ON BACALAR'S DEFENSE. COLLOQUIAL VERSION

consideration of the legal administrative entity of the body of water, with the possible hope that it would be reviewed, included and validated during the annual review process of the operating rules.

From the outset it seemed that the criteria and restrictions applied equally for the entire polygon, but when placing the cursor over the area it was a sub zoning that appeared as 9.9 Microbialitos Bacalar. However, when the PROTUR document of the same date is reviewed, in the sub zoning table it only reached 9.7 established as Cenote Cocalitos, the version of June 2020, and that of August 18 and one of November that reaches up to subzone 9.8 (Geoalternativa, et al, 2020). The subzone where the Ejido Spa was Cocaleros was 9.9 in the interactive plan, it only bordered with land in the polygon of the Ejidal swimming facility. The established uses were: Stromatolite corralitos (little fenced stromatolites), snorkeling and swimming.

Why didn't it appear in the document? Fortunately, I took a screenshot of everything, in case they later argued that it never existed, and more importantly, what was the criteria to determine that only the ejido spa "Mágico Bacalar" owned by the Ejido Bacalar, was left with a lagoon front restricted only for Corralitos for stromatolites, snorkeling and swimming?

Coincidentally the most successful spa in the area, the oldest, which has been operating since the late 1940s, and which involves the families of the 155 ejidatarios and their families, approximately 3000 people, an area of almost 5 hectares, central, with services, basically privileged, and a spa that has one of the largest fleets of boats for tours, restaurant and activities, and that with the PROTUR it was placed in a restricted area that of course was going to place it at a competitive disadvantage against those who were as functional tourist units and did not have any PROTUR restrictions.

What was the criteria for placing the 9.9 Microbialitos Bacalar zone, which did not propose navigation, in the area just outside the docks of the spa and all the coastal businesses in the city, before the navigation area? There are islets and stromatolites on the shore, but it only affected the aquatic area adjacent to the ejido balneary.

We made clear our assumption that it was not related to the ejido's outspoken opposition to the instrument. If the instrument was built with representation of the ejido Bacalar, as advertised by the consultant and the state, why did they approve this restrictive use for their own area adjacent to 134