Suggestion “little worked”
Parliamentary groups in Congress rejected the 2020 rescued People’s Party bill to re-authorize hunting and sport and commercial fishing in national parks. They accuse the PP of using electoral strategies, labeling the move as outdated and underdeveloped.
These sentiments were shared during a plenary session held this Tuesday in the Congress of Deputies, where the PP defended its targeted measure. The amendment to the National Parks Law No. 30/2014 was presented as a measure promoted by the party when it held power, while other factions highlighted alternative approaches.
A People’s deputy, César Sánchez Pérez, expressed support for the legislative initiative, framing it as a response to what he called the problem of a country increasingly sparsely populated by communities and the perceived mismanagement by the government and public authorities responsible for national parks. He also noted a ban on hunting on farms within these zones.
The draft law, introduced by the PP in December 2020 and debated in Parliament today, seeks to restore the framework created by the 2014 National Parks Regulation. The idea is to allow agreements with hunting ground owners that would permit continued hunting and fishing within these protected spaces.
The 2014 law already anticipated a six-year period ending December 2020 for implementing such arrangements through private voluntary agreements with beneficiaries who could not be reached by other means.
Suggestion “little worked”
As a result, most of the parliamentary spectrum criticized the PP for trying to revive a measure when the moratorium had already ended two years earlier. Several lawmakers argued that the park ban should remain in effect, noting the commitment by socialist Eva Patricia Bueno Campanario and others to uphold the prohibition.
The intervening lawmakers, with the exception of Isidro Manuel Martínez Oblanca of Foro Asturias, criticized the initiative as outdated. They pointed out that the descriptive language had not changed in the two years since the bill was first drafted in December 2020, making the proposal appear ill-prepared or insufficiently studied.
Before blaming the PP, some argued that extending the compliance period would require lifting the ban in place since 2020, which would create a problem in areas that currently do not permit hunting. Ciudadanos representative Juan Ignacio López-Bas also voiced his opposition, while Vox signaled a cautious reaction toward a vote among hunters and fishermen.
“The law currently prohibits hunting in national parks,” López-Bas stated. He stressed that allowing hunting and both sport and commercial fishing would clash with the protection objectives of these highly valued ecological zones. When the moratorium expired on December 5, 2020, the party submitted the bill on December 4, 2020, aiming to align it with the rights of third parties on lands designated as national parks, according to the deputy.
Serve the “hunter lobby”
Announced less than a year before general elections, López-Bas observed that the party now seeks to complete in ten months what had previously been planned for six years. The critique pointed toward political maneuvering aimed at satisfying a specific lobby rather than advancing a balanced policy that protects protected areas.
The hunting community’s representatives received remarks from Ezequiel García Nieto, an assistant within United We Can. He noted that in Spain hunting occurs across a broad portion of the national territory and argued that current measures still fall short of addressing the concerns of those who advocate for regulated access, while others insisted that the broader public interest should guide decisions in protected zones.
Francisco José Contreras Pelayo of Vox also opposed the proposal, reframing it as a form of self-correction, suggesting that the measure remained incomplete. He highlighted agreements that were not reached with the PP or the PSOE governments and argued that there is no intention to lift the ban on hunting and fishing in national parks. Instead, he called for voluntary arrangements with park owners as a means to balance use with conservation goals.
In summary, the debate focused on whether the existing moratorium should continue, how hunting and fishing rights could be regulated within national parks, and whether new arrangements would compromise the ecological integrity of protected areas. The discussions reflected broader tensions between conservation priorities and interests tied to rural livelihoods and hunting traditions, with lawmakers weighing the potential benefits and risks of any new regulatory approach. [Source attribution: Parliament of Deputies records and party statements].