[slymon99]

> is it really more important to preserve it as a landmark than for the land to go to use

The Amazon has 10% of the worlds biodiversity, I wouldn't exactly call it a landmark, this isn't historic preservation - and the land is already "in use". Also I'm not sure that "the people of the country" are buying and farming cattle on large chunks of the Amazon, I'd assume the economic gains are highly concentrated amongst a few companies (this is conjecture). Either way, lowering demand for cattle raised in the Amazon would be one way to make this less common.

[framecowbird]

Very true that it's focused on just a few companies. Mostly JBS: they are massive.

However while these companies take the lion's share of the profit it is poor people who are doing the deforestation to improve their standard of living, often hired by those companies via various intermediaries to hide their links to deforestation.