Brazilian Supermarkets Require Deforestation-Free Meat

The major supermarket chains stepped forward to protect the rain forest. A crucial step. WalMart, Carrefour and Pão de Açúcar will work with certificates of origin for beef which they offer on the shelves of their stores. Recently, Greenpeace released a study showing that the biggest slaughterhouses in Brazil, which receive financial funds from the BNDES (Brazilian Development Bank) and other public banks, buy from farmers in illegally deforested areas. The NGO studied the entire distribution chain. (see also my yesterday's post: The Folly of an Economy Going Against the Environment)

Last week in an interview with Míriam Leitão the president of Abras, Sussumu Honda, said that the supermarket chains were taking the denunciations very seriously and would take a decision. Decision taken! The supermarkets published the following statement:

*
Wal-Mart, Carrefour and Pão de Açúcar suspend purchases from farms involved in the deforestation of the Amazon, and will work with audits and certificates of origin.

In a meeting of the Brazilian Association of Supermarkets (Abras), on June 8, the three largest supermarket chains in the country, Carrefour, Wal-Mart and Pão de Açúcar decided to suspend purchases from farms involved in the deforestation of the Amazon. The action is a repudiation of practices condemned by Greenpeace. The supermarket sector, by means of Abras, can’t associate itself with the denounced wrongdoings and will act vigorously.

The position defined by the supermarkets includes notification of the slaughterhouses, suspension of purchases from farms denounced by the federal public prosecutor of the State of Pará and the requirement of Certificates of Origin attached to the invoice/transport bill. As an additional measure, the three supermarket chains require an independent and internationally recognised audit to ensure that the products they sell are not from deforested areas of the Amazon.

This is a joint sectorial response to the report published by Greenpeace earlier this month and the subsequently civil action by the federal public prosecutor of Pará, who sent a recommendation to the large supermarket chains and 72 other buyers of animal products so that they should recede buying meat products originating from the destruction of the rainforest. *
end of statement

At least some companies take their ‘social responsibility’ seriously.

Photos from top to bottom: Hypermarché Carrefour Pinheiros - São Paulo - Meatproduct section; WalMart's Nacional store Brazil and Carrefour Bairo Santo Amaro - São Paulo. - Courtesy: WalMart and Carrefour

90605

The Folly of an Economy Going Against the Environment

From economists it is expected that they are in favour of production at any cost and against environmentalists. But it has to be the opposite. The Brazilian economy will suffer immensely if it continues the deforestation of (among others) the Amazon rainforest.

It is a shot in the foot. Export of Brazilian beef, for example, will face difficulties if the exporters are not guaranteeing the world market that the cattle did not come from deforested areas. The same problem producers will face with supermarkets, as they will require a ‘clean origin’ of the meat. Consumers also are awakening. As a consequence it is irrational, from an economic point of view, to go against the protection of the environment.

The Medida Provisória*) No. 458 (Decree MP 458), which passed Congress is foolish. It permits regularization of the lands for those who illegally invaded the Amazon rainforest. It regularizes illegality.

The confrontation between farmers and environmentalists is completely unreasonable. Even if the matter is discussed only in terms of economy, the environmentalists are right. Farmers celebrate victories that will turn against them in the future. The slaughterhouses will have to prove to supermarkets in Brazil and elsewhere that they did not buy cattle from (illegally) deforested areas.
The world is moving in one direction and Brazil running in the opposite direction with eyes fixed on the past, turning the clock back.

The debate, the proposals in Congress, the approval of MP 458, the mistakes of the government, the complicity of the opposition, show countrywide lack of understanding.
The tragedy is a multi-party action for burning down the Amazon.
Even China starts to change. In the United States, the Bush government is dumped in the trash bin of history. President Barack Obama steers the country in another direction. Presented US Congress with a set of federal parameters for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. What was once just a Californian dream, is now the outlook for the entire country.
At a time when the environment begins to accelerate attention in the world, Brazil still thinks it can bring down the planet's largest tropical forest, as if it were an obstacle.

MP 458, now only pending presidential sanction, is worse than it appears. It is disastrous. It legalises grileiros, who illegally invaded and burned down a part of the Amazon. He, who stole 1,500 hectares before the first of December 2004 could buy it without bidding and without inspection. He has preference over the land and can pay in the most friendly way: in 30 years with three years of grace. And if at the end of the grace he wants to sell the land, the MP allows it. In three years, the property can be passed on. For up to four hundred ‘stolen’ hectares, the period is ten years. And if the grileiro stool the land and left the daily work to his labourers as he himself lives somewhere else? He has also the right to stay with it, because even if the land is run by a "figurehead" the grileiro can buy it. And if it is a company? No problem at all.

Supporters of MP 458 in the House and the Senate say it is to regularize the situation which was initiated by the Military Regime and later abandoned.
Bullshit. As the deadline to acquire land is set by the first of December 2004.
They said it was to benefit the small settlers. Bullshit. As it does allow the sale of land run by a figurehead, and the sale to corporate entities.

The bill creates indecent loopholes for privatization in the worst way of the patrimony of all Brazilians.

Former Minister for the Environment and presently senator Marina Silva said that the day MP 458 was adopted in Congress, it was her third worst day of her life. She feels as if Brazil has lost all the advances of the recent years.
It is almost impossible to agree with Marina Silva as there hasn’t been much progress shown in the last years. The Lula government has always been ambiguous in relation to the environment, and Fernando Henrique, his predecessor, kept silent. If they had shown some stature, Brazil wouldn’t have lost what it lost.
In just the first two years of the Lula government, 2003 and 2004, 51.000 km2 have been deforested. Compare this to the size of the Netherlands (41.528 km2). And many grileiros who were part of that attack at the rainforest will now be ‘regularized’.

Last week Greenpeace released a devastating report, showing that 80% deforestation of the Amazon is due to livestock. Greenpeace published the names of the perpetrators, of which Bertin, Marfrig, Friboi JBS are the largest. The Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) is their partner and finances the ‘illegal’ operation. The mentioned companies provide meat to numerous retail chains, among them, large supermarkets as Carrefour, Wal-Mart and Pão de Açúcar.

During the Globonews’ programme ‘Espaço Aberto’, the coordinator of the study, Andrew Muggiatti met with Sussumu Honda, the chairman of ABRAS (Brazilian Association of Supermarkets). The BNDES was also invited, but did not show up.
The good news that came out of this programme was the positioning of the supermarkets. According to Sussumu Honda, they are preoccupied and will use their power to pressure the slaughterhouses to prove the origin of the cattle which meat is put on the supermarket shelves.
Brazilian meat exporters have threatened to sue Greenpeace. They should do the opposite and refuse any supplier linked to deforestation. The world will not buy Brazilian beef at this price. Exporters will face barriers. That's for sure.

The backward steps will not eliminate the external market. But that is of less importance. The tragedy is that Brazil is losing its future.
Ironically Brazil adopted MP 458 during the Week of the Environment.

This is a free translation and interpretation of an article which Míriam Leitão wrote on her blog on 05 June 2009

*) Medida Provisória In Brazilian constitutional law, a Medida Provisória (presidential decree) is issued by the President of the Republic, at his discretion, without the participation of the legislative branch. The measure has the force of law, albeit not being really a law in the strict technical sense of this term. Only in cases of importance and urgency the Chief Executive may issue decrees, which he should submit later to Congress. The decree stays in force for sixty days, extendable for another 60. After this time, if Congress does not approve it, and convert it into law, the measure will lose its force.
90603

In 2008 Fines for Environmental Crimes Exceeded 1 billion Euro

In 2008 more than BRL 3 billion (€ 1 billion) in fines was imposed in the Amazônia for environmental crimes. But the question is, who is crazy enough to pay the fine? For sure not the Brazilian environment criminal.

A report stipulating the by Ibama (the Brazilian Environment Authority) imposed environmental fines shows that between January 1 and December 8, 2008 22,697 reports of environmental offences were made with a total of BRL 3.25 billion (€ 1.05 billion) in fines. The figure is 38% higher than in 2007, when it was BRL 2.37 billion (€ 0.772 billion).

The bulk of the amount came out of actions against deforestation in the Amazônia. Fines for illegal logging, storage and transport of illegal timber in this region reached BRL 1.76 billion (€ 0.57 billion), accounting for 54% of the total.

Pará is the federal state, which picked together the highest amount of fines with € 196 million. Followed by Mato Grosso (€ 195 million), Amazonas (€ 148 million), Minas Gerais (€ 140 million) and Rondônia (€ 75 million).

Writing criminal reports is one, but collecting the fines is a different chapter. A study by the Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amazônia (Imazon = Institute of Man and Environment in the Amazon region) points out that a very small portion of that money actually gets into the public purse.

According to Imazon, the value of fines collected between 2001 and 2004 was only 2.5% of the total amount of fines imposed in this period. If the same pattern is repeated for 2008, the federal treasury will only collect BRL 81 million (€ 26 million).

But there is probably some progress, whatever that is supposed to mean in the Brazilian legal confusion. According to the researcher Paulo Barreto, one of the authors of the study, there were four legal bodies where could be appealed, now there are only two. Paulo, faithful believer as he is, thinks that this might speed up the process, but he warns that one of the main constraints of collecting fines is the lack of lawyers with Ibama. "What has to be done to improve the collection of fines, is focussing on the most important cases. All the studies show that 80% of the value of the fines should be raised by 20% of the processes.”

For Ibama it is not just the amount of fines in their fight against environmental crime. "Together with the fine, we have the seizure of the area, the confiscation of the illegal product, the removal of livestock, the seizure of trucks, machines and the deterrent effect of an inspection." says Roberto Borges, national coordinator for environmental operations of Ibama.

According to Borges, in addition to the fines Ibama also tried to permanently seize the property of the criminals. "It started with seized timber, but we have to expand to tractors and trucks, used for the environmental crime. We have to de-capitalize the environmental criminal." he says.

Source: O Liberal
(cartoon J.Bosco)
81230
*

The Owner Doesn't Care Much

There is still no strategy to defend the Amazônia
In just one month, the deforestation of the Amazônia exploded. The National Institute for Spacial Research (Inpe) reported data on deforestation in the Amazônia Legal, for the month of April. According to the Deter system (Detecção do Desmatamento em Tempo Real = Deforestation Detection in Real-Time) there was an increase of 774.48% in deforestation in the region, eight times more. In March 2008, 145 km ² was cut down, while the number in April rose to 1,123 km ². Unfortunately Deter is only able to detect deforestation polygons of areas larger than 25 hectares due to the resolution of the space sensors.

And the owner of the Amazônia?
Unfortunately it occurs that the Amazônia has a not-properly-caring owner. Approximately 62% of the Amazônia delta with its rain forests belongs to Brazil, but the numbers of deforestation are alarming. Just in the first five years of Lula’s government, it was 100 thousand km2 (2½ x the Netherlands).

The Brazilian economic columnist Míriam Leitão stated in Bom Dia Brasil: “The argumentation that the world has no right to claim the protection of the Amazônia because rich countries pollute or have already destroyed their forests, is not quite correct. If the Amazônia is ours, we have to preserve it. ........ If Brazil protects its biodiversity, they have to use its wealth for the production of medicines, cosmetics, timber in a sustainable way and industrial production of various items.”

That’s why the Brazilian Academy of Sciences proposes to invest heavily in universities, technological institutes, training of scientists in the Amazônia, to activate research in the region to find the best model of exploitation of its wealth. Today, it is only being occupied by ‘grilagem’ (unlawful claiming of rain forest areas), deforestation and even criminal slave labour.
This is not development.

The main task of the extraordinary minister of Strategic Affairs, Roberto Mangabeira Unger, as coordinator of the Plano Amazônia Sustentável (PAS = Program for a Sustainable Amazônia) is to develop "a strategy of zoning the Amazônia, one with forest and another one without forest." As quoted by his own words.

"Let’s stop talking about the fiction that there is a war between environmentalists and developers. This is not the problem. The problem is that we have not yet formulated the necessary measures neither to defend the forest, nor to develop the Amazônia," he assessed.

The coordinator of the PAS believes (what others are saying for years on end) in a correlation between the unemployment rate and the (illegal) deforestation of native forests: "The Amazônia is not just a collection of trees, it is also a group of people, and if the Brazilians who live there do not have economic opportunities they will be inexorably led to illegal deforestation activities."

But from whom is the Amazônia, after all?
A story published in the American newspaper The New York Times suggests that global leaders argue that the Amazônia is not a unique heritage of any country, which is causing concern in Brazil. And continues: "a chorus of international leaders are more openly declaring the Amazônia as part of a much larger heritage then the only nations that share its territory."

The newspaper quotes the former US vice-president Al Gore, who in 1989 said that "contrary to what the Brazilians believe, the Amazônia is not owned by them, it belongs to us all."

In the meantime the government of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva tries to pass a law to restrict access to the Amazônia Forest, imposing a licensing scheme for both foreigners and Brazilians.

"But many experts say that the Amazônia in the proposed restrictions conflict with his own efforts (of President Lula) to give Brazil a greater voice in the negotiations on global climate change - an implicit recognition that the Amazônia is critical to the world as a whole," the article reads.

"It's a fight that shall only become more complicated in the coming years in the light of two conflicting trends: a growing demand for energy resources and a growing concern with climate change and pollution."

But President Lula is adamant: "The Amazônia has an owner and that’s us, Brazilians."
President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said, attending the 20th National Forum in May that "the world needs to understand that the Amazônia has an owner and that we, Brazilians, are that owner."

He questioned the conditions of developed countries, the biggest polluters, to discuss this issue. "The countries which are responsible for 70% of the world’s pollution are talking now about the Amazônia," he said. Lula advocated the preservation, but also the development of the Amazônia. "It will be a discussion for the next two decades," he said.

“But don’t cry out prematurely”, the "Economist" is right after all
Although most Brazilians do not like it when someone, particular a gringo, wants to "put a finger" in the Amazônia, as President Lula called it, the truth is that the British "The Economist" had it spot on, when it stated that it is almost impossible to put rules in the region,” writes the Brazilian journalist Ricardo Kotscho in one of his columns. And he follows with:

In its story "Welcome to our shrinking jungle" the Economist states bluntly that it is very difficult for the Brazilian government to control the exploitation and deforestation of the Amazônia forest "because there is no control over the ownership of land in the region."

Nobody has control - and hardly somebody will one day. I say this with sadness. In Amazônia region everything is too grand, too immense, too vast, too dense and far too huge for anyone to even dream to place the forest under some form of order.

You can see it with the naked eye: the pastures progressing in cleared areas owned by nobody, where the law has not yet arrived and the State is a distant mirage for the owners of cattle that are multiplying in geometric progression.
Some alarming data show how the burst of cattle raising is devastating the forest:

• In 1964, Amazônia had a flock of about one million cattle and less than 1% of the area had been deforested for pastures.
• In just thirteen years, between 1990 and 2003, the Amazônia herd rose from 26,6 million to 63 million heads, an increase of 6,7% per year, ten times the increase in Brazilian population.
• Today, the pastures shelter more than 70 million heads of livestock, one third of the entire cattle herd in the country. Since the Amazônia has a population of 23 million people there is an average of three heads of cattle per capita (including babies and old people).
• To open the pastures 16% of the forest area has been deforested, which is more than 70 million hectares, equivalent to Spain and Portugal together.
• The Amazônia continues losing 24.000 km2 of native forest per year, an area equivalent to two thirds of the territory of Belgium. As 1% of the forest turns into grass each year, and the current progress of livestock in the region is kept, in 2050, half of the forest will have been cut to house a corral of 285 million head of cattle.
• The main reason for this burst in cattle raising is the low or even non-existent price of land by pure and simple invasion of public areas, the popular ‘grilagem’. It is cheaper to cut trees (USD 200 to USD 300 per hectare) than to recover land from areas already deforested and degraded and turned into ‘juquira’ (USD 700 to USD 750 a hectare). Juquiras are deforested areas which are claimed back by nature with the springing up of small trees and an abundance of weeds. As sugarcane took the place of pastures in the fever for ethanol and soybean moved to the centre west of the country, cattle farms were pushed into the Amazônia in search of new pastures.

A study carried out by Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amazônia (Imazon = Institute of Man and Environment of the Amazônia), and commissioned by the World Bank, brought to light that 42 million hectares - an area corresponding to 8,5% of the Amazônia (an area the size of Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium together) is in illegal possession and totally outside the control of the government.

"This is, in practice, a free privatization of the forest. They never paid for the land and continue without paying taxes," said the coordinator of the research, forestry engineer Paulo Barreto. The process is always the same: the ‘grileiro’ "lends" the land to a timber friend to "clear the area", that is, overthrow the forest, and then plant grass, moving forward without limits and without any control, because, here a title deed is a fiction, even if it were existing.

In this context, some initiatives announced by the federal government to stop the destruction of the rain forest after the world started to protest against the progressive deforestation, sound romantic. But the government actions are entirely insufficient and even laughable and can only be considered as serious and might even revert the situation, if and when the federal government sends the Brazilian Armed Forces with all available equipment including helicopters and planes to the Amazônia.

The worst thing is that this time, we are obliged to accept that the English magazine is correct to say: "In practice, it is almost impossible for the Brazilian government to impose its will within the limits of its empire, even if it wanted."

If Lula claims: "the Amazônia is ours." Why can he only launche a grand-scale manoeuvre with the armed forces, including the navy and air forces, to defend the Amazônia Azul (Blue Amazon, in my next post I shall explain the Blue Amazon) and not do the same for the Green Amazon. Well, frustratingly, the answer is simple, as always: the Amazônia Azul has all to do with oil, while the Amazônia Verde has, as it is, only to do with the environment and global climate change.

source: IG Ultimo Segundo, Ricardo Kotscho
80612

An unwelcome pet - A cobra in the garden

In Brazil and particularly in the Amazon region the word: cobra is used for snake. Any snake is called cobra, whatever the scientific or popular name. A snake is a cobra and a cobra is a snake. Period. So the cobra is going to town. The deforestation of the Amazon causes an invasion of cobras in the neighbourhoods of Belém, according to Ibama, the governmental environment institute. Only this year already 21 cobras are reported by the citizenry, while last year an average of 2 reports per month came in.

Up till now no venomous snake has been caught, although they found species of some 3 meter long. Imagine the fear of the people to step into their garden with the chance to stand eye to eye with a 3 meter long cobra ready to attack. According to Ibama, the infiltration of cobras in the town is a direct result of the illegal deforestation activities in the areas around Belém.
"The deforestation destroys the habitat of the snakes and they move into town", declares a spokeswoman for Ibama. After they have caught the cobras Ibama brings them to local zoological gardens or places them back into the natural habitat of ecological reservations.

80322

Operação “Arco de Fogo” - Operation “Arc of Fire”

By the end of March the results of the first month of the Operation “Arc of Fire” started to be visualised. Operation “Arco de Fogo” is a hard police action, initiated by the federal government to combat the illegal deforestation of the Amazônia.

Approximately 35% of all illegal deforestation in the federal state of Pará is feeding the charcoal ovens; the other part is selective log cutting of noble wood species. Illegal charcoal is purchased by legal companies, and exported mainly to China and the USA to be used in the steel production process.
But the demand for charcoal is only one of the factors causing the deforestation. Brazil's Environment Ministry places more of the blame on farmers who clear large areas in the rainforest to create soybean fields and cattle ranches. Officials say that ranching and farming are responsible for up to 80 percent of total deforestation nationwide.

In Aug.2007 Lula and his government celebrated the fact that for the third consecutive year deforestation in the Amazônia had decreased almost to the historical lowest level of 1991 of 11.030 km2 (roughly 25% of a country the size of Holland), while the Environment Minister Marina Silva claimed that the government policy had saved 20.000 birds, 70.000 primates and some 600 million trees from being cut illegally. However in the same month satellites registered 16.592 fires, mainly in the Amazônia area and illegal deforestation had restarted at a large scale.
According to figures supplied by Marina Silva deforestation between August and November 2007 increased with 10%, mainly due to the delayed start of the rainy season, which enabled the loggers to extract the lumber from the forest to almost the end of the year.

A quick response was evidently required and Lula’s decree prohibited any sale of agriculture products, and imposed fines on all trade of meat, soy and other products originating from illegally deforested areas.
Concentrating on 36 municipalities in the Amazônia responsible for more than 50% of all illegal logging Ibama (the federal environment bureau) initiated its activities, with this decree in hand, to effectively combat the deforestation.
The operation was baptized: “Arco de Fogo” (Arc of Fire).

Operation “Arco de Fogo”, which started on the 26th of February and focused on Tailândia, a little town in the south of the state Pará, is run by Ibama with warlike support of some 1.000 military, civil and federal police agents and contingents of the national security forces. The results after its first month of action are staggering: 23 million BRR (9 million euro) in fines. Furthermore 23.300 m3 illegal logs confiscated, while 14 sawmills and 25 charcoal companies were shut down in an area of 4.200 hectares where illegal deforestation was detected.
The action did not restrict to confiscating the illegal lumber or by fining the company owners, but went a step further by dismantling illegal sawmills and razing illegal charcoal ovens to the ground. By the 25th of March, 53 sawmills were inspected, of which 14 shut down and dismantled and 1.175 charcoal ovens completely demolished. Those destroyed ovens alone would have consumed about 23.000 young trees in one month, according to average production rates.
The environmental action groups were delirious.

Given the scope of the operation it is more than likely that the name Tailândia never ever will be connected to environmental crimes, if, at least, the little town will not be wiped out completely.

The journalist Valterlucio Bessa Campelo comes in his article published in Agência Amazônia with a nicely constructed economic analysis, which I recount here. In Brazil there is a lack of reliable demographic figures and therefore Valterlucio interpolates existing figures to come to a mathematical conclusion for Tailândia.
But let’s have a look at the town Tailândia first. Tailândia has 64.000 inhabitants, a Gross National Product (GNP) in 2005 of 266 million BRR (105 million euro), of which the lumber activities represent (2006) some 67,2 million BRR (26,4 million euro) and the agriculture 28,0 million BRR (11 million euro). On the national Human Development Index (HDI) *) Tailândia figures as number 3046. In 2007 the town received 10,6 million BRR (4,156 million euro = 650 euro per capita) for education, health care etc., from the federal tax funds.

As we can see, the economy of Tailândia leans heavily on the exploration of wood products, whose value represents twice the value generated by agriculture activities. According to data from the IBGE*) some 1.400.000 m3 logs are produced annually in this area, representing 25% of the municipal GNP.
In the opinion of the federal government: All of them illegal.

A recent study carried out by the IBGE indicates that for every 1.000 m3 of logged lumber 15 jobs are created. When we transfer this figure to Tailândia we see 21.000 jobs, of which, according to another study, in average 1/3 is direct labour and 2/3 indirect. The calculation for Tailândia ends up with 7.000 direct jobs in the lumber industry.
In the opinion of the federal government: All of them illegal.

An analysis released by the government of Pará shows that 48% of the total populace is employable, of which 92,7% has indeed a job. When we transfer these indices to Tailândia we see that out of the 64.000 inhabitants, 30.720 are employable of which 28.477 have a job.
In other words of all inhabitants older than 10 years, regardless of what type of work, 25% or 7.000 have a job in the lumber industry. If and when this activity in Tailândia is eliminated the unemployment figure rises from 7,3% to 30%.

The above reconstructed figures help to understand the magnitude of the problem which develops when operations as “Arco de Fogo” are extended to other municipalities and federal states. The question is: leads an operation, which only criminalises the deforestation to a sustainable solution of the problem.
Keep in mind, that Tailândia only represents a minuscule fraction of the deforestation in Brazil.

It should be prudent, and particularly for a Lula, telling everybody his government has a socialistic signature, when operations combating the deforestation of the Amazônia go hand in hand with the necessary social actions to remain the local economy at its level. It is a mistake to belief that thousands of labourers in the lumber industry, direct or indirect, illegal or not, will not be stimulated by the instigating words of the lumber barons. The labourer thinks economically. He wants a job, preferably one he knows best. If he defends the interests of the lumber baron, he defends his income. He might not do that, if an alternative is available.

Apparently, after its operation in Tailândia, Ibama came to the same conclusion. According to the director of Ibama in Pará, Aníbal Picanço, social programs are getting in place to minimize the economic impact of the operation, as have been seen in Tailândia, where the local commerce came to a full stop after the sawmills were fined and shut down and the charcoal ovens demolished.
In the meantime it is clear that the national and international press is waiting with oversized expectations to hear from imprisoned lumber barons. While photographs of “definitely” shackled environment criminals no doubt give a double doses of XTC to the public opinion.
But after the over excitement comes the hangover: What are we doing with the 7.000 jobless people in Tailândia.

Caption of the last 5 images: Hundreds of logs of the expensive species maçaranduba, copaíba, ipê and angelim, were buried under a soybean field, close to the PA-150 state road.
Fonte first seven photographs: Paulo Santos/Reuters, Paulo Whitaker/Reuters and Roberto Stuckert/O Globo, last five: Policia Federal.

Footnotes:
*) (wiki) HDI or the Human Development Index is the normalized measure of life expectancy, literacy, education, standard of living, and GDP per capita for countries worldwide. It is a standard means of measuring well-being, especially child welfare. It is used to determine and indicate whether a country is a developed, developing, or underdeveloped country. It is also used to measure the impact of economic policies on quality of life
*) (wiki) IBGE or the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (Portuguese: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística), is the agency responsible for statistical, geographic, cartographic, geodetic and environmental information in Brazil. The IBGE performs a national census every ten years, and the questionnaires account for information such as age, household income, literacy, education, occupation and hygiene levels.

80369