Project
Photo: Ana Rodríguez Carrington (CC BY 2.0)Victory: Biosphere Reserve in Baja California Saved from Toxic Mine
Known as an “ecological treasure house,” the Sierra La Laguna Biosphere Reserve at the southern tip of Baja California will not be spoiled by toxic mine waste, thanks in part to AIDA’s advocacy.
The reserve was once an island, so it’s home to rare plant and animal species. Canyons, swimming holes, and hot springs can be found in its granite mountain range and lowland tropical forests.
Thanks to AIDA and our partners in Mexico, the Mexican government denied an environmental permit for the Paredones Amarillos gold mine, halting the project for the time being. To protect the biosphere reserve, AIDA helped educate community groups and decision makers about the mine's risks. This helped to build the political momentum necessary for the government to deny the permit.
To extract gold from the mountains, the Canadian company Vista Gold proposed to carve out huge quantities of rock—each ton containing a mere gram of gold–-grind it into sludge, and treated it with cyanide. The company planned to dump massive amounts of toxic waste (called “tailings”) behind a dam intended to store it forever. Unfortunately, tailings dams can break for various reasons, as happened at Bolivia’s Porco mine in 1996. When that dam collapsed, more than a quarter million metric tons of tailings flooded the river and contaminated 500 miles (800 km) of waterways in Bolivia, Argentina and Paraguay.
The mine could also cause acid mine drainage. When sulfur-containing rocks are exposed to air and water, sulfuric acid forms, which causes toxic heavy metals to dissolve and drain into the watershed. The risk of acid mine drainage in Sierra La Laguna was significant and the human and environmental cost would have been tremendous: thousands of people and countless wildlife in the reserve rely on its water for survival.
Depleting freshwater is a further threat because mines use tremendous quantities of water. Owing to the scarcity of water in the reserve, Vista Gold proposed to build a plant on the Pacific coast to remove salt from sea water in a highly energy-intensive process, and then pump the water 45 km to the mine site. The desalination plant posed a threat to the endangered leatherback sea turtle.
Singly and together, the mine’s impacts would have devastated a rare jewel, a unique and lush paradise worth saving for future generations.
Related projects
IACHR Forwards La Oroya Human Rights Petition to Peruvian Government for Comment
For immediate release: April 24, 2007 PRESS CONTACTS: Astrid Puentes, AIDA (+5255) 52120141 [email protected] Martin Wagner, Earthjustice (510) 550-6700 [email protected] Carlos Chirinos (+511) 422-2720 [email protected] U.S. Smelter's Pollution Now Human Rights Issue for Peru IACHR to Examine Peru’s Responsibility for Contamination from Doe Run Corp. Facility WASHINGTON DC, LIMA – The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (a division of the Organization of American States) forwarded a petition alleging human rights violations to the Government of Peru, giving them two months to respond. The petition asserts that severe contamination from a smelter owned by U.S.-based Doe Run Corporation, and lack of effective pollution and human health controls by the government, gravely threaten the rights of the residents of La Oroya, Peru, including their rights to life, health, and integrity. “This first step by the IACHR is good news,” assured Carlos Chirinos, an attorney with the Peruvian Society for Environmental Defense (SPDA), an organization that has been associated with the case since its inception, and one of the lawyers representing the community. “It shows the strength of our petition, and is a positive step in the process to identify the government’s responsibilities.” The IACHR determined that the petition, prepared by Earthjustice, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Center for Human Rights and Environment (CEDHA), and Peruvian lawyer, Carlos Chirinos, met the Commission’s procedural requirements and forwarded it to the Peruvian government last week. According to the Commission’s rules, after this two-month period the IACHR will take into account Peru’s comments in evaluating the admissibility of the case, determining whether the contamination violates human rights, and the resulting responsibilities of the Peruvian government. The Commission is simultaneously evaluating a request by these groups for precautionary measures to address the urgent health threats to the citizens in La Oroya. “We are now waiting for the government’s comments on the petition, as well as a decision by the Commission on the request for precautionary measures. These measures could help considerably to provide effective protection for the people’s human rights in La Oroya,” added Astrid Puentes of AIDA. The precautionary measures requested include: adequate diagnosis and medical treatment for the persons represented, education programs and efficient access to information, effective emissions and contamination controls, an evaluation of contamination in key areas of the city, and implementation of adequate clean-up measures. According to Martin Wagner of Earthjustice, the goal of the precautionary measures is “to improve human rights conditions for the people we represent in La Oroya, and ensure that those responsible take definitive action to control the contamination.”
Read moreAIDA and Participating Organizations Submit La Oroya Petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 21, 2007 Press Contacts: Astrid Puentes, AIDA (+5255) 52120141 [email protected] Luis Eduardo Cisneros (+511) 422-2720 [email protected] Martin Wagner (510) 550-6700 [email protected] Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to Examine Responsibility for Violations at La Oroya, Peru Children breathe sulfur dioxide pollution at 300 times level permitted by WHO Lima, Peru, Washington, D.C. — Public health and environmental organizations from throughout the Western Hemisphere today announced the filing of a petition with the human rights division of the Organization of American States in Washington, D.C. The petition accuses the Peruvian government of doing little to halt contamination from a metallurgical complex that is impacting the lives and health of the citizens of La Oroya, Peru. The petition’s filing was announced at a press conference in Lima, Peru this morning by Carlos Chirinos of the Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental (SPDA), Astrid Puentes of the Interamerican Association Environmental Defense (AIDA), Earthjustice, and the Centro de Derechos Humanos y Ambiente (CEDHA). The petition claims the Peruvian government failed to place pollution controls on the metallurgical complex that operates in La Oroya, a situation that tramples on the human rights of the town’s citizens. Located in the city of La Oroya, some 175 kms from Lima, the complex has been operating for 80 years. Doe Run Peru, a subsidiary of Doe Run Company of St. Louis, Missouri, USA owns the complex. Recent monitoring of air quality – performed by Doe Run itself – has shown that daily average sulfur dioxide levels are between 80 and 300 times the maximum level permitted by the World Health Organization. The Blacksmith Institute even declared the city of La Oroya one of the Top Ten Most Polluted cities in the world. The petition asks the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to recommend that the Peruvian government implement urgent measures to halt the grave violations against the health and lives of the citizens of La Oroya. Learn more about the conditions in La Oroya by watching a short film: http://www.youtube.com/v/gY6WXa9aKrM More Background http://www.aida-americas.org/en/project/doerun_en Read a copy of the petition here (in Spanish).
Read morePlan Colombia Aerial Herbicide Spraying Not Proved Safe for the Environment – Released to US Congress
For Immediate Release February 14, 2007 CONTACTS: Anna Cederstav, AIDA (510) 550-6700 [email protected] Astrid Puentes, AIDA (5255) 52120141 [email protected] PLAN COLOMBIA AERIAL HERBICIDE SPRAYING NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT Critique of recent studies by international environmental NGO released to Congress today OAKLAND, CA, MÉXICO, D.F. - In December, the Colombian government violated a bilateral accord with Ecuador by spraying a mixture of herbicides intended to destroy coca crops within 10 kilometers of the Ecuadorian border. To justify the spraying, Colombia relied on studies by a team from the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD) of the Organization of American States (OAS), claiming that the spray mixture is safe. However, an independent review of CICAD’s recent studies, released to members of the U.S. Congress today, shows that the pesticide mixture being sprayed has not, in fact, been proven safe for the environment, and that Ecuador has substantial cause to oppose the spraying. According to the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the first CICAD Environmental and Human Health Assessment of the Aerial Spray Program for Coca and Poppy Control in Colombia, released in 2005, did not assess many of the greatest potential ecological and human health risks posed by the aerial eradication program in Colombia. Because of these omissions and the potential environmental risk of the spraying, the U.S. Congress requested further studies to better assess whether the mixture is truly safe for the environment. Preliminary results from the follow-up studies, released in August 2006, show that the mixture is indeed potentially harmful to the environment, and particularly to amphibians – the spray mixture killed 50 percent of the amphibians exposed in less than 96 hours. According to Earthjustice scientist and AIDA’s Program Director Anna Cederstav, “Contrary to what is argued by the government, this study shows sufficient cause for concern to suspend the sprayings due to potential environmental impacts, especially considering that Colombia has the second highest amphibian biodiversity in the world and the most threatened amphibian species.” Many other key questions about the environmental impacts of the spraying also remain unanswered, despite the U.S. Congressional mandate to conduct the studies. For example, the State Department has not provided adequate information about the location of and risk to sensitive water bodies and has done nothing to address whether other threatened species are likely to be harmed. Without these determinations, the claim by the Colombian government that it is safe to spray along the Ecuadorian border is misinformed. “Given the number of unanswered questions about the safety of the spraying, and considering the precautionary principle and the international obligation not to cause impacts to the territories of other States, the Colombian government should halt spraying immediately, and instead implement more effective and environmentally safe alternatives for coca eradication,” said Astrid Puentes, AIDA’s Legal Director.
Read more