<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: REDD in the news: 19-25 January 2009</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redd-monitor.org/2009/01/29/redd-in-the-news-19-25-january-2009/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redd-monitor.org/2009/01/29/redd-in-the-news-19-25-january-2009/</link>
	<description>news, views and analysis about reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:47:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Lamb</title>
		<link>http://www.redd-monitor.org/2009/01/29/redd-in-the-news-19-25-january-2009/#comment-656</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Lamb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 19:07:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redd-monitor.org/?p=1368#comment-656</guid>
		<description>The Greenpeace comment that we should look to reduce emissions, not to offset them strikes me as a bit binary. Why shouldn&#039;t it be BOTH. Getting to 350 is going to require doing everything we can to stop carbon pollution, and to put it back where it belongs: in the soil, in the trees, in the animals. Restoration that prioritizes land rights of indigenous peoples, maintaining species diversity, poverty reduction, and storing carbon should be the core ideas behind a progressive REDD. If the train has left the station, if the momentum behind REDD is real and massive, I say that it is better to become the switch man than to shoot peas at the train. http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0121-hance_reforestation.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Greenpeace comment that we should look to reduce emissions, not to offset them strikes me as a bit binary. Why shouldn&#8217;t it be BOTH. Getting to 350 is going to require doing everything we can to stop carbon pollution, and to put it back where it belongs: in the soil, in the trees, in the animals. Restoration that prioritizes land rights of indigenous peoples, maintaining species diversity, poverty reduction, and storing carbon should be the core ideas behind a progressive REDD. If the train has left the station, if the momentum behind REDD is real and massive, I say that it is better to become the switch man than to shoot peas at the train. <a href="http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0121-hance_reforestation.html" rel="nofollow">http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0121-hance_reforestation.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

