This news on a resolution (probably illegal and punishable in court) of the Marche Regional Council, is truly sensational, goes to school at the national level and highlights of that "pasta" is made the center of our politicians (this time with one exception, the Environment Councillor Mark Amagliani) to read ... I do not believe it!
With a "blitz" the Regional Council reduces and eliminates riperimetra (illegally) some Sites of Community Importance (SCI) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs) in the province of Pesaro-Urbino. Without this measure and motivate technically in defiance of the results from studies conducted in these years the University of Ancona, Camerino and Urbino (research, however, paid from the same region!). Introduction: SIC and SPAs have been designated and perimeter in the late 90s following the entry into force of the European Directive called "Habitat" [ http://www.minambiente.it/opencms/opencms/home_it/menu.html?menuItem=/menu/menu_informazioni/RN2000_Direttiva_Habitat.html&lang=it ] and Directive 79/409/EEC on bird conservation.
are more or less populated areas where habitats and species of particular importance (because rare, endemic, etc.). And for the conservation of which the EU provides specific funds in various forms (agriculture, forestry, maintenance / enhancement habitat, sustainable infrastructure, etc.).. The initial scope made by the Marche Region, and subsequent studies conducted by the University of the Marches, have allowed us to have scientific data such as being able to determine with some precision the sites (look here: http://www.regione.marche.it/Home / Struttureorganizzative / AmbienteePaesaggio / Biodiversity% C3% A0/ReteEcologicaRegionale/tabid/861/Default.aspx ).
The problem at this point, a question arises only for "practice" for the protection of species and habitat conservation measures that are, to some hunters, not like "regardless." They are so spread false rumors and misleading information (in the SIC can no longer do the garden of the house, mushroom picking is prohibited, those who want to build a house can not do, etc...) In short, the usual vile strategy adopted by the artfully representatives of hunters as they do best: shooting left and right without any hit the target, just to stir up confusion and farmers, hunters and citizens from the SPA and SCI, the Region Brands and the "usual" ambientalisti.Insorgono some mountain communities and the Province of Pesaro Pesaro-Urbino, avowedly pro-hunting, he begins to ask the region - without technically justify anything - to revise zoning and conservation measures for SIC. Chissà perchè, poi, delle 109 aree di interesse comunitario censite ed approvate nelle Marche, solo quelle poche decine ricadenti del pesarese non vanno bene! Morale della favola?Dopo anni di lavoro certosino dell'Assessorato all'Ambiente, degli Uffici regionali, delle Università di Ancona, Urbino e Camerino, che ha portato alla sostanziale conferma del perimetro e delle misure a tutela dei SIC e delle ZPS pesaresi (basta leggere la Delibera di Giunta Regionale n. 1825 del 9/11/2009 su www.norme.marche.it), la Regione cambia improvvisamente idea. Ad una sola settimana di distanza e, badate bene, SENZA UNO STRACCIO DI STUDIO O AZIONE DI MONITORAGGIO CHE NE POSSA DARE UNA MOTIVAZIONE TECNICO-SCIENTIFICA E QUINDI UNA LEGITTIMAZIONE TOWARDS THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION , the same with the Regional Board Resolution No. 1869 of November 16, 2009 withdrew the resolution no (!!!!) 1825/2009 and endorsed the "new" perimeters of SCIs and SPAs <<...secondo la rappresentazione cartografica trasmessa dalla Provincia di Pesaro e Urbino...>>, giving it the mandate to provide POST (you read that right, in retrospect, that is, having approved an act !!!!!) a valid reason to update the perimeters and areas subject to cut-delete.
The only one that was just the opposite Asssessore Environment Amagliani Marco, when he does not feel is to deny what he had proposed just a week earlier and in a subsequent statement <<... the press has described the new guidelines do not comply with current legislation. ..>>.
and Assessor is absolutely right, because this measure is illegal and is regional in stark contrast to the DPR n.357/1997 and the procedural rules laid down by Community law (Directive 92/43/EEC).
<< E ' all too evident - according to a press release from WWF Marche - that this is a gift to hunters, regardless of the protection of our territory and electioneering purposes only characterized by a rough consensus building of the usual political group Pesaro capable of imposing the Marche region of Italy the worst hunting policies. WWF Marche puzzled by these abuses, will cover all roads can be made against this decision, with legal action at the Tar, appeals to the European Commission, and all that will be appropriate for the cancellation of this unfortunate decision >>.
For those who are not "within" the problems that seem disproportionate response from the WWF, in reality we are facing a paradoxical situation much! The Marche Region
first approve, based on scientific studies and documented multi-year, and perimeter protection of certain sites, then, to respond to unfounded complaints of some government (in bad faith?), Within one week changes the opposite idea and approve a standard, no explanation is supported technically .
We need some more comments on this dreary work of the Regional Council and the intellectual honesty of the political center? We will remember in the voting booth, that's for sure!
0 comments:
Post a Comment