Conservación, divulgación e imagen pública de la naturaleza durante el franquismo: el Parque Nacional de Aigüestortes y Estany de Sant Maurici

Abstract

Los temas ambientales fueron una preocupación menor para el régimen franquista, con una salvedad, al menos a nivel retórico: la protección de la naturaleza. Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar la relación entre la conservación de la naturaleza y su imagen pública, teniendo en cuenta el papel que jugó la divulgación, en el caso del Parque Nacional de Aigüestortes y Estany de Sant Maurici (creado en 1955), y sacando a la luz también las tensiones existentes entre estas cuestiones y las circunstancias socioeconómicas de la población local del momento. Para ello, se han analizado fuentes de diversa índole y dirigidas tanto a un público general como a un público específico: legislación, obras que hablan del parque nacional, relatos de viajes a esa zona del Pirineo catalán, textos sobre conservación de la naturaleza y sobre parques nacionales, prensa, publicaciones periódicas de colectivos, grabaciones del NO-DO y documentos de archivo del Centro de Documentación del parque. A partir de las fuentes examinadas, se identifican distintos discursos y visiones acerca de la naturaleza y su conservación en distintos actores sociales.

Last-century vegetation dynamics in a highland Pyrenean national park and implications for conservation

“…By 1975, forest exploitation had been restricted, but hydroelectricity generation-which began in 1910 and reached its peakfrom 1946 to 1960-and extensive grazing continued. In some sectors of the park, however, forest exploitation continued, due to previous agreements with private owners (Gil-Farrero, 2021, 2022. Hydroelectric power was generated by damming and underground drilling of a number of the abundant (>270) alpine lakes of glacial origin, situated at elevations between approximately 2000 and 2500 m (Catalan et al, 1997).…”

“…Under this new administrative regime, the exploitation of natural resources, except for hydroelectricity and animal husbandry, became more restricted, particularly forest exploitation. Since the creation of the park, conflicts among the different actors involved -especially political/administrative sectors and private/communal owners -have been continuous due to the different interests and perceptions on how nature and natural resources should be managed (Gil-Farrero, 2021, 2022. Topographically, the PNAESM ranges from approximately 1600 m (1,300 m including the peripheral buffer zone) to the highest peaks, which rise slightly above 3000 m (Carrillo & Aniz, 2013).…”

“…For these areas, conducting new paleoecological studies tailored to each specific catchment area would be essential. As it occurred with the creation of the PNAESM and the progress of conservation regulations, an eventual expansion of the park would enhance conflicts with private and communal owners (Gil-Farrero, 2021, 2022. Therefore, further negotiations among all the actors involved would be necessary.…”

Last-Century Forest Dynamics in a Highland Pyrenean National Park and Implications for Conservation

“…By 1975, forest exploitation had been restricted, but hydroelectricity generation-which began in 1910 and reached its peak from 1946 to 1960-and extensive grazing continued. In some sectors of the park, however, forest exploitation continued, due to previous agreements with private owners [7,8]. Hydroelectric power was generated by damming and underground drilling of a number of the abundant (>270) alpine lakes of glacial origin, situated at elevations between approximately 2000 and 2500 m [9].…”

“…Under this new administrative regime, the exploitation of natural resources, except for hydroelectricity and animal husbandry, became more restricted, particularly forest exploitation. Since the creation of the park, conflicts among the different actors involved-especially political/administrative sectors and private/communal owners-have been continuous due to the different interests and perceptions on how nature and natural resources should be managed [7,8]. due to the different interests and perceptions on how nature and natural resources should be managed [7,8].…”