SANTA CRUZ DE TENERIFE, July 13 (EUROPE PRESS) –
The plenary session of the Parliament of the Canary Islands has unanimously approved this Wednesday to initiate the processing of the Popular Legislative Initiative (ILP) that advocates the protection of urban trees in the archipelago.
Domingo Afonso, spokesperson for the citizen initiative, has valued that more than 18,700 citizens have signed the initiative with the difficulties entailed by the health pandemic and the ILP system itself that requires the physical signature.
He pointed out that there is already a precedent for this law in Madrid and that the protection of urban trees is “necessary” to generate recreational spaces, regulate CO2 and promote the development of biodiversity in the cities of the islands.
He has indicated that in episodes of heat they can lower the temperature in the streets by up to 10ºC and also avoid noise, warning that some 100,000 trees “are in danger” due to the execution of works and infrastructure.
He has lamented that “there is no protection” for urban trees, contrary to what happens on rural land, as well as the “endemic hatred” of trees that nests in part of the population.
The objective of the law, he indicated, is to protect trees over 15 years old, with a diameter of 20 centimeters and a height of 140 centimeters, and to regulate some aspects such as pruning and felling, which are prohibited except for safety exceptions, in such a way that in general it will be necessary to opt for the transplant.
Likewise, he has indicated that the owners will have the obligation to protect their trees — he has proposed some fiscal support measures — and that an inventory of trees be created by all the municipalities.
EXAMPLE OF “GOOD DEMOCRATIC HEALTH”
Vidina Espino, spokesperson for the Joint Group, has said that the processing of an ILP is an example of “good democratic health” which is also endorsed by more than 18,000 signatures, stressing that it shares its objectives to promote wooded spaces and guarantee the conservation of older copies.
He has indicated that it is a necessary law for all the islands, especially in Gran Canaria, where more than 800 trees have been felled in recent years, to which he has added parks “less and less green and with more cement.”
Ricardo Fernández (Cs) has claimed the value of trees in Canarian cities to generate “friendlier” spaces while lamenting that on many occasions they are lost in favor of urban development.
He highlighted the obligation for municipalities to prepare an inventory of urban trees and the concise nature of the law to guarantee the protection of trees.
Jesús Ramos (ASG) has said that the protection of trees is “essential” for aesthetic and health preservation aspects and stressed that the presentation of an ILP shows that Canarian society is “mature”.
He has pointed out that trees “are the lungs” of cities and therefore there will be sanctions against those who commit infractions.
Manuel Marrero, spokesman for Sí Podemos, has valued the efforts of the promoters to obtain more than 18,000 signatures in support of the initiative that tries to deal with the “mistreatment” suffered by trees, both by people and by the women themselves. public facilities.
He has defended the environmental values of trees and their contribution to lower temperatures, stressing that this law promotes citizens to be “happier”.
Carmen Hernández (NC) has commented that it is “difficult to imagine” that cities do not have green spaces, since they are an aesthetic element but also an environmental one since they produce oxygen and regulate temperatures. “They are havens of peace,” she said.
He has not hidden that sometimes they “generate problems” of coexistence because they affect homes or public streets when they grow, but he has endorsed that massive logging “is not a solution.”
DIFFERENCES PUBLIC FROM PRIVATE
Jacob Qadri (PP) has pointed out that trees are the “most important element” of the green areas of cities and as mayor, he has defended that massive felling is not carried out but that they try to promote transplantation.
He has valued that the protection of trees is regulated in a law and understands that it is necessary to “differentiate” between those located on public or private land since many families do not have the knowledge or economic funds for their adequate conservation.
David de la Hoz (CC-PNC) has given “thanks” to the promoters of the ILP because it focuses on “non-human life” since “bio-urbanism” is essential to improve the lives of citizens.
Along the same lines, he commented that we must improve the natural environment of educational centers and try to “improve” people’s mental health with the possibility of contemplating and enjoying more green spaces.
Likewise, it has affected the function that trees have to “mitigate” high temperatures.
Matilde Fleitas, from the Socialist Group, has commented that the shade should be “patrimony of humanity” for its benefits for health and the environment and has defended that this ILP will mark “a before and after” because it opens the door to a reform of the law to eliminate “barriers” to access.
He has indicated that it is necessary to “deeply study” the regulation of trees in private areas and charged against the felling of trees and the “insensitivity” of human beings with nature.
