VI WORLD
PARKS CONGRESS
Statement
by the Venezuelan Members of the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas –WCPA
November 2014.
In regard of the celebration of the VI World Parks Congress in Sydney,
it is relevant to call attention on the Venezuelan protected areas (PA), taking
into account that our country hosted the IV World Parks Congress in Caracas,
1992. Currently, most nations could claim progress on issues related to PA, but
when evaluating the situation in Venezuela, we found very negative results,
thus making it necessary to take a deep reflection on why.
Why is the status of PA in Venezuela of interest to the rest of the
world? Venezuela, being part of the “developing world” made important advances
on the protection of its natural heritage when the rest of the world lagged behind.
It created its first national park in 1937 and its first PA in 1926 as part of
its national policy, differentiating itself from other countries where
conservation of natural resources was only as rhetorical discourse. It greatly
enhanced its PA’s coverage over the following decades as to include 16.45% of
its territory; introduced state-of-the-art practices and tools to designate and
manage them; accomplished landmarks experiences on ecological restoration of
marine and terrestrial ecosystems, in times when very few other countries had
done so; established one of the first marine PA of the world (Archipiélago Los
Roques, 1972); interconnected PA when this was thought utopia. By the end of
the 80’s Venezuela had gained such a positive reputation that it was nominated
and selected as host of the IV World Parks Congress. Venezuelans like Gerardo Budowski,
Henri Pittier, Julian Steyermark, José Rafael García, left their positive thread
on the world’s PA vision and administration. And let us not forget that
Venezuela is one of the twelve megadiverse countries, protecting, almost
exclusively, the greatest marvels of that worldwide unique bioregion: the
Guiana Shield.
But, why to worry about Venezuela ?. Because whatever happen in Venezuela
it might happen anywhere, especially in the South American region. Today, our
country’s political elite is imposing its particular vision of the world and of
life itself, and this vision disdains the role and importance of PA, considering
them contrary to social interests. Certainly many world governments do think
so. But what is the novelty in that? The novelty is that few countries take it
into practice demolishing all of the institutions related to PA. The Venezuelan
case goes beyond that of a government allocating meagre resources to PA,
closing parks temporarily or insisting on building oil ducts across them. It is
that of a government that is using a humanistic and ecological rhetoric while favouring
all kinds of forbidden activities and uses in PA, and substituting its professional
staff for party-political commissars. A government that eliminates the Ministry
of Environment distributing its environmental competences to which
constitutionally is obliged, into lower level dependencies within a Housing
Ministry that constructs and pretends to build high level environmental impact
projects inside PA *. The Venezuelan case is well worth a special study and
hence our appeal to all of our WCPA’s colleagues. Do not overlook what happens in
Venezuela as a socio-political curiosity. Do not look upon it with disdain,
with the vague conviction that someday this will pass and go away. Look upon it
as an undercurrent political action that many of our colleagues had overlooked,
which is actually in force, in plain vigour and with all the potential to
expand itself throughout South America, and from there to the rest of the
developing world.
IUCN has played a key role in designing innovative policies that allow
PA to be established and developed. We also understand that, as an institution
somehow analogue to the UN, IUCN is operated under the principle of non-interference
in "internal" affairs. However, even in the core of the UN, when a
country stands out of all the standards of living and rationality, it must be
contacted through diplomatic channels and persuaded not to pursue that conduct.
The case
of Venezuela well deserves thorough and decisive attention of IUCN.
Contact: cmapvenezuela@yahoo.com
*Some illustrative data:
1. Venezuela’s average investment in conservation in the last 10 year is
about US$ 3,66/Sq. km. Developing countries’ average investment has been US$
161/Sq. km. This does not correspond with the fact that the Venezuelan State
has administered an approximate income of US$ 660 billions during the last 14
years.
2. The few resources assigned to PA have led to abandonment and
deterioration of the surveillance and control posts, wastage of equipment with
many years of use. Actually, only 350 park rangers are responsible to take care
of more than 15 million hectares of national parks and natural monuments;
3. Personnel salaries are extremely low and so is their training
capacity, thus corruption is frequent;
4. PA lack police enforcement & custody, a situation that poses a
high-risk situation for park rangers’ surveillance and monitoring activities.
Park rangers have no training in enforcement nor have police functions by law.
Between 2001 and 2014, 4 PA workers have been assassinated in the line of duty.
No person has been charged for these crimes;
5. Deforestations, wildfires, illegal hunting and fishing have reached
record levels. PA are frequently used for illegal activities such as drug
smuggling, common delinquency, kidnapping and other crimes;
6. Constructions of “public interest” (electric lines, paved roads,
service corridors, optic fiber ducts, oil & gas pipelines, communications
antennas) thrive in the PA, executed with a lack of observance for the
mitigation and restoration measures conventionally comprised in environmental
impact assessments.
7. Illegal gold mining flourishes today in Canaima National Park, the
only World Heritage Site proposed by Venezuela and recognized by UNESCO, whilst
competent authorities have not been able to deter it
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario