addition, we used a very high-resolution image (SkySat, 0.50 meters) from March 25, 2024, to visualize the pattern and impact of the illegal mining in greater detail.

Importantly, we found evidence that the mining activity is changing the course of the Loyola River.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sumaco Napo – Galeras National Park

We have continuously monitored the expansion of illegal mining in the Punino River basin ((MAAP #151, MAAP #219).) and its advance towards Sumaco Napo-Galeras National Park. In May 2024, we first detected the penetration of illegal mining across the park’s southeastern boundary.

We estimate the expansion of 142 hectares (350 acres) in the park’s buffer zone, between September 2022 and August 2024. We also just detected the penetration (0.32 hectares) of illegal mining into the park’s boundaries (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Mining deforestation in the Sumaco Napo-Galeras National Park, September 2022 (left panel) vs August 2024 (right panel).

Cofán Bermejo Ecologial Reserve

In MAAP #186, we showed how mining activities along the Bermeja River threaten the boundaries of the Cofán Bermejo Ecological Reserve in the northern Ecuadorian Amazon. In this area, a total mining advance of 337 hectares (833 acres) was recorded during the period from February 2020 to September 2024, of which it was estimated that 1.05 hectares (2.6 acres) are within the boundary of the Cofán Bermejo Ecological Reserve (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Mining deforestation in the Cofán Bermejo Ecological Reserve, Feb 2020 (left panel) vs Sept 2024 (right panel).

El Zarza Wildlife Refuge

We detected mining activities along the Zarza River impacting 33 hectares (82 acres) in the buffer zone of the El Zarza Wildlife Refuge (Figure 4).

Figura 4. Deforestación minera en la zona de amortiguamiento del Refugio de Vida Silvestre el Zarza, septiembre 2022 (panel izq) vs agosto 2024 (panel der).

Acknowledgements

This report is part of a series focused on the Ecuadorian Amazon through a strategic collaboration between the EcoCiencia Foundation and Amazon Conservation, with the support of the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad).

Ecociencia Logo

MAAP #219: Illegal mining expansion in the Ecuadorian Amazon (Punino area)

Posted on by dcadmin
Base Map. Mining deforestation in the heart of the Ecuadorian Amazon (Punino area). Data: ARCERNNR 2022, Planet-NICFI, EcoCiencia.

In a series of previous reports, we warned about the emergence and expansion of illegal mining deforestation in the heart of the Ecuadorian Amazon, in the area surrounding the ​​Punino River, located between the provinces of Napo and Orellana (MAAP #182, MAAP #151).

In the most recent report, we informed that this mining impact had reached 1,000 hectares (MAAP #206).

Here, we provide an update on the growing mining activity in and around the Punino River basin during the first half of 2024.

The Base Map shows an increase of 420 hectares in 2024 (indicated in red), bringing the total impact to 1,422 hectares (3,500 acres) since its inception in 2019 (yellow and red combined). This total is equivalent to more than 2,000 professional soccer fields.

The Base Map also shows that the vast majority (90%) of the mining deforestation is located outside the limits of the areas authorized for such activity (according to the mining registry updated to 2022). In other words, the vast majority of mining is likely illegal.

We emphasize that the mining deforestation has rapidly expanded to enter the limits of two protected areas: Sumaco-Napo Galeras National Park and El Chaco Municipal Conservation Area (see Figure 1, below).

In addition, the mining deforestation is actively expanding within the boundaries of Indigenous territories of the Kichwa nationality (see Figure 2, below).

Below we illustrate in more detail the rapid increase in mining deforestation, especially in these protected areas and Indigenous territories.

Mining expansion in the Punino area, 2019-2024

Chart 1 illustrates the steadily increasing mining deforestation in the Punino area over the past 5 years. The impact began in 2019, reaching 1,000 hectares by the end of 2023, and more recently reaching 1,422 hectares in June 2024.

Chart 1. Historical deforestation due to mining in the Punino area between November 2019 and June 2024

Expansion of illegal mining in protected areas

Figure 1 shows the expansion of mining deforestation in and around the two protected areas of the Punino zone. Note that mining has recently penetrated the boundaries of both Sumaco-Napo Galeras National Park (0.32 hectares) and El Chaco Municipal Conservation Area (144 hectares).

Figure 1. Protected areas affected by mining activity between 2019 and 2024 in the Punino area. Data: ARCERNNR 2022, MAATE 2024, NCI 2018, Planet-NICFI, EcoCiencia.

Figure 2 shows the initial encroachment (0.32 hectares) of mining deforestation in the boundaries of Sumaco Napo-Galeras National Park between September 2022 (left panel) and June 2024 (right panel).

Figure 2. Mining deforestation within the boundaries of Sumaco Napo-Galeras National Park, comparing September 2022 (left panel) with June 2024 (right panel). Data: MAATE 2024, Planet/NICFI, EcoCiencia.

Figure 3 shows the invasion and expansion of deforestation due to mining (144 hectares) within the boundaries of El Chaco Municipal Conservation Area between September 2023 (left panel) and June 2024 (right panel).

Figure 3. Mining deforestation within the boundaries of the El Chaco Municipal Conservation Area, comparing September 2023 (left panel) with June 2024 (right panel). Data: NCI 2018, Planet/NICFI, Ecociencia.

Expansion of illegal mining in indigenous territories

Figure 4 shows the expansion of mining deforestation (300 hectares) in relation to the Indigenous territories of the Kichwa nationality in the Punino area.

Figure 4. Indigenous territories affected by mining activity between 2019 and 2024 in the Punino area. Data: RAISG 2023, ARCERNNR 2022, Planet-NICFI, EcoCiencia.

Figure 5 shows the expansion of deforestation due to mining in the indigenous territories of the Kichwa nationality between September 2023 (left panel) and June 2024 (right panel).

Figure 5. Mining deforestation within indigenous territory of the Kichwa nationality, comparing September 2023 (left panel) with June 2024 (right panel). Data: RAISG 2023, Planet-NICFI, EcoCiencia.

Figure 6 shows the expansion of deforestation due to mining in indigenous territories of the Kichwa nationality south of the study area between November 2019 (left panel) and June 2024 (right panel).

Figure 6. Mining deforestation within indigenous territory of the Kichwa nationality, comparing November 2019 (left panel) with June 2024 (right panel). Data: RAISG 2023, Planet-NICFI, EcoCiencia.

 

Annex 1

Annex 1 shows the four watersheds impacted by mining activity: the Punino River basin and also the Sardinas River, Lumucha River and Supayacu River basins, which in turn form part of the Coca River macro-water system.

Annex 1. Water systems impacted by mining activity in the Punino area.

 

Annex 2

Annex 2 shows the construction of 91 kilometers of roads due to mining activity.

Annex 2. Construction of access roads associated with mining activity.

Acknowledgements

This report is part of a series focused on the Ecuadorian Amazon through a strategic collaboration between the EcoCiencia Foundation and Amazon Conservation, with the support of the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad).

MAAP #213: Estimating Carbon in Amazon Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories

Posted on by dcadmin
Intro Image. Screenshot of OBI-WAN forest carbon reporting app.

In a recent report (MAAP #199), we presented the updated version of NASA’s GEDI data,1 which uses lasers aboard the International Space Station to provide cutting-edge estimates of aboveground carbon globally, including our focal area, the Amazon.

These lasers, however, have not yet achieved full coverage, leaving considerable gaps in the data and resulting maps.

Here, we feature two new tools that allow us to fill in these gaps and provide detailed wall-to-wall estimates of aboveground biomass for specific areas, which can then be converted to aboveground carbon estimates.

The first is the OBI-WAN forest carbon reporting app (see Intro Image), which uses statistical inference to produce mean, total, and uncertainty estimates for biomass baselines at any given scale (from local to worldwide).2

The second is a fused product from GEDI and TanDEM-X missions.3 The combination of lidar (GEDI) and radar (TanDEM-X) has started to produce unmatched maps that combine the ability of lidar to retrieve forest structure and the ability of radar to offer wall-to-wall coverage at multiple resolutions (see Figures 1-5 below for examples at 25m resolution).

Employing these two tools, we focus on estimating aboveground carbon for select examples of two critical land designations in the Amazon: protected areas and indigenous territories. Both are critical to the long-term conservation of the core Amazon (MAAP #183). We hope that providing precise carbon data will provide additional incentives for their long-term conservation.

We select 5 focal areas (3 National Parks and 2 Indigenous Territories; see list below) across the Amazon to demonstrate the power of these datasets. Together, these five areas are currently home to over 1.4 billion metric tons of aboveground carbon.

  • Protected Areas (National Parks)
    Chirbiquete National Park (Colombian Amazon)
    Manu National Park (Peruvian Amazon)
    Madidi National Park (Bolivian Amazon)
    k
  • Indigenous Territories
    Kayapó Indigenous Territory (Brazilian Amazon)
    Barranco Chico Indigenous Territory (Peruvian Amazon)

Focal Areas

As noted above, the aboveground carbon estimates below are based on the aboveground biomass estimates from the OBI-WAN forest carbon reporting app and GEDI-TanDEM-X data. Figures 1 – 5 are based on GEDI-TanDEM-X, at 25 meter resolution.

National Parks

Chirbiquete National Park (Colombian Amazon)

Chirbiquete National Park covers over 4.2 million hectares in the heart of the Colombian Amazon (Guaviare and Caqueta departments). Both datasets converge in the estimate of around 600 metric tons of aboveground biomass, equating to over 300 million metric tons of aboveground carbon across the park (80.5 tons of carbon per hectare). Figure 1 shows the detailed spatial distribution of this biomass across Chirbiquete National Park. Note that the GEDI-TanDEM-X data misses the western tip of the park.

Figure 1. Aboveground biomass across Chiribiquete National Park (Colombian Amazon). Data: GEDI-TanDEM-X

 

Manu National Park (Peruvian Amazon)

Figure 2. Aboveground biomass across Manu National Park (Peruvian Amazon). Data: GEDI-TanDEM-X

Manu National Park covers over 1.7 million hectares in the southern Peruvian Amazon (Madre de Dios and Cusco regions).

Both datasets converge in the estimate of over 450 metric tons of aboveground biomass, equating to over 215 million metric tons of aboveground carbon across the territory (126.8 tons of carbon per hectare).

Figure 2 shows the detailed spatial distribution of this biomass across Manu National Park.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Madidi National Park (Bolivian Amazon)

Figure 3. Aboveground biomass across Madidi National Park (Bolivian Amazon). Data: GEDI-TanDEM-X

Madidi National Park and Integrated Management Area covers over 1.8 million hectares in the western Bolivian Amazon (La Paz department).

Both datasets converge in the estimate of over 350 metric tons of aboveground biomass, equating to over 160 million metric tons of aboveground carbon across the park (85.3 tons of carbon per hectare).

Figure 3 shows the detailed spatial distribution of this biomass across Madidi National Park. Note that the GEDI-TanDEM-X data misses the southern tip of the park.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Indigenous Territories

Kayapó Indigenous Territory (Brazilian Amazon)

Kayapó Indigenous Territory covers over 3.2 million hectares in the eastern Brazilian Amazon (Pará state). Both datasets converge in the estimate of over 413,000 metric tons of aboveground biomass, equating to over 198 million metric tons of aboveground carbon across the territory. Figure 4 shows the detailed spatial distribution of this biomass across Kayapó and four neighboring Indigenous Territories. Totaling across these five territories (10.4 million hectares), the data sets converge on over 1.5 billion metric tons of aboveground biomass, and 730 million metric tons of aboveground carbon (70 tons per hectare).

Figure 4. Aboveground biomass across Kayapó and neighboring Indigenous Territories (Brazilian Amazon). Data: GEDI-TanDEM-X

Barranco Chico Indigenous Territory (Peruvian Amazon)

Barranco Chico Indigenous Territory covers over 12,600 hectares in the southern Peruvian Amazon (Madre de Dios region). Both datasets converge in the estimate of over 2 million metric tons of aboveground biomass, equating to over 1 million metric tons of aboveground carbon. Figure 5 shows the detailed spatial distribution of this biomass across Barranco Chico and two neighboring Indigenous Territories (Puerto Luz and San Jose de Karene). Totaling across these three territories (nearly 90,000 hectares), the data sets converge on over 19 million metric tons of aboveground biomass, and over 9 million metric tons of aboveground carbon (102 tons per hectare).

Figure 5. Aboveground biomass across Barranco Chico and neighboring Indigenous Territories (Peruvian Amazon). Data: GEDI-TanDEM-X

Notes

1 GEDI L4B Gridded Aboveground Biomass Density, Version 2.1. This data is measured in megagrams of aboveground biomass per hectare (Mg/ha) at a 1-kilometer resolution, with the period of April 2019 – March 2023. This serves as our estimate for aboveground carbon reserves, with the science-based assumption that 48% of recorded biomass is carbon.

2 The approach relies on the foundational paper from Patterson et al., (2019) and it is used by the GEDI mission to estimate mean and total biomass worldwide (Dubayh et al., 2022, Armston et al., 2023). The method considers the spatial distribution of GEDI tracks within a given user-specify boundary to infer the sampling error component of the total uncertainty that also includes the error from the GEDI L4A models used to predict biomass from canopy height estimates (Keller et al., 2022). For more information on the OBI-WAN app, see Healey and Yang 2022.

3 GEDI-TanDEM-X (GTDX) is a fusion of GEDI Version 2 and TanDEM-X (TDX) Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) images (from Jan 2011 to December 2020). It also incorporates annual forest loss data to account for deforestation during this time. The GTDX aboveground biomass maps were produced based on a generalized hierarchical model-based (GHMB) framework that utilizes GEDI biomass as training data to establish models for estimating biomass based on the GTDX canopy height. The combination of lidar (GEDI) and radar (TanDEM-X) has started to produce unmatched maps that combine the ability of lidar to retrieve forest structure and the ability of radar to offer wall-to-wall coverage (Qi et al.,2023, Dubayah et a;., 2023). This fused product is a wall-to-wall gap-free map that was produced at multiple resolutions: 25m, 100m and 1ha. Ongoing processing over the Pantropic region will be made available over the next months but some geographies have been already mapped such as most of the Amazon Basin (Dubayah et al., 2023). The data we used is publicly available.

References

Armston, J., Dubayah, R. O., Healey, S. P., Yang, Z., Patterson, P. L., Saarela, S., Stahl, G., Duncanson, L., Kellner, J. R., Pascual, A., & Bruening, J. (2023). Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI)GEDI L4B Country-level Summaries of Aboveground Biomass [CSV]. 0 MB. https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2321

Dubayah, R. O., Armston, J., Healey, S. P., Yang, Z., Patterson, P. L., Saarela, S., Stahl, G., Duncanson, L., Kellner, J. R., Bruening, J., & Pascual, A. (2023). Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI)GEDI L4B Gridded Aboveground Biomass Density, Version 2.1 [COG]. 0 MB. https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2299

Dubayah, R., Armston, J., Healey, S. P., Bruening, J. M., Patterson, P. L., Kellner, J. R., Duncanson, L., Saarela, S., Ståhl, G., Yang, Z., Tang, H., Blair, J. B., Fatoyinbo, L., Goetz, S., Hancock, S., Hansen, M., Hofton, M., Hurtt, G., & Luthcke, S. (2022). GEDI launches a new era of biomass inference from space. Environmental Research Letters, 17(9), 095001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac8694

Dubayah, R., Blair, J. B., Goetz, S., Fatoyinbo, L., Hansen, M., Healey, S., Hofton, M., Hurtt, G., Kellner, J., Luthcke, S., Armston, J., Tang, H., Duncanson, L., Hancock, S., Jantz, P., Marselis, S., Patterson, P. L., Qi, W., & Silva, C. (2020). The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation: High-resolution laser ranging of the Earth’s forests and topography. Science of Remote Sensing, 1, 100002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srs.2020.100002

Healey S, Yang Z (2022) The OBIWAN App: Estimating Property-Level Carbon Storage Using NASA’s GEDI Lidar. https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/rmrs/understory/obiwan-app-estimating-property-level-carbon-storage-using-nasas-gedi-lidar

Kellner, J. R., Armston, J., & Duncanson, L. (2022). Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document for GEDI Footprint Aboveground Biomass Density. Earth and Space Science, 10(4), e2022EA002516. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022EA002516

Dubayah, R.O., W. Qi, J. Armston, T. Fatoyinbo, K. Papathanassiou, M. Pardini, A. Stovall, C. Choi, and V. Cazcarra-Bes. 2023. Pantropical Forest Height and Biomass from GEDI and TanDEM-X Data Fusion. ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA. https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2298

Qi, W., J. Armston, C. Choi, A. Stovall, S. Saarela, M. Pardini, L. Fatoyinbo, K. Papathanasiou, and R. Dubayah. 2023. Mapping large-scale pantropical forest canopy height by integrating GEDI lidar and TanDEM-X InSAR data. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3306982/v1

Krieger, G., M. Zink, M. Bachmann, B. Bräutigam, D. Schulze, M. Martone, P. Rizzoli, U. Steinbrecher, J. Walter Antony, F. De Zan, I. Hajnsek, K. Papathanassiou, F. Kugler, M. Rodriguez Cassola, M. Younis, S. Baumgartner, P. López-Dekker, P. Prats, and A. Moreira. 2013. TanDEM-X: A radar interferometer with two formation-flying satellites. Acta Astronautica 89:83–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2013.03.008

Acknowledgments

We greatly thank the University of Maryland’s GEDI team for data access and reviewing this report. In particular, we thank Ralph Dubayah, Matheus Nunes, and Sean Healey.

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

Citation

Mamani N, Pascual A, Finer M (2024) Estimating Carbon in Amazon Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories. MAAP: 213

MAAP #211: Illegal roads and Deforestation in Indigenous Reserves & National Parks of the Colombian Amazon

Posted on by dcadmin

Illegal roads are a major threat to the Colombian Amazon, often opening remote primary forests to the main drivers of deforestation: cattle pastures, land grabbing and coca production.

Base Map. Illegal roads causing recent deforestation. Data: MAAP/ACA, FCDS.

These illegal roads threaten protected areas (including national parks) and indigenous territories (known as Resguardos in Colombia).

In 2024, in collaboration with our Colombian partner FCDS, we have documented these impacts in two important areas in the heart of the Colombian Amazon: the Llanos del Yari-Yaguara II Indigenous Reserve and the adjacent Chiribiquete National Park (see Base Map).

Most notably, in the Llanos del Yari-Yaguara II Indigenous Reserve, we see the construction of a new road, causing massive deforestation of primary forests, both within and adjacent to the territory (856 hectares, or 2,115 acres, in total).

In Chiribiquete National Park, we see the expansion of deforestation of 64 hectares (158 acres) along an illegal road penetrating the northwest sector of this important protected area.

Below, we show satellite images for both cases.

Llanos del Yari- Yaguara II Indigenous Reserve

Since March 2023, a new 14-kilometer illegal road has been built in this area, of which 5.3 km is within the northeastern sector of the Llanos del Yari- Yaguara II Indigenous Reserve, located in the department of Guaviare. Figures 1 and 2 show that this construction has caused massive deforestation: 856 hectares (2,115 acres), of which 394 hectares are within the Reserve, between February 2023 (left panel) and March 2024 (right panel). This deforestation is presumably for new cattle pasture, facilitated by the new road. Note that Figure 1 shows the satellite images without markings, while Figure 2 adds markings for the illegal road construction and associated deforestation.

Figure 1. Deforestation along the new illegal road in the Llanos del Yari- Yaguara II Indigenous Reserve, without markings. Data: Planet, NICFI.
Figure 2. Deforestation along the new illegal road in the Llanos del Yari- Yaguara II Indigenous Reserve, with markings. Data: Planet, NICFI.

Chiribiquete National Park

In the adjacent northwest sector of Chiribiquete National Park, deforestation continues to expand along an existing illegal road, known as the Tunia-Ajaju road, located in the department of Caquetá. Figures 3-6 show the deforestation of 64 hectares (56 hectares in zone B and 8 hectares in zone C) along this road inside the national park, between March 2023 (left panel) and March 2024 (panel right). This deforestation is presumably for new cattle pastures, facilitated by the road. Note that Figures 3 and 5 show the satellite images without markings, while Figures 4 and 6 add markings for the illegal road construction and associated deforestation.

Figure 3. Deforestation along the new illegal road in Chiribiquete National Park (zone B), without markings. Data: Planet, NICFI.
Figure 4. Deforestation along the new illegal road in Chiribiquete National Park (zone B), with markings. Data: Planet, NICFI.
Figure 5. Deforestation along the new illegal road in Chiribiquete National Park (zone C), without markings. Data: Planet, NICFI.
Figure 6. Deforestation along the new illegal road in Chiribiquete National Park (zone C), with markings. Data: Planet, NICFI.

Citation

Finer M, Ariñez A (2024) Illegal roads and Deforestation in Indigenous Reserves & National Parks of the Colombian Amazon. MAAP: 211.

 

MAAP #197: Illegal Gold Mining Across the Amazon

Posted on by Matt Finer
Example of major gold mining zone in the Peruvian Amazon. Data: Planet.

Illegal Gold Mining continues to be one of the major issues facing nearly all Amazonian countries.

In fact, following the recent high-level summit of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization, the nations’ leaders signed the Belém Declaration, which contains a commitment to prevent and combat illegal mining, including strengthened regional and international cooperation (Objective 32).

Illegal gold mining is a major threat to the Amazon because it impacts both primary forests and rivers, often in remote and critical areas such as protected areas & indigenous territories.

That is, illegal gold mining is both a major deforestation driver and a source of water contamination (especially mercury) across the Amazon.

Previously, in MAAP #178, we presented a large-scale overview of the major gold mining deforestation hotspots across the entire Amazon biome. We found that gold mining is actively causing deforestation in nearly all nine countries of the Amazon.

Here, we update this analysis with two important additions. First, we add to the overview major gold mining operations taking place in rivers, in addition to those causing deforestation (see Figure 1).

Second, we present a new map of likely illegal gold mining sites, based on information from partners and location with protected areas and indigenous territories (see Figure 2).

Finally, we show a series of high-resolution satellite images of key examples of illegal Amazon gold mining.

Updated Amazon Gold Mining Map

Figure 1 is our updated Amazon gold mining map.

The orange dots indicate areas where gold mining is currently causing deforestation of primary forests. The blue dots indicate areas where gold mining is occurring in rivers. Combined, we documented 58 active forest and river-based mining sites across the Amazon.

The dots outlined in red indicate the mining sites that are likely illegal, for both forest and river-based mining. We found at least 49 cases of illegal mining across the Amazon, the vast majority of the active mining sites noted above.

Note the concentrations of illegal mining causing deforestation in southern Peru, across eastern Brazil, and across Ecuador. Similarly, note the concentrations of illegal mining in rivers in northern Peru and adjacent Colombia and Brazil.

Figure 1. Updated Amazon gold mining map. Data: ACA/MAAP. Click to enlarge.

Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories

Figure 2 adds protected areas and indigenous territories. We found at least 36 conflictive overlaps: 16 in protected areas and 20 in indigenous territories. We also found an additional two conflicts with Brazilian National Forests.

We highlight a number of high-conflict zones. For protected areas: Podocarpus National Park in Ecuador; Madidi National Park in Bolivia; Canaima, Caura, and Yapacana National Parks in Venezuela. We note that the Peruvian government has been effectively minimizing invasions in protected areas in the southern region of Madre de Dios (Tambopata National Reserve and Amarakaeri Communal Reserve).

For indigenous territories: Kayapo, Menkragnoti, Yanomami, and Mundurucu in Brazil; Pueblo Shuar Arutam in Ecuador, and a number of communities in southern Peru.

Figure 2. Amazon gold mining map., with protected areas and indigenous territories. Data: ACA/MAAP, RAISG. Click to enlarge.

Methods

The forest-based mining sites displayed in Figure 1 are largely based on information obtained over the last several years of our deforestation monitoring work. The river-based sites are largely based on information obtained from partners in country and on the ground.

We complemented this information with automated, machine-based data from Amazon Mining Watch, and data from RAISG.

For these sources, we checked recent imagery and only included sites that appeared to still be active.

Classification as an illegal mining site is largely based on location within protected areas or indigenous territories, or clearly
outside of an authorized mining zone

Citation

Finer M, Mamani N, Arinez A, Novoa S, Larrea-Alcázar D, Villa J (2023) Illegal Gold Mining Across the Amazon. MAAP: 197.

 

MAAP #185: Gold Mining Deforestation in the Southern Peruvian Amazon: 2021-2022 Update

Posted on by dcadmin
Base Map. Gold Mining Deforestation in the Southern Peruvian Amazon, 2021-2022 update. Zooms indicated by insets A-F. Click on image to enlarge. Data: ACA/MAAP, CINCIA.

Gold mining continues to be one of the main causes of deforestation in the southern Peruvian Amazon, especially in the Madre de Dios region.

Here, we provide a comprehensive look at the most recent (2021-2022) gold mining-related deforestation in the area, combining two important types of data for the first time:

  1. Deforestation within the Mining Corridor, a large area delimited by the Peruvian government to organize and promote mining. Mining activity in this corridor, officially known as the “Small-scale and Artisanal Mining Zone in the department of Madre de Dios,” can be formal, informal, or illegal.1
    j
  2. Deforestation outside the Mining Corridor, which represents our estimate of illegal mining. According to current regulations (Legislative Decree No. 1336), illegal mining occurs in one or more territorial categories such as protected natural areas, indigenous reserves, and natural bodies of water (such as lakes or rivers). Therefore, for this report, the presence of mining-related deforestation in protected natural areas and their buffer zones, as well as indigenous communities, is considered an indicator of illegality. However, it is important to recognize the possibility that some of these findings may be covered by current regulations regarding mining formalization.2 Therefore, it is recommended to consider the findings of illegal deforestation as referential.

These two study areas cover a total of 1.38 million hectares and include all detected mining areas in the southern Peruvian Amazon.

We highlight several important findings (see Base Map and Table 1):

  • Table 1. Data: ACA/MAAP.

    We estimate a total deforestation of 18,421 hectares (45,520 acres) due to gold mining in the southern Peruvian Amazon in the last two years (2021-2022).
    l

  • Of this total, the majority of mining-related deforestation (76.6%, or 14,117 hectares) occurred within the Mining Corridor.
    l
  • The remaining deforestation (23.4%, or 4,304 hectares) took place outside the Mining Corridor. Breaking down this percentage, 15% is found in indigenous communities, 4.8% in buffer zones of protected natural areas, 0.8% in forest concessions, and 2.8% in non-zoned areas.
    j
  • Furthermore, we found that mining within protected natural areas, such as the Tambopata National Reserve and the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve, has been effectively controlled by the Peruvian government through the National Service of Protected Natural Areas (SERNANP).
    j
  • It is important to highlight that mining has stopped in the core of La Pampa (the most critical zone during the years 2014-2018) following Operation Mercury in early 2019 and the subsequent Restoration Plan in 2021.
    j
  • Compared to the years prior to Operation Mercury (2017-2018), there has been an approximate decrease of 4.5% (866 hectares) in mining-related deforestation. Most notably, there has been a major reduction in mining outside the corridor (from 47.7% to 23.4%), and a greater concentration within the corridor (from 52.3 to 76.6%).3  That is, an apparent major reduction in illegal mining.

Mining Corridor

Our main finding is that the vast majority (76.6%) of gold mining-related deforestation in the southern Peruvian Amazon occurred within the Mining Corridor.

We estimate that the deforestation due to mining is 14,117 hectares within the Mining Corridor in the last two years (2021-2022). Below, we present a series of zooms of some emblematic examples of recent mining-related deforestation in the corridor (Images A-C).

Image A: Mining Corridor

Image B: Mining Corridor

Image C: Mining Corridor

Outside of the Mining Corridor

The remaining deforestation due to mining (23.4%) is located outside the Mining Corridor. Breaking this down, 15% (2,769 hectares) occurred within indigenous territories, 4.8% (876 hectares) in buffer zones of protected areas, 0.8% (141 hectares) in forest concessions (for Brazil nuts), and 2.8% (517 hectares) in non-zoned areas during the last two years.

Regarding indigenous communities, the most affected were Barranco Chico (816 hectares) and San José de Karene (602 hectares), followed by Tres Islas (482 hectares), San Jacinto (177 hectares), Kotsimba (174 hectares), Puerto Luz (171 hectares), Boca Inambari (140 hectares), Shiringayoc (126 hectares), Arazaire (57 hectares), and El Pilar (23 hectares).

Regarding the buffer zones of protected areas, the most affected were the buffer zones of the Tambopata National Reserve, the Bahuaja Sonene National Park, and the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve. On the other hand, it has been found that mining within the actual protected areas, such as the Tambopata National Reserve and the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve, has been effectively controlled by the Peruvian government through the National Service of Natural Protected Areas (SERNANP).

Regarding forest concessions, deforestation due to mining was identified in 141 hectares within Brazil nut concessions in the Pariamanu and Pariamarca river basins.

Next, we continue with a series of zooms showing some emblematic examples of recent deforestation due to mining in the following prohibited areas: indigenous communities (Barranco Chico, Image D), buffer zone of the Bahuaja Sonene National Park (Chaspa, Image E), and Brazil nut concessions (Pariamanu, Image F).

We also present an important area in the buffer zone of the Tambopata National Reserve known as La Pampa (Image G). La Pampa was the epicenter of destructive deforestation due to gold mining between 2014 and 2018. We show that after Operation Mercury, which began in early 2019, the expansion of gold mining in La Pampa was essentially halted.

Image D: Barranco Chico (Indigenous Community)

Image E: Chaspa (Buffer Zone of Bahuaja Sonene National Park)

Image F: Pariamanu (Brazil Nut Concession)

Image G: La Pampa (Buffer Zone of Tambopata National Reserve)

Annex

We show a version of the Basemap without the zoom insets.

Base Map (without insets). Deforestation by Gold Mining in the Southern Peruvian Amazon, with Update 2021-22. Click image to enlarge. Data: ACA/MAAP, CINCIA.

Notes

1The Mining Corridor, designated by Legislative Decree No. 1100 as the “Zone for small-scale and artisanal mining in the department of Madre de Dios,” categorizes mining activities as follows:

  • Formal: Completed formalization process with approved environmental and operational permits.
  • Informal: In the process of formalization; Operates only in authorized extraction areas, uses permitted machinery, and is considered an administrative offense, not a crime.
  • Illegal: Operates in prohibited areas such as bodies of water (e.g., rivers or lakes), uses prohibited machinery, is considered a criminal offense, and is punishable by imprisonment.

2 Due to the possibility that these activities could be existing operations prior to the declaration of Natural Protected Areas and their buffer zones.

3 The data for 2017-2018 were obtained from the Amazonian Scientific Innovation Center – CINCIA.

Methodology

Mining Corridor

We used LandTrendR, a temporal segmentation algorithm that identifies changes in pixel values over time, to detect forest loss within the Mining Corridor in 2021 and 2022 using the Google Earth Engine platform. It is important to note that this method was originally designed for Landsat images with moderate resolution (30 meters)1, but we adapted it for higher spatial resolution NICFI-Planet monthly mosaics (4.7 meters).2

Additionally, we created a baseline for the period 2016-2020 to eliminate old deforested areas (prior to 2021) due to rapid changes in the natural regrowth process.

Finally, we manually separated forest loss due to mining and other causes in 2021 and 2022 to specifically report on direct impacts related to mining. For this part of the analysis, we used various resources to aid the manual process, such as radar image alerts (RAMI) from the SERVIR Amazonia program, historical data from CINCIA from 1985 to 2020, forest loss data from the Peruvian government (National Forest Conservation Program for Climate Change Mitigation), and the University of Maryland.

  1. Kennedy, R.E., Yang, Z., Gorelick, N., Braaten, J., Cavalcante, L., Cohen, W.B., Healey, S. (2018). Implementation of the LandTrendr Algorithm on Google Earth Engine. Remote Sensing. 10, 691.
  2.  Erik Lindquist, FAO, 2021

Outside the Mining Corridor

These places were identified as the main active fronts of deforestation due to gold mining, based on historical data from the Amazon Scientific Innovation Center – CINCIA and automatic alerts of forest loss generated by both the University of Maryland (GLAD alerts) and the Peruvian government platform (PNCBMCC-Geobosques).

The analysis combines the LandTrendr method (described earlier) with a photo interpretation based on high-resolution satellite images from Planet (3 meters). In each of the sites, we have detected, identified, and analyzed deforestation due to gold mining between 2021 and 2022. For areas with overlap between native communities and buffer zones, priority was given to the areas of the native communities.

Acknowledgements

We thank S. Novoa, C. Zavala, O. Liao, K. Nielsen, S. Otoya, and C. Ipenza for their valuable contributions and comments to this report, and R. McMullen for translation. We also thank C. Ascorra and M. Pillaca from the Amazon Scientific Innovation Center – CINCIA for providing us with historical mining data from 1985 to 2021.

This report was prepared with the technical support of USAID through the Prevent Project. Prevent (Proyecto Prevenir in Spanish) works with the Government of Peru, civil society, and the private sector to prevent and combat environmental crimes for the conservation of the Peruvian Amazon, particularly in the regions of Loreto, Madre de Dios, and Ucayali.

Disclaimer: This publication is made possible by the generous support of the American people through USAID. The contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

 

Citation

Finer M, Mamani N (2023) Gold Mining Deforestation in the Southern Peruvian Amazon: 2021-2022 Update. MAAP: 185.

MAAP #183: Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories Effective Against Deforestation Across Amazon

Posted on by dcadmin
Base Map. Primary forest loss (2017-21) across the Amazon, in relation to protected areas and indigenous territories.

As deforestation continues to threaten primary forest across the Amazon, key land use designations are one of the best hopes for the long-term conservation of critical remaining intact forests.

Here, we evaluate the impact of two of the most important: protected areas & indigenous territories.

Our study looked across all nine countries of the Amazon biome, a vast area of 883.7 million hectares (see Base Map).

We calculated primary forest loss over the past 5 years (2017-2021).

For the first time, we were able to distinguish fire vs non-fire forest loss. For non-fire, while this does include natural events (such as landslides and wind storms), we consider this our best proxy for human-caused deforestation.

We analyzed the results across three major land use categories:

1) Protected Areas (national and state/department levels), which cover 197 million hectares (23.6% of Amazon).

2) Indigenous Territories (official), which cover 163.8 million hectares (19.6% of Amazon).

3) Other (all remaining areas outside protected areas and indigenous territories), which cover 473 million hectares (56.7% of Amazon).

In summary, we found that deforestation was the primary driver of forest loss, with fire always being a smaller subset. Averaged across all 5 years, protected areas and indigenous territories had similar levels of effectiveness, reducing primary forest loss rate by 3x compared to areas outside of these designations.

Below, we show the key results across the Amazon in greater detail, including a breakdown for the western Amazon (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru) and the Brazilian Amazon.

Key Findings

Amazon Biome

We documented the loss of 11 million hectares of primary forests across all nine countries of the Amazon biome between 2017 and 2021. Of this total, 71% was non-fire (deforestation and natural) and 29% was fire.

For the major land use categories, 11% of the forest loss occurred in both protected areas and indigenous territories, respectively, while the remaining 78% occurred outside these designations.

To standardize these results for the varying area coverages, we calculated annual primary forest loss rates (loss/total area of each category). Figure 1 displays the results for these rates across all nine countries of the Amazon biome.

Figure 1. Primary forest loss rates across the Amazon, 2017-21.

Broken down by year, 2017 had the highest forest loss rates, with both a severe deforestation and fire season. In addition, 2021 had the second highest deforestation rate, while 2020 had the second highest fire loss rate.

Averaged across all five years, protected areas (green) had the lowest overall primary forest loss rate (0.12%), closely followed by indigenous territories (0.14%).

Interestingly, indigenous territories (orange) actually had a slightly lower deforestation rate compared to protected areas (0.7 vs 0.8%), but higher fire loss rate (o.7 vs .04%), resulting in the overall higher forest loss rate noted above.

Outside of these designations (red), the primary forest loss rate was triple (.36%), especially due to much higher deforestation.

Western Amazon

Breaking the results down specifically for the western Amazon (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru), we documented the loss of 2.6 million hectares of primary forests between 2017 and 2021. Of this total, 80% was non-fire (deforestation and natural) and 20% was fire.

For the major land use categories, 9.6% occurred in protected areas, 15.6% in indigenous territories, and the remaining 74.8% occurred outside these designations.

Figure 2 displays the standardized primary forest loss rates across the western Amazon.

Figure 2. Primary forest loss rates across the Western Amazon, 2017-21.

Broken down by year, 2017 had the highest deforestation rate and overall forest loss rates. But 2020 had the highest fire loss rate, mainly due to extensive fires in Bolivia. 2021 also had a relatively high deforestation rate. Also, note the high level of fires in protected areas in 2020 and 2021, and indigenous territories in 2019.

Averaged across all five years, protected areas had the lowest overall primary forest loss rate (0.11%), followed by indigenous territories (0.16%).

Outside of these designations, the primary forest loss rate was .30%. That is, triple the protected areas rate and double the indigenous territories rate.

Brazilian Amazon

Breaking the results down specifically for the Brazilian Amazon, we documented the loss of 8.1 million hectares of primary forests between 2017 and 2021. Of this total, 68% was non-fire (deforestation and natural) and 32% was fire.

For the major land use categories, 9.4% occurred in indigenous territories, 11.2% occurred in protected areas, and the remaining 79.4% occurred outside these designations.

Figure 3 displays the standardized primary forest loss rates across the Brazilian Amazon.

Figure 3. Primary forest loss rates in the Brazilian Amazon, 2017-21.

Broken down by year, 2017 had the highest forest loss rate recorded in the entire study (.58%), due to both elevated deforestation and fire. Note that indigenous territories were particularly impacted by fire in 2017.

2020 had the next highest forest loss rate, also driven by an intense fire season. Fires were not as severe the following year in 2021, but deforestation increased.

Averaged across all five years, indigenous territories had the lowest overall primary forest loss rate (0.14%), closely followed by protected areas (0.15%).

Interestingly, indigenous territories had a lower deforestation rate compared to protected areas (0.5 vs 0.11%), but higher fire impact (0.09 vs 0.04%).

Outside of these designations (red), the primary forest loss rate was triple (.45%).

Methodology

To estimate deforestation across all three categories (protected areas, indigenous territories, and other), we used annual forest loss data (2017-21) from the University of Maryland (Global Land Analysis and Discovery GLAD laboratory) to have a consistent source across all countries (Hansen et al 2013).

We obtained this data, which has a 30-meter spatial resolution, from the “Global Forest Loss due to Fires 2000–2021” data download page. It is also possible to visualize and interact with the data on the main Global Forest Change portal.

The annual data is disaggregated into forest loss due to fire vs. non-fire (other disturbance drivers). It is important to note that the non-fire drivers include both human-caused deforestation and forest loss caused by natural forces (landslides, wind storms, etc.).

We also filtered this data for only primary forest loss, following the established methodology of Global Forest Watch. Primary forest is generally defined as intact forest that has not been previously cleared (as opposed to previously cleared secondary forest, for example). We applied this filter by intersecting the forest cover loss data with the additional dataset “primary humid tropical forests” as of 2001 (Turubanova et al 2018). Thus, we often use the term “primary forest loss” to describe this filtered data.

Data presented as primary forest loss rate is standardized per the total area covered of each respective category per year (annual). For example, to properly compare raw forest loss data in areas that are 100 hectares vs 1,000 hectares total size respectively, we divide by the area to standardize the result.

Our geographic range extends from the Andes to the Amazon plain and reaching the transitions with the Cerrado and the Pantanal. This range includes nine countries of the Amazon (or Pan-Amazon region as defined by RAISG) and consists of a combination of the Amazon watershed limit, the Amazon biogeographic limit and the Legal Amazon limit in Brazil. See Base Map above for delineation of this hybrid Amazon limit, designed for maximum inclusion.

Additional data sources include:

  • National and state/department level protected areas: RUNAP 2020 (Colombia), SNAP 2022 (Ecuador), SERNAP & ACEAA 2020 (Bolivia), SERNANP 2022 (Peru), INPE/Terrabrasilis 2022 (Brazil), SOS Orinoco 2021 (Venezuela), and RAISG 2020 (Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana.)
  • Indigenous Territories: RAISG & Ecociencia 2022 (Ecuador), INPE/Terrabrasilis 2022 (Brazil), RAISG 2020 (Colombia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana), and MINCU & ACCA 2021 (Peru). For Peru, this includes titled native communities and Indigenous/Territorial Reserves for indigenous groups in voluntary isolation.

For analysis, we categorized Protected Areas first, then Indigenous Territories to avoid overlapping areas. Each category was disaggregated by year created/recognized to match the annual report of forest loss, for example. If a Protected area was created in December 2018, it would be considered within the analysis for the year 2019.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Andes Amazon Fund (AAF), Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD), and International Conservation Fund of Canada (ICFC).

We thank M. MacDowell and M. Cohen for helpful comments on this report.

Citation

Finer M, Mamani N (2023) Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories Effective Against Deforestation Across Amazon. MAAP: 176.