index

Texto Pie de Foto
A traditional lack of interest in environmental matters. It doesn´t help, either,
that for the average citizen the environment, specially during a crisis,
is not a priority.
The Natura 2000 Network is perceived as a hindrance to development.
The conservation versus socioeconomic development debate is still very
current.
A network that is not very funcional. Some think that, despite its name,
the group of conservation areas that belong to the network are actually
not being managed as a European network of natural sites of interest.
An excesively bureaucratized network. The Natura 2000 Network
sounds of a lot of bureaucracy, whether due to the complexity of the processes
followed for the drafting of the management plans (still pending
in many autonomous communities) or to the extra requirements it creates
when processing project files from an environmental point of view
(environmental assessments, environmental impact statements, etc.)
Lack of management plans. Strictly speaking, the network is declared
but not implemented, as the process of setting it up is completed only
with the designation of SACs and the drafting of the corresponding management
plans, still pending in many autonomous communities.
Bad start. Although the massive amount of technical and scientific work
carried out to shape the proposal that gave birth to this network is well
acknowledged, the general perception is that the whole proccess was
removed from civil society and from the territories directely affected. The
feeling that it is just an imposed environmental policy has been a source
of conflict since its beginnings. That is why the positive aspects of
the Network are, repeatedly and not very successfully, explained and
justified.
An invisible network. Many of the sites that are part of the Natura 2000
Network exist only in the cartography attached to the corresponding file.
On the field they are invisible and, if they don´t coincide with any of the
iconic protection statuses (Natural Park, National Park...), sites are not
even signposted. In many cases, so, one doesn´t know if one is within
the Natura 2000 Network.
Unexploited touristic resource. If the publicizing of the benefits of belonging
to the Natura 2000 Network -from a quality of life and landscape
point of view- were reinforced, there would be a chance of better exploiting
the touristic potential of the network. These days, information about
just a few recent experiences related to rural development programmes
can only be found.
Lack of funding. It is discouraging that no single specific financial instrument
has been allotted to Natura 2000 sites. Indirectly, the message
received by society sounds more of restrictions than of the promotion of
socieconomic development compatible with conservation.
Natura 2000 Network. Handbook for journalists 59