En Notas


Does the North American Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) have any interest in protecting some islands of the Malvinas Archipelago?

14 de August de 2022 22:17

Wildlife Conservation Society holds the illegal ownership of the Steeple Jason and Grand Jason islands, northwest of the Malvinas.

No one knew -until today- why a Representative, originally from the deep interior, from the saltpeter, the cotton fields, who became an environmentalist, presented a project aimed at protecting something in the deep sea floor that not even the researchers were able to define precisely, -the Deputy- with a certain anger, rejecting all the scientific, environmental, economic, territorial and strategic arguments of the experts who opposed her unfounded project and, drawing even more attention, that the Foreign Ministry and, more specifically, the Malvinas Secretariat, will accompany a project located in a sector adjacent to the marine area occupied and disputed by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Can a National Representative endorse a project conceived and promoted by a foreign Foundation and the secretary of the Malvinas not know who the Wildlife Conservation Society is?

Do legislators, officials and their advisors work blindly, ignore or participate in an external framework that, under the guise of caring for the environment, weakens Argentine sovereignty?   

The WCS Foundation is supported by OCEANS 5; organization that, its "first grants supported work in the overseas territories of the United Kingdom, Antarctica, the Arctic and several large Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ), including that of the United States" (sic) including among its partners and members to thirteen foundations from the United States, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, and this, which could be overlooked, becomes extremely important, since the aforementioned “Marine Protected Area” would complete the “blue belt ” that Already in 2017, the English announced that they would surround the Malvinas - among other overseas territories - ensuring control and exploitation of fishing resources.

Why was it admitted that this project, framed in an internationalized marine environment and linked to an area occupied and disputed by the United Kingdom, was dealt with in the Chamber of Deputies, without due evaluation of all the necessary background information and approval? prior to the Defense, Foreign Relations, Natural Resources, Maritime Interests and Budget Committees?

Is it a mere coincidence that who would have to administer this Blue Hole Marine Protected Area was none other than the recently resigned Administrator of National Parks Lautaro Erratchu who on August 3 issued Decision 484 declaring the Lanín Volcano of Neuquén a "Mapuche sacred site" ? ?

For purely fishing issues, the Foreign Ministry has a career ambassador in the Federal Fisheries Council, understanding - surely - that the scope of these activities, despite being an exploitation of resources, under the domain and jurisdiction of the coastal State, is influenced by regulations. international agreements derived from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ratified by Argentina in 1995 (Law 24,543) and, furthermore, because 5,497,178 km2 of maritime and island territory (1,639,900 km2); Antarctic (2,426,911 km2) and the Argentine continental shelf (1,430,367 km2) are occupied or disputed by the United Kingdom.

We have already said - we asked ourselves and we affirmed - in the seven previous articles on the subject , for what reason was the AMP originally limited to 12 thousand km2 (2014) in the Argentine EEZ moved to the Blue Hole of the high seas with 164 thousand km2? 2021) ; Was it not known that Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese and Spanish-British vessels with English licenses fish in the selected area and that cannot be reached by this marine protected area (MPA) and that, as happened with the Agreement signed by Cavallo de Conservation (FOCZ) east of the Malvinas in 1990, would it allow consolidating the granting of licenses to the islanders?; For what reason was a project discussed in session that was not approved by the Budget and Finance Commission and does not provide for funds for control and research tasks; that, without taking into account the needs for naval and research equipment, only in matters of control and surveillance will require about 15 million dollars annually?; Did the authors of the project not know that due to lack of resources the oceanic patrol vessels (OPV) recently acquired from France are moored at the Mar del Plata Naval Base, without being able to control even the extensive Argentine sea and that the Undersecretariat of Fisheries and INIDEP have 17 articles in Law 24,922 - if the means were available - to carry out all the tasks of protecting the continental shelf by prohibiting bottom trawling fishing, without the need to dictate any new MPA?; That a declaration of National Marine Monument is enough to protect the crew and the remains of the ARA San Juan Submarine?; Nor is it that by assigning the category of Strict Reserve “on” the platform, only national vessels will be prevented from fishing? Were the scientific prerequisites required by FAO (2012) to establish an MPA not met? that there is no breach of the "commitment of the Strategic Plan for Biological Diversity 2011-2020" Because in 2011 the United Kingdom established a reserve of 1.07 million km2 around Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and has restricted an area of our country equivalent to 52% of the Argentine EEZ?; that the project will not have any economic benefit, will not prevent illegal fishing and will in no way strengthen national sovereignty since by Article 77 of the Sea Convention no one will be able to undertake activities on the platform without the express consent of the Argentine State?

Everything is very serious . But it is absolutely worse, because Wildlife Conservation Society owns several Islands in the Malvinas Archipelago and, of course, now we can understand WCS's interest in the Blue Hole, which would become the "blue belt" of British protection of the Malvinas and Also, his special concern for the care of the black-browed albatrosses that are found on the islands of “his property” and, according to the report of the local WCS affiliate led by the aforementioned Falabella, when describing the percentages of species to be conserved in the Blue Hole-EEZ (Page.82) reach “2.72” (Pg.

By Agenda Malvinas


Other news about Columnists

Might interest you


No comments yet

Log in or sign up to comment.