Having studied the healing plants and peoples of tropical South America for well over four decades, I am often asked, “What is the conservation status of the Amazon Rainforest? Is the glass half-full or half-empty?” My reply never changes. “By definition, any glass that is half-full is half-empty!” When I first traveled to the Amazon in the 1970s, the world was a different place. Most people thought of the rainforest, if they thought of it at all, as a green hell to be avoided at all costs. Soon thereafter, public perception of tropical rainforests shifted dramatically, driven by the emerging modern environmental movement. Tropical forest and river in Suriname. Image courtesy of Mark J. Plotkin. Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in 1962 and Earth Day in 1970 were milestones in generating global awareness and concern over deforestation, pesticides, pollution and species extinction, particularly in the industrialized world. However, Western scientists like Tom Lovejoy, Richard Schultes and E.O. Wilson — as well as Brazilian scientists like Marcio Ayres, Paulo Nogueiro-Neto and Paulo Vanzolini — presented a compelling case that the biological richness and fragility of tropical forests merited at least as much attention as ecosystems in the temperate regions. These scientists reframed the global image of Amazonia from “green hell” to “treasure trove of biodiversity.” The media also played a positive role. The vast scale of burning and clearing — turning a green wonderland into a red desert through major development projects like ill-planned dams or road building — shocked and horrified…This article was originally published on Mongabay