Post by
Katoriff1 on Nov 02, 2022 7:49am
From Media 'Hoy' in DR. GLTA!
Mining, agriculture and pressure contrary to the Law THE COUNTRY Today 2 November, 2022 Mining in San Juan de la Maguana. By Osiris de Len mining _has been, and will continue to be, the fundamental support for the development of yesterday's society and today's society, in the same way that it will continue to be the fundamental support for tomorrow's society, beyond the criticism of those who have never sympathized with mining, since mining is the only productive activity capable of providing all the metallic elements required by all sectors of society, including agriculture, industry and technology; it is the only activity capable of providing all the fossil fuels required by the electricity industry that lights up the world and moves industry, and required by the transport sector that moves passengers, food and medicine in all parts of the world; is the only productive activity that provides cement, steel, But despite all these great and indisputable benefits of mining, this productive sector has always concentrated on its exploration and production programs, and has completely abandoned the dissemination, information and promotion programs, with which the land has been free for the exclusive use of those who, not being sympathetic to mining, have given themselves the task of using the media to completely distort the image of mining and present it as solely responsible for all the environmental sins in the world today, and In a modern world where the majority of people consume what is permanently disseminated through the media, opposition to mining grows and grows every day, even if that opposition is made from a cell phone built on a 100 % using mining components,or it is done from a radio booth where everyone arrived mounted on cars built using mining components and powered by mining fuels. Sample of this opposition is evident in the province of San Juan, where it is argued, without any Environmental Impact Assessmentthat proves the reason, that the gold mining of El Romero cannot be allowed because that exploitation would supposedly destroy the waters of the San Juan River, dry up the Sabaneta dam and destroy agriculture, ignoring that nickel has been mined in Bonao since 1971, in Cotu gold and silver have been exploited since 1975 and copper and gold have been exploited in Maimn since 2008, and that these 3 large mining operations are developed next to the Yuna River, which is the largest in the country and has not been impacted, next to the Hatillo dam, which has the largest capacity for water storage and production of tilapia and has not been impacted, and next to the main rice-growing area of the country, where there are 55,000 hectares planted with rice with record production, since the Last year the country produced 14.4 million quintals of rice,of which 67% occurred within the mining areaLa Vega-Bonao-SFM-Cotu-Bajo Yuna , 21% in the northwestern line, and barely 12% in the southwestern region that includes San Juan, demonstrating that in Bonao and Cotu mining coexists with agriculture that produces 5 times more than the agriculture of San Juan. But what is most worrying is that while article 40 of Environmental Law 64-00 establishes that any project, infrastructure work or industry, which by its nature may affect the environment, requires that the Ministry of the Environmentgrant an environmental permit, or an environmental license based on an Environmental Impact Assessment, depending on the magnitude of the effects that the project may cause, on this occasion it goes so far as to demand that the Government violate Environmental Law 64-00 and that the Environmental Impact Assessment ordered by the Law is not allowed, perhaps because some opponents of the agricultural area understand that if the Environmental Impact Assessment mandated by the Law is carried out, it would be demonstrated that many opposition agricultural arguments, raised without no geoscientific base of support, they would be eroded before the nation. Now, what is not understood is that the authority does not assume the leading role ordered by Environmental Law 64-00 to instruct the execution of the Environmental Impact Assessment, as it has been done since 2000 every time Some project, public or private, has been presented to the environmental authorities, because if this time social pressure is accepted so that the Environmental Impact Assessment ordered by the Law is not carried out, the bad precedent would be created that in each future project the same pressure would be applied by any group or sector opposed to any project in any region, with which Environmental Law 64-00, our best environmental protection instrument, would lose all its reason, and the projects would depend on whoever has more lobbying power, and that would be catastrophic for the nation.Asking to disrespect our Environmental Law is not typical of environmentalists, especially when people who yesterday opposed public projects with the valid argument that the Government had not carried out the mandatory Environmental Impact Assessment, today oppose a mining project demanding that it be violated. the Law so that the obligatory Environmental Impact Assessment that they previously demanded and that the Law mandates is not carried out.