Controversies over tropical forest and KyotoSlowing deforestation in Amazonia would be a significant contribution to combating global warming and, depending on decisions under the Kyoto Protocol, could provide non-destructive support for rural population in the region (Fearnside 2000a). Crediting avoided deforestation is divisive, both within and among environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and governments. Positions of NGOs on inclusion of avoided deforestation in the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) are tightly linked to geography: European NGOs oppose inclusion of forests, USA NGOs (other than USA branches or affiliates of international groups) favour inclusion of forests, and Brazilian NGOs (also excepting most branches or affiliates of international NGOs) also favour forests. The probability of chance explaining these views being clustered in Europe, North America and Brazil in this way is miniscule. In other words, these positions are based on something other than the universal concerns about climate change and future generations that predominate in public statements on all sides.