The image seems to communicate environmental degradation and loss of biodiversity in what was once a lush rainforest.
The critical commentary offers quantitative data re acres of rainforest destroyed (that which appears to be immediately represented by the photo) and 40% of population affected by mercury contamination. There are no people in this photo, or in any of the photos. Is that deliberate? Is the idea not to put a human face on the toxicant contamination b/c it's too 'sentimental' or 'invasive'? This contrasts the Minimata photos of the clawed hand. Part of me wonders why there's an avoidance of representing the toxicity as embodied in the people--the miners: it this b/c neurological damage is hard to see on the surface of bodies?