index

BLOCK
02 THE ANALYSIS
The journalists´ experience
Marine reserves
What, then, could be done to improve this diagnosis? Well, as psychologists
and experienced publicists well know, emphasizing the positive
aspects. It may seem a not very honest strategy, but it is very convenient
in the current circumstances.
Among those positive aspects, those achievements, we should include
the disasters that the mere fact of belonging to the Network has often
prevented. There is no shortage of examples, in any country. A fact that
is normally not underlined is that the Natura 2000 Network is the consequence
of two very important European Directives for the conservation
of nature: the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive. Both instruments
have proven their utility on many occasions.
The giant squid as bait
Since we are on the task of underlining the positive, we could take a leaf
out of other disciplines´ books. Paleonthology, for instance, seems to
me a case that can throw some light on this. In itself, Paleonthology is a
hard and difficult to communicate science. It demands a lot of compared
anatomy, complex dating techniques, a good amount of geology and,
to make matters worse, attractive conclusions are not that frequent. A
usual task consist in studying closely under the magnifying glass hundreds
of the diminute teeth of micromammals, crucial for establishing
changes in scenario and fauna.
Towards the end of 2013, when the workshop on communicating the Natura
2000 Network was held, even general interest media were voicing
some of the Network´s positive consequences, although maybe not attributing
them to it completely. That was the case with the future marine
reserves planned to be designated along the whole of the EU coasts, all
of them in the framework of the Natura 2000 Network. It may be objected
that in fact it is easier to designate conservation areas where private
property does not present objections, plus the fact that marine protected
sites are looked on more kindly than those on land, that are often perceived
as a hindrance to development and private initiative.
The question is no nonsense. While the Natura 2000 Network protects
18 per cent of the European land territory, it will only do the same with
4 per cent of its territorial waters, which points at a clear assimetry. In
Spain, we should bear in mind, the land currently under the umbrella
of the Natura 2000 Network amounts to 30 per cent of the country´s
territory.
“The reader perceives the fabric of the EU community as as
an administrative labyrinth and does not bother trying to
remember its nooks and crannies”
However, Paleonthology has in its hand two good cards of enormous
attractive for all audiences, including children. One of them is, obviously,
our fascination with dinosaurs. The other is human evolution in general
and Neanderthals in particular. Why precisely dinosaurs and Neanderthals?
What is wrong with the trilobites? Pages and pages have been
written about these preferences, but analyzing them now would divert
us from our subject.
As a conclusion, a possible informative tactic to increase interest in the
Natura 2000 Network would be to emphasize its many positive aspects
and embody them in such attractive icons as those of the Paleonthology
of vertebrates. We should look for and exploit the “dinosaurs and
Neanderthals” of the Natura 2000 Network. Could that be some marine
reserve, like that of Cachucho in Asturias, where the very attractive and
newsworthy giant squid lives?
54
Natura 2000 Network. Handbook for journalists