Arturo Moscoso writes in El Deber:
Where do we go with the protected areas
For a number of years, a number of protected areas and conservation units have been created by countries, following the mandates of the UN Biodiversity Convention and to fulfill the functions of maintaining ecosystem representativeness, protecting landscapes, protecting water sources And to conserve different species in order to ensure biological diversity and ecological functionality.
The categories of protected areas are diverse. There are those that have a very specific objective, as well as others with multiple objectives. There are virgin areas and others with human populations, some native and other migrants. National, departmental, municipal, private, protected areas in the forestry sector and others in the hydrocarbon sector have been created. In many cases, the areas have management committees with the participation of local villagers and representative public or civil society actors. In all cases, the working tool is the management plan, which allows zoning and determining the areas of greatest protection, core areas, areas for the use and use of natural resources, as well as areas for landscape reconstruction, among others .
Bolivia has not been left out of this spatial order. Almost 20% of the country’s surface is protected area. In the case of the department of Santa Cruz, that figure reaches 36%. According to their objectives, they must respond to local needs and be inserted into development plans as a way to guarantee their sustainability.
These territorial spaces are pressured by different productive sectors that demand initiatives and works of infrastructure or use of their resources. Lately we have seen a lot of discussion and analysis about protected areas, but when we talk about them, their conservation objectives and their impacts are not mentioned. The discussion should be centered on the objectives of each one, so as to ensure a technical rather than a political debate and some technical conclusions, prior to the corresponding public consultations that may or may not allow some new projects in protected areas.
Let’s not forget that the self-proclaimed defender of mother nature has done the opposite with TIPNIS, and now trying to find oil/gas in OUR protected areas. National Parks should remain as they are! Let alone, the invasion of illegal coca growers, whose only business is to supply to cocaine production!
enough with the demagogue, incompetence, eleven years have gone by with total control of ALL State powers and having wasted over $180 billion dollars, this ruling ochlocracy of the coca grower caudillo must stop!