The Commission for Environment and Sustainable Development approved Bill 5262/16, by Sarney Filho (PV-MA), which establishes new criteria for the compensation of the legal reserve, reports the “Câmara Agency”. The compensation is one of the alternatives to regularize the situation of the owner of rural property that held, on July 22, 2008, legal reserve area. The other options provided for in the Forest Code (Law 12.651 / 12) are to restore the reserve or allow the natural regeneration of vegetation in the area.
Today, the code provides that compensation of the legal reserve can be made in areas that meet the following criteria: be equivalent in extension to the legal reserve area to be compensated; be located in the same biome of the legal reserve area to be compensated; if out of state, be located in areas identified as priorities by the Union or the states.
The project changes these criteria by providing that compensation of the legal reserve can be made in areas that: are equivalent in ecological importance and in extension to the legal reserve to be compensated; and are located in the same watershed of the legal reserve to be compensated.
From the original text, the compensation area should belong to the same ecosystem of the reserve area. For Tatto, the term ecosystem does not favor a precise delimitation in the field, as the term biome, for example (mapped by the IBGE), which can generate difficulties when applying the law.
Hydrographic microbasin
If it is not possible to compensate the legal reserve within the same hydrographic basin, the competent environmental body should apply the criterion of closest proximity between the property and the area chosen for the compensation. The area must be located in the same river basin, as well as in areas identified as priorities by the Union or by the states, taking into account, when it exists, the provisions of the River Basin Plan.
For the commission’s rapporteur, Nilto Tatto (PT-SP), “it makes no sense” to allow the legal reserve of a property to be allocated hundreds or thousands of miles away. “The legal reserve must be evenly distributed throughout the country’s micro-basins,” he said.
Tatto said that the only justification for admitting this possibility is monetary. “It obeys a short-term view, which disregards the damage caused by the lack of native vegetation for the agricultural enterprise and for the entire Brazilian economy.”
In December 2016, the Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, Food Supply and Rural Development rejected the text. Having received dissenting opinions on merit committees, the project has lost its conclusive character and will be analyzed by the Plenary. Before that, the proposal goes to the Constitution and Justice and Citizenship Commission.