Ituxi.Earth

The Ituxi Group has taken note of the report published by Mongabay, which questions the integrity of the forest management processes of our Fortaleza Ituxi and Unitor projects. We want to emphasize that we respect Brazilian journalism and have cooperated fully since the beginning of the investigation, providing all requested information to the reporter and inviting them to visit and personally inspect our projects.

We sent a comprehensive response and analysis of Ituxi’s forest management practices, and we were surprised to see that our justifications were almost entirely disregarded in the publication.

Additionally, the report cast doubt on the entire chain of carbon credits generated by our group, which have always been certified by the market for maintaining the expected quality and integrity.

The Fortaleza Ituxi and Unitor projects have consistently demonstrated a strong commitment to environmental preservation, evidenced by the conservation of native forest cover. It is well-known that our conservation areas in the Amazon rainforest serve as sanctuaries of protection amid increasing illegal deforestation in the country.

These initiatives have protected our environment for over 10 years and have also generated positive economic impacts locally. We have created more than 100 direct jobs and supported around 300 low-income families living in riverside communities. Both projects also play a crucial role in conserving habitats and endangered species, promoting biodiversity, and contributing to the fight against global warming.

It is important to note that the revenue generation of the projects depends not only on the sale of carbon credits but also on sustainable, low-impact forest management activities. Forest management is conducted according to technical criteria established by the relevant environmental authorities, ensuring responsible use of timber resources and sustainability of operations.

By occupying forest areas, landowners waive the right to convert the land for agricultural activities, thus contributing to the maintenance of vital ecosystems.

Regarding the areas mentioned by the reporter, it is important to clarify that the farms listed in the composition of Unitor do not entirely contribute to the project. Some areas lie outside the scope of the REDD+ project, which could only be accurately verified by analyzing the satellite imagery report commissioned by the reporter from CCCA.

For instance, the Três Barras Farm is a large property, and not all of its area is allocated to REDD+.

In part of the area, the owner engages in agricultural activities, which are in no way associated with the UNITOR project area or PMFS.

Another point overlooked by the report is that these farms are also targets of invaders. During the questioned period, there was an incident where an invader deforested part of an area for agricultural use. We filed a police report which resulted in the repossession of the land.

The Mongabay report also erroneously links us to the crime of laundering illegal timber through our forest management plans. They attempt to justify such crimes using satellite analysis technology from the Center for Climate Crime Analysis, which lacks the precision needed to evaluate managed areas.

Competent environmental authorities do not use satellite images to measure the volume of supposed timber extraction. As noted by the reporter herself, satellite imagery is not conclusive: it merely indicates a potential focus of extraction or clearing at a specific point.

To verify the information provided by satellites, on-site inspections are necessary. It should be noted that the entire sustainable forest management process includes auditable traceability, meaning it can be thoroughly audited.

For every tree extracted under PMFS, an indicative plate with the Forest Origin Document (DOF) number is attached.

Knowing that on-site visits are the correct method for such inspections, we invited the Mongabay reporter to visit our projects and draw her own conclusions—a request that was not accepted.

Drawing conclusions about a sustainable management area based on the average wood volume per unit area (hectare) assumes a homogeneous distribution of tree volume, as seen in planted forests like eucalyptus. In tropical forests such as the Amazon, the wood volume is not uniform and can vary within the same property.

Following an anonymous complaint, ICMBio issued a notice to the Ituxi Group requesting the investigation of signs of exploratory activities. In response, we presented a report identifying the geographic coordinates using Geoprocessing techniques on the specified dates. This allowed for investigations at the points indicated by ICMBio’s notice to confirm or deny illegal activities at these locations.

In some areas marked as deforested by satellite images, stone slabs, small geographical features, and even river springs were identified, along with entirely intact areas.

Campinaranas, ecosystems found in humid climates with sandy, predominantly hydromorphic soils in the Amazon, were also identified.

In this region, large windstorms are common, often uprooting and breaking trees within the forest, creating clearings. Another example of satellite inaccuracies is the opening of branches for exploration drainage, as shown in the images below. None of the coordinates questioned by ICMBio showed deforestation, and only on-site presence confirmed this.

These examples illustrate how satellite image analysis can be imprecise in judging deforestation without proper verification. Such errors can damage the reputation of companies committed to the environment, like the Ituxi Group.

Finally, the greatest proof of the legality of Ituxi’s projects—attesting that there are no embargoes on our management practices—is the authorization for the exploration of the areas for the entire year of 2024. This also demonstrates to the market that there are no irregularities under investigation by regulatory bodies.

Our forest management procedures have always been conducted with rigor and transparency, following all legal and environmental regulations, and will continue to do so. Every stage of the process, from tree measurement to the  identification and extraction of commercial species, is carried out with the utmost care and respect for the environment.

It is neither plausible nor reasonable to claim that REDD+ projects are used for timber laundering.

We have been dedicated to the voluntary carbon credit market for 13 years, and any connection to illegal timber management would completely undermine the credibility we value with our clients.

It would waste the primary asset of carbon credits, which is preservation. We have always advocated that a standing forest is worth much more than a felled one.

The Ituxi Group is committed to transparency and responsibility in all its activities, always striving to contribute to the well-being of local communities and the conservation of the precious natural resources of the Amazon.

To our clients mentioned in the report, we offer our sincerest apologies. To our collaborators, please know that the Ituxi Group’s mission to protect our forest will remain steadfast.

Sincerely,

Ituxi Group