Nature Restoration Law guarantees prosperity

2023-07-25 02:15:01

The Marilles Foundation considers that the Nature Restoration Lawcurrently being processed by the European institutions, is the best guarantee for the future of the economic prosperity of the Balearic Islands and Europe as a whole, although “it is not as ambitious as would be desirable”.

The law demands that the loss of biodiversity be stopped and that a minimum of 30 percent of the terrestrial and marine habitats of the European Union be restored and regenerated.

The law demands that the loss of biodiversity be stopped and that a minimum of 30 percent of the terrestrial and marine habitats of the European Union be restored and regenerated, which in the archipelago would translate into a “unique opportunity”, according to statements to Europa Press by the director of the Marilles Foundation, Aniol Esteban, for recover ecosystems, habitats and species that today are in “a poor state of conservation”.

80″ of European habitats, in a poor state of conservation

The director of Marilles considers that in a context of climate emergency, of biodiversity loss, and on a continent with 80″ of its habitats in a poor state of conservation, it is essential to pass a law of these characteristics.

The future standard would allow recover fragile habitats in the archipelago like some soma bays under heavy pressure, Posidonia or coral backgroundsas well as wetlands, coastal ecosystems and biodiversity in agroforestry spaces.

The bays of Portocolom, Pollença, Alcudia, Sóller, Santa Ponça, Magaluf (Mallorca), Maó, Fornells, Addaia, Es Grau (Menorca), Talamanca, Sant Antoni Portmany (Ibiza) and Es Peix Lake in Formentera could benefit.

In this way, the bays of Portocolom, Pollença, Alcudia, Sóller, Santa Ponça, Magaluf (Mallorca), Maó, Fornells, Addaia, Es Grau (Menorca), Talamanca, Sant Antoni Portmany (Ibiza) and Es Peix Lake in Formentera could benefit.

Is about shallow water bays that have suffered severe degradation and that with appropriate measures could be recovered to high ecological levels.

This requires, he has argued, controlling and regulating pressures such as water pollution either by spillage or by the impact of boating or fishing and, at the same time, promoting ecological restoration programs for species such as brown algae of high ecological value, captive breeding of seahorses and species such as pipefish, and sharks such as guitarfish that inhabited the Balearic Sea at the beginning of the century.

However, the law “lacks ambition”, although it supposes, according to Esteban, “starting the right path, although it may not be enough”. The fact that the recovery percentage is set at 30% is, he pointed out, proof “of how difficult it is to take small steps on issues that require giant steps”.

Rejection of the PP veto

The plenary session of the European Parliament (EP) rejected, in the middle of the month, the veto of the European PP to the law, a text that has had the support of socialists, liberals, greens, the left and some ‘popular’ MEPs who support the norm despite the frontal rejection of their group.

The veto did not go ahead by a close vote of 324 MEPs against the rejection and 312 votes in favour. After this vote, the negotiation with the Twenty-seven now begins, so that they determine and quantify the areas to be protected.

The director of Marilles has lamented that the European conservative parties have generated division and have mobilized to sectors that, in his opinion, are precisely the ones that will benefit the most and those who most need the standard to guarantee its viability as lagriculture, livestock, fishing and forestry.

Suddenly, We have gone back ten years and we have returned to the framework that nature conservation is a threat to primary sectors, when we all know and a part of the primary sector knows that nature conservation and the primary sector are closely related

“Suddenly, We have gone back ten years and we have returned to the framework that nature conservation is a threat to primary sectors, when we all know and a part of the primary sector knows that nature conservation and the primary sector are closely related,” he stated.

The Nature Restoration Law It has reached its final processing somewhat devalued in relation to some aspects related to the protection of biodiversity due, the director of Marilles has pointed out, to the pressures carried out precisely by the primary sector –“or on behalf of it”– and by the conservative parties that present “an absurd fight” between environmentalism and the primary sector.

“The prosperity of the primary sector depends on listening to science and necessary measures are applied to deal with the biodiversity and climate crisis“, he has defended.

Negotiation with the Twenty-seven

In any case, warns Aniol Esteban, the law is not guaranteed Because in the negotiation with the Member States that is now beginning, it could end up having a low real impact on the restoration of nature.

It all depends, as he explains, on the degree of freedom that the European Union leaves to the states. Thus, if it gives freedom and countries have governments that have already tried to block the norm, “you cannot expect it to be implemented with enthusiasm.” On the other hand, if Europe “draws the line”, the states will have to implement it or expose themselves to sanctions.

For example, in relation to target 30×30 (restore 30 percent of degraded marine ecosystems by 2030), States have been left free to define what “high protection” is, instead of setting it from the EU, which can lead to lax interpretations. As indicated, what is expected, however, is that room for maneuver is left because the powers in the matter are state or sub-state.

In this sense, the result of the elections this Sunday will have a direct impact on the implementation of the law in Spain and the Balearic Islands. “The success of the law depends entirely on who governs from 23J”, warned the director of Marilles.

Esteban has explained that the commitment of the current state Executive with the restoration law is known, as is the fact of what forces have positioned themselves against it. “It would be strange if a hypothetical Conservative government changed its position on the matter,” he concluded.