A/HRC/43/53/Add.2 on soil, wildlife, persistence and ability to bioaccumulate. The pesticide tax was applauded for being one of the first in the world to apply higher rates to products of higher toxicity. 35 G. Healthy biodiversity and ecosystems 62. The full enjoyment of human rights depends on healthy ecosystems, and healthy ecosystems depend on biological diversity. The loss of biodiversity undermines human rights, including the rights to life, health, food, water, culture and the right to a healthy and sustainable environment (A/HRC/34/49, paras. 5–25). 63. Norway enjoys a wide range of ecosystems – marine, coastal and mountainous. According to information received from the Government, 20,915 species have been evaluated by the Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre. A total of 4,438 species are currently on the Norwegian Red List for Species, and 2,355 are considered “threatened” (critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable). 64. Protected areas are a key tool to protect biodiversity. According to government data, 17 per cent of the land of Norway is legally protected, meeting the Aichi Biodiversity Target in this area by 2020. However, these protected areas are not representative of all of the national ecosystems, with some ecologically valuable systems, such as wetlands and forests, underrepresented. Currently 4.9 per cent of forests have protected status (in nature reserves and national parks). While progress is being made, the goal of 10 per cent protection remains distant. This is a critical issue, as roughly half of the country’s threatened species depend on forests. 65. Norway has a comprehensive integrated management process for marine ecosystems. However, only 3.1 per cent of the country’s marine area is currently protected. A number of new marine protected areas are in the process of being designated, but even when these areas are added, Norway will fall short of the Aichi Target of protecting 10 per cent of representative marine ecosystems by 2020. 66. The Nature Diversity Act provides the Government with a broad set of tools for protecting biodiversity. However, the Special Rapporteur is concerned that many of this law’s provisions are discretionary, making it hard to hold the Government accountable should it fail to use the tools to effectively safeguard biodiversity. Under the Nature Diversity Act, the Government may designate a threatened species as a priority species, but it is not obligated to do so. Thus far, only 13 out of more than 2,000 threatened species have been designated as priority species. Similarly, the Government must consider protecting important habitats for priority species, but is not obliged to implement such measures. 67. In a recent case, the Parliamentary Ombudsman handled a complaint involving a proposed road that would damage the habitat of the threatened European eagle-owl. The Ombudsman criticized the approval of the road for failing to take the impacts on the owl into account, as required by the Nature Diversity Act, and requested the Ministry of Local Government and Modernization to review its decision. However, when the Ministry reassessed the road proposal, it did not change its original conclusion. 68. Concerns were raised by environmental organizations, human rights organizations and the Sámi people regarding the adverse impacts of fish farming, both in Norway and in other countries where Norwegian aquaculture corporations are operating. These concerns involve pollution, impacts on native fish species and potential human rights violations. The Norwegian aquaculture industry began in the late 1960s and has grown rapidly, to the point where it now accounts for 72 per cent of the total value of Norwegian fisheries. 69. The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries monitors the impact of sea lice from fish farms on wild Atlantic salmon to determine whether aquaculture in a particular coastal region can be expanded, held constant or reduced. However, it is essential to note that populations of wild Atlantic salmon have declined roughly 50 per cent in the past 30 years in Norway, and two of the most important threats are high levels of sea lice and escaped farmed salmon. 35 David Pearce and Phoebe Koundouri, “Fertilizer and pesticide taxes for controlling non-point water pollution”, Agriculture and Rural Development note (Washington, D.C., World Bank, 2003). 13