How about this...not buying any shoes made of leather...I'm all for greenpeace but sometimes you miss the mark...if they aren't destroying the rain forest in brazil they'll find somewhere else to do it...cows have to graze somewhere...and lets face it do you really need to kill an innocent animal for a pair of sneakers?

Hey there-

I have to agree with veggal! There are PLENTY of amazing VEGAN shoe brands out there to choose from. any beef production for any reason is terrible for the world. GO VEG!

I agree also... stop using leather, period. Stop eating beef.

I actually disagree with veggal. There are many ways that you can produce leather without having to cut down rainforests!

What an excellent, straight-forward, effective video.

Oh and to Veggal, they're targeting name brands because the majority of leather people buy comes from those big companies and putting attention and publicity towards big, popular brand names has a larger impact and is more likely to keep people from purchasing leather than a video about not buying leather. This has context and a clear mission which can make a big difference.

veggal is right, So not only I,every one will agree with him. his sentence "cows have to graze somewhere" shows the real fact.

Veggal, you have a point about cows having to graze somewhere. And how about people reducing or eliminating their consumption of beef so that cows won't have to graze somewhere? (Or less somewheres?) If people think eating beef is going to nourish them, wait until they try to continue living without oxygen! Once the rainforest is gone, we will all be gasping for air and only the plankton (until "they" kill that off) will be able to keep us etching out our oxygen-starved existence. Maybe I sound melo-dramatic, but let's face it, this is real!

veggal is certainly right that we all, as individuals, can choose to not buy leather shoes. myself, i'm wearing shoes made from organic cotton and recycled car tires. personal decisions are no doubt important, every little bit helps.

but no matter how many of us stop buying leather shoes, we're never going to convince EVERYONE to stop buying leather shoes. or at least, not quickly enough. Brazil has a commitment to end deforestation in the Amazon by 2015. do you seriously think we can convince the whole world to stop buying leather shoes in time to save the Amazon by 2015?

how about stopping everyone from eating beef by 2015? you see that happening? cuz that is another commodity helping fuel the growth of the Brazilian cattle sector and hence driving deforestation in the Amazon.

it's a larger issue than saving the Amazon, too. being that deforestation contributes 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions, this is a large piece of lowering our emissions in time to avert runaway climate change.

the only way to effect such change rapidly enough is by going after the larger problem: the industries directly involved in the deforestation and the companies being supplied by those industries. the cattle industry in Brazil is responsible for 80% of Amazonian deforestation, so we're targeting them.

we've traced cattle grazed on deforested Amazon to slaughterhouses, tanneries, and processing facilities owned by companies that are supplying leather to Nike, Adidas, Timberland, etc. if we can get these companies to refuse to buy leather that comes from Amazon destruction, and to support solutions to both deforestation and climate change, it would have a far larger impact than even several thousand of us boycotting their shoes.

@veggal said: "if they aren't destroying the rain forest in brazil they'll find somewhere else to do it...cows have to graze somewhere..."

while no one refutes such an obvious statement, it really is meaningless. unless you're suggesting that burning down the Amazon to make grazing land is the same as grazing them on the abundant grasslands Brazil already has? it is a far more nuanced situation than you seem to think it is, veggal.

you can help by not buying leather shoes, for sure. organizationally, however, we have the resources to make a much larger impact, and that's exactly what we're trying to do.

love the video :)

veggal is right, So not only I,every one will agree with him. his sentence "cows have to graze somewhere" shows the real fact.

Emptying a lake using one thimble or a thousand thimbles is futile. For every one of you leather-abstainers there are THOUSANDS of reasonable people who will rightly continue to enjoy the benefits of leather and meat. Until there are better and cheaper substitutes that the masses like, animals will have to continue their role as a much-appreciated resource to humans.

i must grudgingly agree with "rational" on this one.

hence we're going after the source of the problem rather than advocating lifestyle choices as the solution. no doubt everyone's personal decisions are important and do make a difference, but we simply can't rely on personal decisions alone to tackle the enormity of the situation we're facing.

Mike, or anyone, I would like to see some research to demonstrate that "Cattle ranches are the leading cause of Amazon deforestation. Tropical forest destruction generates more greenhouse gas pollution than all the world's trains, planes, and cars put together."

I'm not a doubter, I just need it to persuade others.

Thanks.

Rob

@mikeg: I agree with a lot of the points that you make. I don't discount the argument that going after the major companies that are purchasing Amazon leather might draw attention to the problem and have a more dramatic immediate impact than trying to tell people not to purchase products. However the obvious that veggal points out is not so obvious to everyone and needs to be pointed out (but maybe you are right that that is not in the scope of this ad). The "larger problem" is still consumer demand, it's just not as easily solvable. I'm also not convinced that if major companies stop buying leather produced in the Amazon it will have any impact since the cattle are also produced for beef, but it would be a good start.

As for "rational"s comment that a person who understands the impacts of using beef and leather and continues to use them can be called "reasonable" and "right", I disagree. There are reasonable substitutes. The lake is being emptied by thimbles such as yours.

@Rob:

• “Brazil is the world's fourth largest producer of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.(1) The majority of emissions come from the clearance and burning of the Amazon rainforest. Globally, tropical forest desctruction is responsible for around 20% of global GHG emissions.(2) Ending deforestation is an essential part of a global strategy to tackle climate change and to preserve biodiversity.”

(1) WRI CAIT Version 6.0 – figure for 2000 (the most recent figure available) http://cait.wri.org/

(2) IPCC (2007c)

• “The cattle sector in the Brazilian Amazon is the largest driver of deforestation in the world,(4) resposible for one in every eight hectares destroyed globally.(5) Efforts to halt global deforestation emissions must tackle this sector.”

(4) Cattle in the Brazilian Amazon cause more deforestation than any other country total except Indonesia, where there are multiple drivers of deforestation:
a) Indonesia has the second largest deforestationrate, by area, after Brazil (1.87 million ha/yr, 2000-2005). Source: FAO (2009) ‘Table 2 ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0350e/i0350e04b.pdf
b) Deforestation in Indonesia has multiple drivers. For instance: II ED estimate the percentage share of land-use on deforested land to be oil palm (32%), rubber (30%), rice (19%) and Cassava (19%). Source: Grieg-Gran, M (2006): 13 Wetlands International estimate that concessions granted for oil palm and timber (mostly for pulpwood) were key drivers of deforestation in Indonesia, particularly on peatland: 42% (7.48 million ha) for oil palm and 58% (10.34 million ha) for timber. Source: Hooijer et al (2006) Table 4 Concessions on peatland in Indonesia

(5) The cattle sector in the Amazon accounts for nearly 14% of annual deforestation (1.72 million ha/yr Amazon deforestation attributable to cattle and 12.57 million ha/yr of world gross deforestation):
a) Amazon deforestation average 2000-2005, 2.15 million ha/yr. Source: INP E PRO DES (2009)
b) 80% of Amazon deforestation (1,72 million ha/yr) is attributable to cattle. Sources for 80%: Chomitz and Thomas (2001): 14; Grieg-Gran (2006): 13; Presidência da República (2004): 10; Barreto et al. (2008): 20 citing IBGE (2006b); Greenpeace (2008a) c) World gross deforestation 2000-2005, 12.57 million ha/yr. (12.57 million ha deforested - 5.26 million ha reforestation = 7.31 million ha net deforestation). Source: FAO (2009) ‘Table 2’ ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0350e/i0350e04b.pdf

• “Tropical forest destruction is responsible for about 20% of global GHG emissions, more than the world’s entire transport sector.(77)”

(77) IPCC (2007b): 104 ‘Figure 1.3: GHG emissions by sector in 2004’ www.ipcc.ch/graphics/graphics/ar4-wg3/jpg/fig-1-3b.jpg

These facts and more can be found in the full report, available here:
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/press-center/reports4/slaughtering-the-amazon

@a third:

thanks for your comment. it is true that the cattle are being raised for beef in addition to leather, among various other "cattle products." but the fact is, they have to sell all of the cow to make it a profitable endeavor. if their illegal deforestation practices mean they can no longer sell their hides for leather, it all of a sudden is not nearly as profitable for them to keep doing business the way they have been, and they have to start considering actually leasing some of Brazil's abundant grassland instead of illegally burning down the Amazon forest.

however, the beef from the cows raised by ranchers who are burning down the Amazon is also very much part of the conversation, even though we've targeted the shoe companies. see, for instance, today's press release we just put out:

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/press-center/releases2/cattle-industry-giant-mafrig-t