Brazil’s Environment Council Revokes Rules Protecting Mangroves and Sandbanks

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Brazil’s Environment Council (CONAMA), controlled by federal government officials and chaired by Minister of the Environment Ricardo Salles, on Monday, September 28th, ordered the extinction of two resolutions defining the permanent protection areas (APPs) of mangroves and sandbanks along the Brazilian coast. The abrogation of these rules makes room for real estate speculation in the vegetation strips of beaches and occupation of mangrove areas for shrimp farming.

CONAMA also revoked a resolution that required environmental licensing for irrigation projects, in addition to issuing new regulations that allow packaging materials and pesticide residues burned in industrial furnaces to be converted into cement, thereby superseding the rules that established the appropriate environmental disposal of this material.

In the morning, environmentalists, legislators and the Brazilian Association of Members of the Environmental Prosecutor’s Office (ABRAMPA) called for all items to be removed from the meeting agenda of CONAMA, a consultative and deliberative body on environmental issues. There was also an attempt to cancel the meeting through legal proceedings. All attempts failed.

The revocation of Resolutions 302 and 303, both dating from 2002, removes specific protection measures for mangroves and sandbanks, the strips of vegetation commonly found on dune areas, on Northeastern beaches. The government’s argument is that these resolutions were covered by laws that were later introduced, such as the Forestry Code.

However, environmental experts point out that these resolutions are still being enforced today as they are the only legal tools that effectively protect these areas. For instance, last month in São Paulo, the São Paulo State Environmental Company (CETESB) lost a lawsuit and was forced to respect the boundaries established in the 2002 resolution “to avoid the occurrence of irreparable damage to the community and the environment”. The abrogation of Resolution 302 also puts an end to rules that defined the boundaries of artificial reservoirs’ permanent preservation areas, as well as the regime for the use of the surroundings of these lakes.

The revocation of Resolution 284, dated 2001, eliminates the federal regulatory criteria for environmental licensing of irrigation projects. According to environmentalists, this revocation is intended to remove legal demands made by agribusiness.

The Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock of Brazil (CNA), which is a member of the CONAMA, argued that the resolution clashes with others that are currently in force. The Ministry of Agriculture declared that irrigation is not an “activity”, but rather an accessory of agriculture. “We do not see a positive impact on the environment in this resolution,” declared the Agriculture Ministry’s member on CONAMA.

Concentration

During the vote, Ricardo Salles suggested that the votes be deferred to another meeting due to doubts raised by some members opposed to the revocations. However, all government members and corporate institutions voted to uphold the agenda and its deliberations. Questioned by reporters, Salles did not comment on the outcome of the CONAMA vote.

The result exposes the government’s control over a body that, because of its mission and history, has always been technically and independently composed. Since July last year CONAMA, which defines environmental norms and rules, has been reorganized by Salles.

The Minister concentrated the majority of council votes in the federal government and representatives of the productive sector. States and civil society have lost representation. CONAMA was reduced from 96 to 23 members.

Carlos Bocuhy, president of the Brazilian Institute of Environmental Protection (PROAM), states that, due to the current structure, the federal government now holds 43 percent of the voting power within the board, in addition to another eight percent of the corporate sector’s voting power. The remaining votes are divided among representatives of the states, municipalities and civil society. If before they held 60 percent of the vote, they now hold 49 percent under the new composition.

The body’s former structure was intended to give representation to several segments of society. Some civilian members were selected by nomination and others by election. However, since last year, this selection began to be made by means of a lottery.

Institutions representing civil society, including environmental associations, rural workers and indigenous peoples, saw their seats drop from 23 to four. Two of these seats are vacant because their members – from the Rare Association of Brazil and the Active Island Commission – left the council and were not replaced. As a result, voting took place with no accounting for the other two members’ votes.

States have also lost representation. If before there was one seat for each of the 26 states and the Federal District, now there are five seats, each representing a formal geographic region of the country. Municipalities, which once had eight representatives, now have two. The Federal Prosecutor’s Office is a member of the board and is often critical of environmental flexibility, but it is the only member with no voting rights.

“With the constitution of CONAMA established by the Bolsonaro government, the government gained full control to pass resolutions, reducing the rigor of environmental legislation through council resolutions. CONAMA, a body with four decades of significant contributions to environmental policy, is dead in practice,” said former IBAMA president Suely Araújo, a senior public policy expert with the Climate Observatory. “Regardless of the government in place, the Council has always been an arena for technical debates, with wide exposure of the topics under debate. It was a tremendous shame to attend today’s meeting. The final outcome can be summed up in one word: regression.”

Judicialization

The regional Prosecutor, Fátima Aparecida de Souza Borghi, representative of the Federal Prosecutor’s Office (MPF), stressed to members of CONAMA that the revocations will be challenged by the MPF in Court.

WHAT SOME MEMBERS OF THE CONAMA SAID ABOUT THE DECISIONS

IN FAVOR

Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock (CNA) – João Carlos de Carli Filho, CONAMA member

Indeed, there is a need for a review of all of the CONAMA’s resolutions that conflict with current environmental legislation. We have to point out that for us, from the corporate sector, there is tremendous legal insecurity related to the technical actions on our side, when there is any questioning regarding our activity. There are many resolutions, many that need to be reassessed by the CONAMA. It is urgent to do this.

Ministry of Agriculture (MAP) – Gustavo dos Santos Goretti, CONAMA member

The Ministry has been emphasizing the need to revoke Resolution 284 (irrigation), since it does not benefit the environment in any way. The solution deals with irrigation as an activity, but in fact agriculture is the activity. We do not observe a positive impact of this resolution, which has been slow to implement projects, since the granting of water resources does not require environmental licensing for the installation of equipment.

AGAINST

Associação Novo Encanto de Desenvolvimento Ecológico (Ecological Development Association) – Carlos Teodoro Irigaray, CONAMA member

The Brazilian consolidation laws establish that public officials are accountable for their decisions, technical opinions that are fraught with gross errors. I understand that this would be established in this resolution (284). Therefore, I vote against its adoption (of revocation). The simple revocation of this resolution (303/2002) will impact the Atlantic Forest biome more directly, which is one of the most affected biomes in Brazil. This will have repercussions on sea turtle reproduction areas and the protection of sandbanks. This subject merited a more careful consideration. This revocation will cause much greater environmental damage than the potential gain, for providing a number of inconsistencies contained in the resolution with the legislation in force.

Federal Prosecutor’s Office – Fátima Aparecida de Souza Borghi, CONAMA member

To have pesticides incinerated is a serious matter. This (resolution 284) goes against the ratification of the Stockholm Convention, among other treaties. There are still internal public health issues. Environmental bodies do not have the equipment to monitor this. This equipment is sophisticated and expensive. These are issues that should be taken into consideration. The potential responsibility of the official does not vanish over a legal opinion, which is entirely unreasonable. This is all unconstitutional and illegal. I reiterate that the Federal Prosecutor’s Office will take the appropriate measures.

Cement industry position

The Brazilian Portland Cement Association (ABCP) stated on Monday, September 28th, that the resolution passed by the CONAMA for incineration of pesticide residues is a safe measure, with no risk of contamination for the population.

The new resolution states that, now, the so-called “persistent organic pollutants”, a category that includes agro-toxins, could be incinerated in cement production furnaces.

By means of a note, the ABCP stated that the resolution provides definitions on “the maximum limits that may be present in the waste to be co-processed in cement kilns that follow European standards and also established by the Stockholm Convention that identifies which substances are harmful to health and the environment.”

According to the association, the destruction of waste that may contain pollutants “is guaranteed” by temperatures above 13,000º C in cement kilns and in the control of emissions, “more specifically of dioxins and furans”.

The new resolution, according to the institution, was technically discussed and unanimously passed in meetings held in August this year by the Technical Board of Environmental Control and Quality and Land Management, comprised of representatives of corporate and environmental institutions. “The co-processing activity has existed for over 20 years in the country and internationally since the 70s. It is a proven safe technique with strict process and environmental controls,” declared the ABCP.

Target of criticism by the environmental sector, the new resolution will support a more sustainable production process, according to the ABCP. “From this measure, the cement industry intends to reduce 30 percent of total CO2 emissions by 2050 and replace 55 percent of fossil fuel, promoting recycling, the useful life of landfills and the eradication of dump sites, thereby generating income and quality of life for Brazilians,” it said.

Source: O Estado de S. Paulo