Project
Alberto Peña Kay
Protecting the Santurban páramo from mining's damage
In the Andean region, high-mountain ecosystems known as páramos capture water from the fog and supply it to the lowlands. One such ecosystem is the Santurbán páramo, which provides fresh water to more than two million people in Colombia.
Santurbán, like the other páramos on the continent, also captures large amounts of carbon, making it a key ally in mitigating the climate crisis. It is also a refuge for hundreds of endangered species, including the iconic spectacled bear.
The land in and around the páramo contains gold and other minerals. This has put Santurbán in the spotlight of the multinational mining industry, which for decades has sought to establish large-scale projects in the ecosystem that threaten to degrade it.
The Committee for the Defense of Water and the Santurbán Páramo—a coalition of environmental advocates—has thwarted these ongoing attempts, with support from AIDA and other civil society organizations.
Background
The Santurbán páramo is located in the heart of the Eastern Cordillera of the Colombian Andes, in the departments of Santander and Norte de Santander, at an elevation ranging from 2,200 to 4,290 meters above sea level.
It covers an area of 129,743 hectares and is home to 57 lakes. It serves as a habitat for 457 plant species and 293 species of vertebrate fauna.
There are mineral deposits in Santurbán, primarily gold, but also silver and copper. This explains the region’s mining tradition, particularly in the part of the páramo located in Santander, in the province of Soto Norte. The communities in the area have built their culture and identity around gold mining, which is mainly artisanal and small-scale.
But since the 1990s, the gold deposits in the páramo have also attracted foreign mining conglomerates seeking to develop large-scale projects. This has raised concerns among the population that relies on the Santurbán water sources, who have mobilized in defense of water, their land, and life.
Although national and international regulations prohibit mining in páramos, the Colombian government has granted mining concessions to transnational corporations in Santurbán.
Photo: Keishpixl / Pixabay.
The long struggle to protect the páramo
One of the companies that sought to develop large-scale mining in Santurbán is Eco Oro Minerals Corp.—formerly Greystar Resources—a Canadian company that intended to establish the Angostura open-pit mine there to extract gold and silver. Between 1994 and 1995, the company acquired its mining titles and conducted exploration. And in 2010, it applied for a mining permit.
That was the year AIDA became involved in defending the ecosystem, supporting the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Santurbán Páramo. Our legal work helped convince the Colombian government to deny the mine an environmental permit in May 2011.
In January 2013, the government designated a portion of the páramo (11,700 hectares) as a Regional Natural Park. That year—together with the committee and partner organizations—we carried out a campaign and advocacy efforts to urge the government to recognize the entire Santurbán area as a páramo ecosystem through a delimitation based on scientific criteria. In December 2014, the Ministry of the Environment established a delimitation that protected 76% of the páramo (98,954 hectares).
Furthermore, as a result of a litigation supported by AIDA, in February 2016, Colombia’s highest court reaffirmed that mining in páramos is prohibited.
That same year, in December, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the World Bank Group’s private sector arm, decided to divest from Eco Oro Minerals. This achievement was the result of a process that began in 2012, when the committee—advised and supported by AIDA and international partner organizations—filed a complaint before an independent accountability mechanism, which concluded that the IFC’s investment in the Angostura project failed to take into account the project’s social and environmental impacts, thereby contradicting the financial institution’s internal policies.
Also in 2016, Eco Oro Minerals filed an arbitration claim against the Colombian government with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), arguing that it had been adversely affected by government decisions aimed at protecting the country’s páramos, including the delimitation of Santurbán.
In 2017, the Constitutional Court invalidated the delimitation because the affected communities were not consulted. The high court ordered that a participatory delimitation be carried out.
And that year, a new threat to Santurbán emerged when the Canadian multinational Aris Mining applied for an environmental permit for Soto Norte, a gold mining project located near the páramo. Following citizen protests and technical objections, in October 2020, the National Environmental Licensing Authority shelved the project.
Photo: Aztlec.
Current situation
In March 2025, the Colombian government designated the western flank of the Santurbán massif as a temporary renewable natural resource reserve area, delimiting and protecting an area of 75,344.65 hectares. This resulted in a two-year suspension of the Soto Norte project. However, Aris Mining's contract to formalize Calimineros' small-scale mining activities through the purchase and processing of mineralized material remains in effect.
In addition, the Canadian mining company continues to move the project forward. In September 2025, it released its prefeasibility study, revising the mine’s original design.
Meanwhile, members of the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Santurbán Páramo face threats and stigmatization because of their work. In March 2025, UN Special Rapporteurs and the Working Group on Business and Human Rights denounced these incidents in communications sent to the governments of Colombia, Canada, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as to the companies Aris Mining and MDC Industry Holding Company LLC, the former co-owner of the Soto Norte project.
Regarding the arbitration claim filed by Eco Oro Minerals, in July 2024, ICSID ruled in favor of the Colombian government and rejected the Canadian company’s claim for USD 1.1 billion in compensation.
Concerning the delimitation of Santurbán, in July 2026, the Ministry of the Environment issued a resolution introducing the concept of "progressive delimitation." On that basis, the government proposes to progressively demarcate the páramo, covering 29,199 hectares across 19 municipalities—those where the participatory agreements required by the Constitutional Court in its 2017 ruling have already been finalized. It also proposes two measures on the creation and expansion of reserves to restrict mining in the ecosystem.
Learn more about the impacts of mining on the páramos of Latin America (in Spanish).
Partners:
Related projects
Opening our eyes to the dangers of salmon farming in Chile
Recently, I went to dinner with some friends. Two of them ordered salmon. The dish was expensive because, although Chile is the world’s second largest producer, salmon is a non-native species and one of the most popular fish in the country. I respectfully asked my friends if they were aware of the toll commercial salmon production takes on our oceans. Their response was glib: “That’s an exaggeration,” they said. “I don’t think it’s that bad.” Unfortunately, I expected that response. The environmental dangers of salmon farming in Chile are largely hidden, but that doesn’t make them any less serious. An unsustainable industry On July 5, nearly 700,000 salmon escaped from their pens at a farm off of Huar Island in Patagonia’s Los Lagos region. The escape has revived public debate on the dangers of Chile’s salmon industry. Caused by damage the pens sustained during a storm, the escape could represent one of the largest environmental catastrophes since salmon farming began in Chile in the 1980’s. But what’s the bigger problem? As it turns out, it’s not just one problem — it’s many. The problems of salmon farming first became visible in 2007 when scientists recorded the first case of infectious salmon anemia, a lethal illness for the fish. Although the industry adopted new infrastructure and sanitary standards, the root of the problem remained unaddressed—the overpopulation of marine habitats, packed with more fish than they could support, was causing oxygen depletion and, eventually, oceanic dead zones. Those poor farming practices also led to the excessive use of antibiotics to treat illnesses and infections. Eventually, other problems arose—algae blooms, and the so-called red tides that have devastated the area’s marine life. The recent massive salmon escape has posed serious public health risks because the fish had been treated with excessive amounts of antibiotics, making them inapt for consumption by humans or other animals. But, despite warnings from the authorities in the days following the escape, fishermen in the area began capturing salmon and selling them at extremely low prices. As an invasive predator, the salmon also posted a threat to the ecosystem, since they are aggressive fish prone to devastating anything in their path, including native species. Greenpeace said the escape was equivalent to a plague of 140 million rats eating anything in their path. Although the company was required to re-capture at least 10 percent of the salmon, they failed to reach that goal, despite offering up to $11 per fish. The work was further complicated since salmon are prey to sea lions and other predators. All this has revealed a clear structural problem—the lack of government control and regulation of an unsustainable industry. The most recent escape, from a farm owned by Marine Harvest Company, is yet another example of how the entire industry is failing to comply with environmental standards. According to Chile’s National Fish Service, some 3.3 million salmon have escaped from different fisheries in the Los Lagos, Aysén and Magallanes regions in the last eight years. Urgent Measures If this malpractice continues, salmon farming could destroy Chile’s marine biodiversity. Other countries have taken drastic actions in response to cases similar to the one on Huar Island. In the United States, for example, Washington State decided to gradually eliminate salmon farms after 300 salmon escape from a hatchery there. At AIDA, we are working to protect Chilean Patagonia, the country’s most pristine region, into which the salmon industry continues to expand. In May 2017, we filed a complaint with the Chile’s Superintendent of the Environment asking they investigate the damages salmon farms are causing to the Magallanes region, and sanction the companies responsible. We also commissioned a scientific report demonstrating how susceptible the region is to the risks of salmon farming. Hopefully my compatriots will realize that we share a common interest in protecting our most pristine waters from the damages of salmon farming. Because at the end of the day, that bite of salmon may be more expensive than they think.
Read more
Guatemalan indigenous communities file complaint for dams’ damages
Affected communities have called on the Inter-American Development Bank to withdraw funding for the Pojom II and San Andrés dams for failure to comply with its operational policies. The mega-projects have damaged water sources and harmed the livelihoods of local indigenous people, particularly women. Washington, D.C. Indigenous communities affected by Guatemala’s Pojom II and San Andrés dams have called on the Inter-American Development Bank to withdraw its investment in the mega-projects. A complaint filed before the Bank’s independent accountability mechanism explains how the serious social and environmental damages caused by the planning and construction of the dams resulted from the projects’ failure to comply with the Bank’s operational policies. The communities are represented by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the International Platform Against Impunity, and the Plurinational Ancestral Government of Q’anjob’al, Popti, Chuj and Akateko. “The damages caused by the projects’ implementation are the result of non-compliance with the Bank’s operational policies, particularly its policies on environment and sustainability, indigenous people, gender, and information disclosure,” explained Liliana Ávila, AIDA attorney. The complaint details how the dams were authorized without adequate community consultation, and how those affected did not receive sufficient information on the risks. In addition, community members who have peacefully resisted the projects have suffered attacks, threats, and harassment; in 2017, they reported the murder of one local resident, which has yet to be resolved. The construction of the dams has also caused severe environmental damage, including water scarcity and pollution, which have affected local people’s ability to fish, grow food, and maintain their tradition lifestyle. The affected people of the microregion of Ixquisis, in the department of Huehuetenango, are primarily indigenous Mayans including the Chu, Q’anjob’al and Akateko ethnic groups. “The damages from the dams are differentially suffered by women, since they are the primary managers of water use in their homes,” said Anabella Sibrián from the International Platform Against Impunity. “The women of Ixquisis face stigmatization and live in fear of retaliation for their peaceful opposition to the projects.” The Pojom II hydroelectric plant is operated by Generadora San Mateo S.A, while San Andrés is run by Generadora San Andrés S.A. Both are subsidiaries of Promoción y Desarrollos Hídricos S.A., a Guatemalan company. In 2013, IDB Invest, a private arm of the Inter-American Development Bank, approved loans of up to $9 million USD for the construction of Pojom II and up to $6 million USD for the San Andrés project. “We our hope that the Bank’s accountability mechanism confirms the projects have violated internal policies and thus recommends that IDB Invest withdraw its investment from these harmful mega-dams,” Ávila said. The Ixquisis communities were recently awarded the 2018 Front Line Defenders award for Human Rights Defenders at Risk for their valiant, peaceful struggle to defend their water and their territory. Find more information on the case here. Press Contact Victor Quintanilla (México), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107
Read more
Why we work to protect human rights in Latin America
The attorneys who make up AIDA’s Human Rights and the Environment Program work to protect people and communities whose rights have been violated or are at risk from the degradation of their natural environment. They know that there is an undeniable connection between the full enjoyment of human rights and a healthy environment. Here’s why they do what they do: “I DO IT BECAUSE IT’S IN MY BLOOD.” Astrid Puentes, AIDA Co-Director “I work in defense of the environment and human rights because they are essential aspects of life, and they are linked. I do it because it’s in my blood: my father was a farmer, my grandparents and great-grandparents too. Part of my connection with nature comes from my family; it’s my inheritance. I’ve always wanted to contribute to making the world better, particularly in my home country of Colombia, which has so many natural resources but also so much social injustice. I dedicated my career as an attorney to helping make my country a better place. When I became a mother, that motivation only grew, and now I feel a great responsibility to do everything I can so that my children will have a better planet.” Early in her career, Astrid helped stop a proposal by the Colombian and United States governments to spray a transgenic fungus on the Amazon, which would have seriously damaged a vital ecosystem that many people depend on. It was the first successful case in which Astrid was directly involved. “I DEFEND HUMAN RIGHTS BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT DIGNITY AND EQUALITY ARE INALIENABLE RIGHTS.” Liliana Ávila, Senior Attorney “I defend human rights because I believe that dignity and equality are inalienable rights. I believe in the value of differences and in the struggles of those who have not known their rights. These convictions have made me feel indignation, shame, and rage for the way rights human rights have been infringed upon in my country — Colombia — as well as in Latin America and the world at large. I defend human rights because, for me, they are the realization of the human aspiration to build a more just world.” Last May, Liliana was moved by the story of an indigenous woman in Guatemala whose community depended on a nearby river, which was suffering water shortages due to the construction of a dam. With the water from that river, the woman watered flowers in her garden, which brought her happiness when life made her sad. That story filled Liliana with hope because she knew that, though her work, she could help keep those flowers blooming. “MY GREATEST MOTIVATION COMES FROM MY AWARENESS OF INEQUALITY AND INJUSTICE.” Daniel Iglesias, Fellow “My greatest motivation comes from my awareness of the inequality and injustice that characterize the modern world, in large part due to the effects of global capitalism. It is our responsibility to fight to eliminate those inequalities. Defending human rights through solidarity and by denouncing injustice is a fundamental way to achieve that goal.” As a human rights attorney, Daniel come face-to-face with injustices such as indigenous communities being stripped of their land, people deprived of their freedom of expression, and those who have been affected by the damages caused by extractive industries. Those experiences inform Daniel’s work with AIDA in Mexico, and feed his desire to continue working for social and environmental justice in the region. “I GREW UP knowing I HAD RIGHTS.” Marcella Ribeiro, Legal Advisor “I grew up knowing I had rights. I knew I would never lack food or water and that the beach in front of my house in Brazil would never be polluted because I had the right to a healthy environment. But when I learned that people living in favelas and those affected by droughts didn’t know they had rights, and didn’t organize to claim them, I decided to devote myself to fighting so their voices are heard and their humanity is recognized.” Marcela worked in Brazil’s favelas educating residents about their human rights. Since then, she has understood that social justice will always be possible as long as people are allowed to enjoy their social, cultural, economic and environmental rights.
Read more