New Presidential Decree On Protected Areas

Status
Not open for further replies.

samiam

Bronze
Mar 5, 2003
592
0
0
Tourism can be developed in an "ecologically sound and sustainable" manner but I dont see why we have to sacrifice our natural parks to do so.
As for the population of the area, they have been there for a long time. Way before this became a national issue and they are not waiting to be saved by a big hotel coorporation nor any of the current or past governments. I wont lose any sleep over weather they'll be better off with a hotel in the middle of the park or not because they will be the least benefitted from that. Atleast I will be able to afford the room and enjoy the beach. They now fish and live of the tourism that visits the parks, if they build a hotel there, they wont even have that!
I havent heard a single good, valid reason why it has to be built INSIDE the park?
In the Argentine and Chilean Patagonia, tourist facilities are in the towns outside their natural parks. The towns thrive with shops, restaurants and cafes and what they sell is precisely that, a pristine, untouched park that thousands of people visit and enjoy each year.
Why can't tourist facilities be constructed outside the parks and tours to explore the parks be organized? I for one would love to have a nice hotel to stay in Pedernales or Independencia and take "The Jaragua Park Tour" and spend the day at the beach or learning about the habitat. Atleast I would feel I have left the place just as I found it. For those who want to drink rum, hang out with sluts and hear loud reggaeton, go somewhere else!!
 

Keith R

"Believe it!"
Jan 1, 2002
2,984
36
48
www.temasactuales.com
The Unofficial English Translation of the Press Release

PRESS DECLARATION OF THE COALITION FOR THE DEFENSE OF PROTECTED AREAS

Background

President Leonel Fernandez, on 30 December 2005, signed Presidential Decree 686-05.

The decree establishes that "The Sectoral Law on Protected Areas No. 202/04, of 30 July 2004, left outside the restrictions on tourism development imposed by the category of National Park a strip of land located in the National Park of the East in Bayahibe, and another in the Jaragua National Park in Pedernales, establishing new categories of conservation, surfaces, locations and limits.

"A Commission is created for the tourism development of the strips liberated by the Sectoral Law on Protected Areas in the Zones of Pedernales and Bayahibe, which will be presided over by the Ministry of Tourism and additionally composed of the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Public Works, the Director of the National Sewage Institute and Mr. Marino Ginebra."

THE COALITION FOR THE DEFENSE OF PROTECTED AREAS DENOUNCES THE FOLLOWING IRREGULARITIES IN THE DRAFTING OF THE DECREE:

1. It is false that the Sectoral Law on Protected Areas 202-04 left outside the restrictions on touristic use of the protected areas Guaraguao-Punta Catuano and Bah?a de las Aguilas. It is limited to changing its management category, which currently is Category VI: Protected Landscape.

2. The Sectoral Law on Protected Areas 202-04 contains not one article or point in which it speaks of "liberating" some area. As has been explained, it is limited to realizing a change of management category for two zones in the del Este and Jaragua national parks.

3. To subordinate the Ministry for the Environment to the Ministry for Tourism, is a violation of Law 64-00, which establishes that it is the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources to whom corresponds the governance of the National System of Protected Areas, as well as the zoning of its territories jointly with the Technical Secretary of the Presidency, according to Article 30 of Law 64-00.

THE COALITION FOR THE DEFENSE OF PROTECTED AREAS CONSIDERS THAT:

* Decree 686-05 violates the General Law on the Environment and Natural Resources (64-00) and the Sectoral Law on Protected Areas and Biodiversity (202-04).

* During the Sixteenth Conference of UNCTAD celebrated in Brazil current President Fernandez said: "There exists a current in the country that considers that the approval of a law that excludes protected areas in specific zones of the national territory contributes to development. Another current, to which I belong, considers that the indiscriminate exploitation of the country's resources without taking into consideration the environmental dimension does not contribute to development."

* Decree 686-05 contradicts the position of Dr. Leonel Fernandez Reyna, President of the Republic, who during the campaign in 2004 manifested on numerous occasions his adhesion to the current that considers the protected areas indispensable to sustainable development.

* The National Park of the East is visited annually by around half a million tourists, which has generated riches for the surrounding communities, who see themselves as threatened by the privatization of this National Patrimony.

* By destroying the protected area of the National Park of the East, the existing tourist zones will view as privatized their principal destination spots for excursions, which supposes a death blow to a good part of the Dominican hotel sector.

* The Coalition for the Defense of Protected Areas considers as extremely irregular the systematic maneuvers that have been undertaken, in the prior and present government, to offer for sale and undertake meddling in the management of different protected areas owned by the Dominican State, giving away in an illicit manner National Patrimony. Due to this situation, we will ask the Commission for Transparency and Ethics presided by Dr. Jose Joaquin Bid? Medina to initiate an investigation of all public officials connected to real estate and tourism businesses, whether directly or through other officials or family members. Likewise we ask that it investigate deeply the possible existing interests held by physical persons included on the Commission.

THE COALITION FOR THE DEFENSE OF PROTECTED AREAS WILL UNDERTAKE THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS:

* The Coalition for the Defense of Protected Areas asks President Leonel Fernandez Reyna to derogate Decree 686-05, and that he honor his commitment regarding the National System of Protected Areas that he assumed before becoming President of the Republic.

* As well at the Coalition for the Defense of Protected Areas we urge President Leonel Fernandez Reyna that he direct existing tourism investment and new investments that could be developed in the country, toward the extensive terrains with touristic calling available outside the Jaragua National Park, part of the Biosphere Reserve declared by UNESCO and the National Park of the East, under consideration to be declared Cultural Heritage of Humanity.

* The Coalition for the Defense of Protected Areas asks competent State bodies to submit Manuel P?rez G?mez, Secretary of State for Public Works, for violating the law when breaking into the National Park of the East, destroying important forest zones.

We call on Dominican civil society, civic organizations, environmentalists, the national tourism sector and international cooperation organs, to urgently commit themselves to defending the National System of Protected Areas of the Dominican Republic.

The Coalition for the Defense of Protected Areas is already undertaking an information campaign reaching out to international entities regarding the impact of Presidential Decree 686-05 and publicly ask for the help of all international organizations, in order to fight against the destructive maneuvers that corrupt politicians and real estate speculators are carrying out for the fraudulent takeover of some protected areas in the Dominican Republic.
 
Last edited:

Chris

Gold
Oct 21, 2002
7,951
28
0
www.caribbetech.com
This is not directly DR environmentally related... so Keith could edit or cut me if he should wish. But here is an article that came across my e-mail tonight. It is nice... read it... if feels like shangri-la. But the most telling, is the link at the bottom. It says 'Sighting' of Tasmanian tiger sparks ?1.2m bounty hunt. To me, that speaks volumes...

The article talks about a truly unexplored area on earth... the Foja mountains of Irian Jaya. For environmentally conscious folks, it is really a sweet piece of reporting...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...08.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/08/ixnewstop.html
 
Sep 19, 2005
4,632
91
48
funny something else popped up inthis thread, because i wanted to mention that intodays paper there was a report of several NEW species being discover in asia. and they expect to discover several more, because they barley got into this vast wilderness, that has been uncharted.

I mention that because someone mentioned that X number of species go extinct each day..

bob
 

Dolores1

DR1
May 3, 2000
8,215
37
48
www.
Keith,

1. It is false that the Sectoral Law on Protected Areas 202-04 left outside the restrictions on touristic use of the protected areas Guaraguao-Punta Catuano and Bah?a de las Aguilas. It is limited to changing its management category, which currently is Category VI: Protected Passage.

Wouldn't the correct translation of Paisaje Protegido in English, or Category VI be: Managed Resource Protection Area

Could you check into that.
 

Dolores1

DR1
May 3, 2000
8,215
37
48
www.
Jose Grullon brought this up in another thread, but it is so relevant here. Those who can should read Chapter 11 in the Jared Diamond book: "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed".

It focuses on the Dominican Republic and Haiti, and points out how good presidential leadership can make a difference. It is subtly critical of President Leonel Fernandez's position re the environment, when compared with the straight out position of not fearing to clash with economic interests to favor the national good of the late President Joaquin Balaguer.
 

Keith R

"Believe it!"
Jan 1, 2002
2,984
36
48
www.temasactuales.com
Dolores said:
Keith,

1. It is false that the Sectoral Law on Protected Areas 202-04 left outside the restrictions on touristic use of the protected areas Guaraguao-Punta Catuano and Bah?a de las Aguilas. It is limited to changing its management category, which currently is Category VI: Protected Passage.

Wouldn't the correct translation of Paisaje Protegido in English, or Category VI be: Managed Resource Protection Area

Could you check into that.
Thanks for catching the mistake. That's the trouble when I do translations in a hurry. :ermm: I'll edit the post to correct it. Actually, I think "paisaje protegido" translates as "protected landscape".
 

Mirador

On Permanent Vacation!
Apr 15, 2004
3,563
0
0
protected landscape

Keith R said:
Thanks for catching the mistake. That's the trouble when I do translations in a hurry. :ermm: I'll edit the post to correct it. Actually, I think "paisaje protegido" translates as "protected landscape".


Keith, your translation is correct, however, unless the text or related legislation includes the definition, the meaning will remain ambiguous.
 

Keith R

"Believe it!"
Jan 1, 2002
2,984
36
48
www.temasactuales.com
Unfortunately, the Law 64-00 and Decree 686-05 do not define the term (not that I can find, that is), and I have yet to get my hands on the text of the Sectoral Law on Protection Areas.:ermm:
 

Dolores1

DR1
May 3, 2000
8,215
37
48
www.
I had the book, but lent it out, and having trouble getting it back. Will be in Puerto Rico this weekend and will try to buy another copy to share.
 

NALs

Polls Forum Moderator
Jan 20, 2003
11,634
2,099
113
Dolores said:
Jose Grullon brought this up in another thread, but it is so relevant here. Those who can should read Chapter 11 in the Jared Diamond book: "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed".

It focuses on the Dominican Republic and Haiti, and points out how good presidential leadership can make a difference. It is subtly critical of President Leonel Fernandez's position re the environment, when compared with the straight out position of not fearing to clash with economic interests to favor the national good of the late President Joaquin Balaguer.
Sounds like an interesting book.

I'll see if I can get my hands on it and read it. I am hoping he is not one of these Malthusian types, who constantly say the world is going to end soon.

In the 1970s a group of economists (ahem) from the Chicago Boys (or University of Chicago Economics Department) wrote a report titled "The Limits to Growth". Basically, they said that capitalism was going to destroy itself by the turn of the century (notice, we already pass this turn and capitalism is still alive) and that England would not exist by the year 2000 (again, notice England alive and well in 2006).

Their base for such claims was made on linear models of several resources ranging from petroleum to agricultural products and other things and they envisioned a depletion of such resources. The problem? Never in the history of humanity have we run out of resources!

Resources are like money, when you really need it it appears. Whether you have to borrow it, earn it, get it as an ROI in an investment, whatever, when you need it its there, available.

Don't get me wrong, we do run out of somethings (such as whale oil in the 1800s), but there is always someone somewhere inventing the next best thing to replace the old model and for this reason, the world did not end as was often sited in the 1800s newspapers once Whale oil ceased to be exploited. Whale oil was used to burn for light.

I hope he is not one of those Malthusians types.

Thanks for the recommendation Dolores.

-NALs
 

Chris

Gold
Oct 21, 2002
7,951
28
0
www.caribbetech.com
Dolores said:
I had the book, but lent it out, and having trouble getting it back. Will be in Puerto Rico this weekend and will try to buy another copy to share.

Thanks Dolores. If you can find one, just tell me how much it is and I'll pay for it.
 

samiam

Bronze
Mar 5, 2003
592
0
0
Chris said:
Does anyone have the Jared Diamond book available here in the DR? Is anyone willing to play 'library' for us? Or we can buy it?

I have it, but I am still in the middle of it. If you wish to buy it, you can get it on amazon.
If you want I can PM you when I'm done, though be warned, I'm a bit of a slow reader. Self diagnosed ADD just to make myself feel better about it.
 

Keith R

"Believe it!"
Jan 1, 2002
2,984
36
48
www.temasactuales.com
Since Nals appears determined to hijack and bog down what was a serious discussion about a serious issue with his ramblings, I guess there is no choice left but to close this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.