Well, it's not as straight forward as that. The preservation areas are more for land cover changes and such. There is a specific part in the legislation which states that "activities with no locational alternatives" like mining, can occur in hill tops. There is also a part about watershed divides (only big formations, not small divides)
The legislation is a bit complicated and filled with controversy! After all, how do you find the hill / mountain bottom in order to calculate the top 1/3? The environmental agencies wants the botton to be as low as possible. The agriculture / forestry lobby wants to push it up (they always talk about the first saddle point...). Furthermore, the law defines what are mountains and hills. But that is not a consensus also... That's one of the many reasons why the entire brazilian environmental legislation is under "attack" (ops, I should say revision)... This is a very complicated issue that I, somehow, got involved in. But once it became too political, I moved away from the discussions. But if you are curious about it, fell free to ask Cheers Daniel On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Rich Shepard <rshep...@appl-ecosys.com> wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Daniel Victoria wrote: > >> Some friends and I had a similar problem once. We had to find hilltops >> because, according to Brazilian environmental legislation, they are >> environmental preserves. (Top 1/3 of the mountain / hill has to be >> preserved) > > Daniel, > > Does this mean that the bottom 2/3 can be mined as long as the top 1/3 is > preserved? Interesting idea. > > Rich > _______________________________________________ > grass-user mailing list > grass-user@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user > _______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user