MRAG, Author at Rainforest Action Group

BHP Electric Car Greenwash

December 17, 2018

Melbourne Rainforest Action Group (MRAG) today released a report detailing the activities of BHP Billiton in South America. The report highlights the company’s poor environmental and social record in a number of locations.

Of particular concern is that BHP is now promoting itself as being environmentally responsible by promoting the use of its mining materials, particularly copper in electric cars.

“MRAG has particular concerns about BHP’s intended entry into Ecuador, a country with minimal experiences in dealing with mining companies. BHP has recently purchased a stake in exploration company Solgold who hope to develop the Cascabel mine in the north of Ecuador. The copper at Cascabel is being promoted under the guise that it will be required for electric cars, yet the bulk of world’s copper demand is predicted to go into energy infrastructure, not electric cars” said spokesperson Anthony Amis.

BHP has also been alarming people because of their exploration activities in the Intag Valley Ecuador, a region where the company has mining concessions.

MRAG has documented a litany of environmental problems caused by BHP operations across South America, including the infamous 2015 Samarco mine disaster in Brazil which killed 19 people.

Perhaps of even greater concern is BHP’s history in Colombia, particularly at its coal mine at Cerrejon and its divested Cerro Matoso nickel mine. Both operations have had devastating effects on people living the near mine sites. Horrific violence has been inflicted against community members in both regions, with 30 leaders have killed near Cerro Matoso. How has BHP managed to operate in these locations with little difficulty when armed groups operate in these regions?

The Colombian problem also now appears to be spilling over into Ecuador. A director of the Australian mining company operating on the border, Rio Dorado was quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald on December 7, “well, if we have anybody enter the site what we should be doing is shooting and asking questions after the event,”

“The Colombian/Ecuadorian border is classified by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs as a Do Not Travel Zone due to the very high level of risk, yet the Cascabel mine site is only 10km away from this zone, and anything transported from the mine will have to travel 30-40km through the no go zone. Why would you want to build a mine in or near this region, unless you were sure that you could pay for protection your asset” Mr Amis concluded.

Download Press Release

Direct actions at IMARC

Environmental groups and human-rights defenders argued against the increase in global development, particularly against mining in protested forests and on Indigenous land. The Melbourne Rainforest Action Group (MRAG) was joined by the Latin American Solidarity Network, Mapuche-Aboriginal Struggles for Indigenous Land and FrontLine Against Coal for three actions that took place over the week. Protestors say they were concerned at the ongoing impact of mining especially in the wake of the IPCC report on climate change, with speakers damning the inaction of government and corporations to take the report seriously.

“We are particularly concerned at the global escalation of mining in the headwaters of the Amazon and key forests in Ecuador, where Australian mining companies are taking the lead in the push for mining exploration for copper, gold and rare earth minerals,” a member of the Melbourne Rainforest Action Group says.

“It’s like the Wild West, with BHP, Hancock and SolGold all vying for position. Our contacts in Ecuador have been increasingly worried at the presence of mining exploration teams in protected reserves, where their presence has been impacting on extremely rare and endangered species.”

Allan Mogerema, a youth leader from the Paga Hill community in PNG, and star in the recently released film “The Opposition”, said the wholesale land grabs by Australian multinationals in his country had impacted massively on his community, many members of which are now forced to live in camps and on the streets of Port Moresby.

“For decades Papua New Guinea has been on the frontline of extractivism, in particular mining. The impacts of this have include desecration of sacred sites, poisoning of waterways, rape of women by mine security and the wholesale land grabbing of Indigenous lands,” Allan says.

Mining disaster possible in Ecuador?

samarco dam collapse brazil. Image Credit: Getty Images — *Samarco dam collapse, Brazil. Image Credit: Getty Images*

News reports on the 5th of September that mining company BHP has purchased a 6.1% stake in exploration company Solgold for $35m have raised concerns that another mining disaster in northern Ecuador could be possible if Solgold’s Cascabel gold/copper mine is eventually constructed. Environmentalists fear that a repeat of the BHP’s /Samarco tailings dam collapse in November 2015 (Brazils worst environmental disaster) could be repeated in Ecuador. BHP appears to be in a tussle with Australian miner Newcrest over eventual control of Cascabel.

“Ecuador is a known earthquake hotspot, with Cascabel just west of a cluster of known quakes on the western side of the Andes. In the rush to get a mine and tailings dam built, shortcuts could be taken?” said MRAG spokesperson Anthony Amis. “If a tailings dam is not constructed, tailings could be dumped directly into rivers or even piped into the ocean, a practice which is used in another geologically unstable region, Papua New Guinea where both Newcrest and BHP are involved.”

Even in supposedly developed countries such as Australia, tailings dam walls can fail. Newcrest’s Cadia Mine in New South Wales was shut down 3 months in 2017 due to an earthquake and the tailings dam wall at Cadia failed in March 2018. Earthquakes recorded near Cascabel exploration area average higher magnitudes that than those recorded at Cadia. Potential pollution from any problems at Cascabel will mainly impact on the Rio Mira river which stretches through Ecuador and into Colombia. Colombians have already feeling the full brunt of BHP’s activities with communites near Cerro Matoso ferronickel mine suffering health problems for many years. Another potential issue is that Solgold will have to consult with impacted communities, which is required by the Ecuadorian constitution. In June 2018, an Ecuadorean Court shut down mining by a Chinese company Junefield/Ecuagoldmining South America for failure to consult with communities.

Solgold have a history of discovering resources which later were sold off to leave others to deal with environmental consequences. Coal seam gas in Surat Basin Queensland and the opening up of coal mining in the Queensland’s Galilee Basin are two examples.

MRAG also have concerns regarding Newcrest’s involvement in the Fruta del Norte gold mine in the south east of Ecuador, located near the border with Peru.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT ANTHONY AMIS on 0425 841 564

Download Press Release

Mega-mining in Ecuador: the dream of a naive milkmaid

The fable tells the story of a milkmaid on her way to market carrying a pitcher full of milk on her head. On the way, she was thinking about what she would do with all the money she would receive from selling the milk: she would buy chickens that, when raised, would multiply and could be sold and, then, buy a pig, which after caring for it with great dedication, she could sell to buy a cow, and, in this way, continue to expand her business. But so distracted was the naive milkmaid thinking about her future that she stumbled on the road and her pitcher broke, along with all her ambitious hopes for progress.

Although this legend is only fiction, the milkmaid’s story seems a true economic- political projection of what awaits Ecuador if it continues to swallow the discourse that mega-mining will generate huge revenues, rescuing the country from "underdevelopment". In fact, mega-mining is for Ecuador the equivalent of a broken pitcher that offers hope that will never come, just like what happened with the naive milkmaid.

We say this because the discourse that mega-mining will generate large revenues for the country is more an illusion than a reality: beyond any propaganda, even official projections offer very poor revenue projections. Worse yet, such an illusion is perversely unrealistic in view of all the social and environmental costs that must be extracted through a surrender to transnational mining capital - capital that disguises its true intentions under the banners of "progress" and "development".

The lies behind progress

Alberto Acosto. Political economist, ex-minister of Energy and Mining, former president of the Constituent Assembly, and former candidate of the Presidency of Ecuador.

The political discourse of "development" has always been useful to cover up the most petty interests. Historically, blinded by the hopes of "development", impoverished societies have undertaken lugubrious projects, without measuring the material or human environmental losses that these entail. Perhaps the very desperation that "underdevelopment" generates leads thousands to accept as valid, projects that, in the end, only benefit a few in exchange for the spilt blood of innocents.

One of these dismal projects is mega-mining exploitation, which is falsely sold as a ladder to reach "development" [3], but is only an instrument that enriches transnational capital: capitals that leaves a wake of environmental destruction and serious social conflicts. Examples of this situation are numerous. Perhaps one of the continents that has lived it the most is Africa [4]: just think about the Marikana massacre in South Africa - provoked in 2012 - that involved the mining company Lonmin Platinum [5]; or the participation of the mining company Lundin Gold in the bloody civil war of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the late 1990s, as well as its collaboration in South African Apartheid and its complicity in crimes against humanity in Sudan. [6]

But mining devastation is not limited to Africa. Latin America has also suffered in the name of "development". Just one example: according to the Observatory of Mining Conflicts in Latin America, at the time of writing of this article, in the region there are some 246 mining conflicts, associated with 141 cases of criminalization of social protest. Among the countries with the greatest levels of conflict are Mexico, Chile and Peru (each with 40 or more), followed by Brazil and Argentina (with more than 25 cases each), then Colombia, Honduras and Bolivia (between 9 and 15). cases), later Ecuador, Nicaragua and Panama are located (with about 7 cases each) and the list goes on [7].

Added to these conflicts distributed throughout Latin America are numerous environmental disasters, such as the tragedy caused by the rupture of the dam of the mining company Samarco, in Minas Gerais, Brazil, which caused the death of 19 people, the loss of hundreds of nearby houses, along with the spill of 32 million cubic meters of mining waste [8] (a situation for which BHP Billiton, the largest mining company in the world, was responsible). As in the example of Minas Gerais, or the case of the "mining arch" promoted to the south of the Orinoco, in Venezuela [9]), there are many other cases of environmental destruction caused by mining in Latin America [10], most of which are accompanied by a wild corruption, characteristic of extractivism [11] that, when combined with a dependent capitalism, has contributed to regions like Latin America and Africa "being poor because they are rich... in natural resources".

The legacy that mining - and extractivism in general - leaves in impoverished societies shows that the mega-mining incursion into Ecuador does not have an encouraging future. Not even in economic terms.

Perhaps in other social and environmental dimensions mining is an alternative for Ecuador given the arguments - especially economic and political - which are injected into the debate. But in reality, and as this paper shows, the mining aspirations of the country are nothing but the ravings of an economic elite - that will never give benefits to the great majority - instrumented by large transnational companies that will end up with their hands muddied with blood and crime.

The mining expansion between neoliberalism, Correísmo and Morenismo

The beginning of mega-mining in the Ecuador can be dated to between the 1990s and the beginning of the 2000s, driven by a strong neoliberal impulse both in legal terms and external financing, and an incursion of foreign capital (particularly capital focused on exploration activities).

As a result of neoliberal support for mining, in 2007 the concessionary areas for this activity came to cover 20% of the national territory (approximately 5,626,751 hectares) [12].

With the arrival of Rafael Correa to the presidency in January 2007, along with the Constituent Assembly that began sessions in November of the same year, it seemed that the mega-mining advance in the country would come to an end, but it was not to be. An ephemeral possibility of stopping this mining advance was experienced with the issuance of Constituent Mandate no. 6 in April 2008 (known as the Mining Mandate). This mandate extinguished mining concessions that, for example, did not comply with obligations established in the law or affected water sources or protected areas. But within days of issuing said mandate, as noted by Sacher (2017), Correa and several ministers met with representatives of Canadian transnational mining companies - and the Ambassador of Canada - to assure them that the Government would promote large-scale mining activity in the country. (Sacher, 2017, p.165).

As a result, the Correa government made the respective legal modifications (including the creation of a new Mining Law in 2009) to allow transnational mining activity to continue in the country [13]. Paradoxically, this legal, political - and even police-military [14] - support that the Government granted to mining was combined with an attempt to reposition the State in the sector through the reversion of mining concessions, which caused the concessionary areas to be reduced to 4.5% of the national territory in 2011 (approximately 1'210,000 hectares) [15].

Although the position of the Correa government was paradoxical, when it became Correísmo [16], its turn in favor of large transnational mining interests was completed. So much though, that mining became one of the axes of Ecuador’s so-called "productive transformation." In fact, when comparing targeted "priority" sectors for economic transformation, it is noted that mining was not in the initial plans of the government, and was only included in the 2013 National Plan for Buen Vivir, or Good Living [17]. That is to say, in the first seven years of Correa's government, mining was not presented as a priority sector; but after securing power --remember that in February 2013 Correa was re-elected - the mining sector became an explicit priority (a similar reading could be made, for example, to the announcement of the Yasuní exploitation made by Correa a few months after being reelected. in 2013 [18]).

At the end of the Correísmo the mining expansion accelerated. In April 2016, the Correa government reopened the mining cadastre, that is, it reopened "the possibility for mining companies to claim new areas of the national territory for mining concessions" (Sacher, 2017, p.174). Thanks to this reopening, according to official information [19], 160 new mining concessions were delivered in 2016. But if the mining path of Correísmo was marked, the Government of Lenín Moreno has been even clearer in its efforts to deliver the country to mega-mining interests. Only between December 2016 and all of 2017, 275 additional new mining concessions were delivered [20].

Such has been the maelstrom of the 21st century mining feast that, despite the fact that on December 11, 2017 the Moreno government agreed with the indigenous movement to suspend the delivery of more concessions [21], between December 12 and 29, 69,856 new hectares were concessioned in the same year [22]. And in the midst of that Morenista mining expansion the participation of big transnational capital remains intact [23].

Between the Correa and Moreno expansions, we see that if we add all the mining concessions already delivered between 2016-2017 (around 435) with those concessions that at the time of writing this article would be in process (more than 430), the total area destined for mining would reach 15% of the national territory (approximately 3,901,956 hectares according to estimates by William Sacher in January, 2018). Faced with such expansion (laden with enormous illegalities), social movements (especially the indigenous movement) generated significant social pressure that led to the resignation of the Mining Minister (who was already a minister during Correísmo) [24], in addition to pushing the Comptroller to audit several mining projects [25]. In summary, beyond the speeches and the "dialogues", the mega-mineral expansion continues either with Correísmo or Morenismo (and in a very dark way [26]).

Small profits, selling out, and unacceptable costs

According to information presented by William Sacher in November 2017, there are 27 main mining projects active in Ecuador (the majority initiated during the neoliberal period). Of these projects, five show a considerable advance that led them to be qualified by the Correa government as "strategic projects" (implying that the government would give them greater emphasis and support in comparison to other projects). The official information of these "strategic projects" which we have collected from different press releases, is shown in Table 1. In the table it is observed that from the projects, Fruta del Norte, Mirador, Loma Larga (Quimsacocha) and Río Blanco, the State would expect to obtain by taxes, royalties, etc,. about $2,856 billion, while the estimated investment would reach $2.793 billion. In the case of Panantza-San Carlos, according to statements made by the then Minister of Mining in 2016, it would take four years to determine if the ore is economically viable.

It should be noted that there are multiple versions of how much revenue mining could generate the country, which really obscures the scenario. For example, according to estimates presented by the Ministry of Mining in October 2017 [27], for the period 2017-2021, mining is expected to generate $ 4.599 billion of foreign investment - of which one billion would supposedly be invested in 2018 [28], fiscal revenues that would reach 1.326 billion dollars, around 25 thousand jobs (4,100 direct and 19,600 indirect) and a share of GDP that would reach 4% by 2025 [29]. On the other hand, estimates made in 2012 indicated that when the five "strategic projects" are in the exploitation phase (including Panantza-San Carlos), they would generate $784 million of average annual state revenues from royalties [30].

All these figures are crumbs compared to an official estimate of May 2011 according to which the country's mining reserves would represent 270 billion dollars [31] (a figure that, by the way, seems more like a "milkmaid's racket" aimed to cheer up international financial markets that speculate on the potential profits of transnational mining capital).

Source: Ministerio de Minería. Proyectos Mineros Estratégicos, Noviembre 2016. Catálogo Minero.

These figures leave much to be thought about regarding the true profitability of mining for the Ecuadorian State.

Just to give an example, if you assume as real the estimate made in 2012 that, on average, each year the five major mining projects could generate $784 million in state revenue, it turns out that this annual amount would not even cover the cost of monthly salaries of the non-financial public sector, which between January and November of 2017 reached an average of $818 million per month (in this period, some $9 billion were spent on salaries).

Whether the estimate of the annual income that the State would obtain through royalties when all the "strategic projects" are in the exploitation phase (which would not cover even one month of salaries of the non-financial public sector), or weather these estimates of tax revenues to be obtained between 2017-2021 from, we reiterate, about $1.326 billion (which would not represent or 25% of the collection of VAT made between January and November 2017, which totaled $5.464 billion), it turns out that the revenue offered by mining to the country is extremely small.

In fact, it would be much more profitable to increase income taxes for the primary economic sectors of the country: according to information from the Internal Revenue Service, in 2016 a mere 215 economic sectors obtained $57.993 billion in income, but only generated a tax on the income of $1,325 billion, that is, 2.29% of total earned income.

If the income tax on these economic groups is increased by 1.35%, the same annual amount of tax revenue would be obtained as the estimated revenue from mining royalties. Another idea: there are estimates [32] that show that if in 2015 a ceiling of $3000 had been placed on the 38,700 public employees who then earned a remuneration equal to or greater than that limit, it would have saved $623 million per year, an amount that would cover almost 80% of the expected annual income from mining royalties. The list of examples that show how tiny the potential revenue that mining would generate are innumerable.

A wild surrender: the pitcher was always broken

When reviewing the myth of an extremely profitable mining industry in Ecuador, a mandatory question arises: Why such low profitability? Well, maybe the answer is that the mining pitcher has a structural break: a wild capitulation to transnational capital. As evidence of this surrender, we find several tax incentives for extractivist activities in general, and for mining in specific.

In effect, as Carlos Zorrilla points out, "during the last four years of Correísmo, several laws were modified and others were created with the aim of attracting transnational mining investment at all costs" [33]. Within these modifications, according to official information [34], the following is mentioned:

Benefits in income tax

For all extractivism: A tax rate of 22% is proposed with an exoneration of its payment to any new investment during its first 5 years of operations, in addition to exempting companies from the advance of said tax (for the calculation of the advance, expenses for generation of new employment, improvement of productivity and technological innovation, among others). Deductions are also included to encourage productivity, innovation and eco-efficient production, in addition to a 100% deduction for depreciation and amortization of machinery, equipment and technologies aimed at these purposes. Likewise, the tax rate on the amount destined to reinvest in productive assets is reduced by 10 points and several benefits are included to open capital of companies in favor of their workers and deductions of 100% of the cost of hiring new workers for five years for new investments (assuming that this implies support for economically depressed areas).
For mining: In addition to the above benefits, an accelerated straight-line amortization - between 5 and 10 years - of costs incurred by mining concessionaires to access mineral reserves and to build or improve state infrastructure is proposed.

Benefits in value added tax

For all extractivism: Exoneration for exported goods and services.
For mining: In addition to the above, since 2018 a 0% tariff is proposed for gold acquired by holders with a marketing license. Likewise, in mining exports, the tax paid for the periods corresponding to January 1, 2018, will be reimbursed.

Benefits in tax stability

For all extractivism: Tax stability for the maximum time of any investment contract. The income tax, the exit tax, and the value added tax are frozen. This benefit applies for a minimum investment of more than $100 million and payments of 25% of the income tax.
For mining: A previous benefit is granted to any investment in medium and large-scale metal mining, regardless of the minimum investment or any other requirements [35].

Other benefits

For all extractivism: exoneration of the tax on the exit of foreign currency to companies that carry out external financing operations. Possibility of including in the investment contract the contractual commitments necessary for the development of the new investment.

In addition to these incentives, Ecuadorian mines will produce raw metal, that is, with impurities. For example, the copper concentrate produced at Mirador will have approximately 30% copper, 60% other minerals and 10% water [36].

Since Ecuador does not have metal refineries, refining will be done in China, Europe or North America, where most of the profits will remain.

Likewise, the State grants mining companies large indirect subsidies: in construction and maintenance of roads, especially for transportation to and from mines, as well as construction of other public infrastructure for the benefit of private mining companies (for example, the construction of Puerto Cobre and of connection routes for Chinese mining company ECSA); in financing - with debt - the construction of hydroelectric power plants to provide energy at low prices (note that the mines are large consumers of electricity that can be obtained directly with various state benefits or with preferential rates); and in not claiming compensation for the loss of existing productive activities. In addition, there are many cases where companies do not pay for water, even when they consume it in huge quantities [37].

Regarding taxes, even if the government wishes to collect them, large mining companies manage to avoid them or evade their payment using several mechanisms well known by extractivism: several transnationals present in Ecuador use subsidiaries registered in tax havens, such as those of the Cayman Islands or the Virgin Islands [38]; transfers of prices, expenses and benefits; modification of balance sheets and account statements; etc. (See Sacher, 2017, pp.148-149). In short, mining companies are experts in hiding their real income to minimize taxes: "This has been shown, for the Chilean case, by Orlando Caputo, an expert on mining issues, who was Salvador Allende's representative on the Executive Committee and General Manager of Codelco" (Acosta 2009, p.97). To make matters worse, in many cases the countries of origin of large mining companies offer them various benefits. For example, Chinese companies receive incentives from their government such as: advantages in fiscal and financial terms, subsidies, low interest loans from large state banks, and even diplomatic support (Sacher, 2017, p.85).

With such surrender against transnational capital, in addition to the tricks that it uses so much to evade the payment of taxes, it is clear why large-scale mining does not promise large revenues for Ecuador.

Thus, returning to our analogy of the milkmaid who aspired to progress with her milk pitcher that ended up shattered, even though the mining pitcher promises great revenues with which the country could "develop", the reality is that this wild surrender to transnational capital assures that any mining revenue will be spilled without the need to - like the milkmaid - stumble on the road.

But the problem of mega-mining is even more complex because, even if the income for Ecuador were really significant, such activity would still prolong the country's suffering from the multiple pathologies of the curse of extractive wealth [39]: vulnerability to external shocks; recurrent economic crises; deterioration of the terms of exchange; aggressive indebtedness; impoverishing growth; import consumerism; absence of productive transformations; submission of the state to transnational capital; a police state focused on criminalizing the anti-extractivist resistance; concentration of wealth; widespread poverty and inequality; structural heterogeneity; environmental deterioration; the proliferation of corruption and rentier "mentalities"; weak governance and institutionality; widespread voracity in many important social actors that coexist with authoritarian governments; conflict that can happen even in civil wars or wars between neighboring countries (as seen repeatedly in Africa).

To these pathologies are added others specific to mega-mining like: waste and destruction of existent resources in affected zones (for example, affectation to rural agricultural activities, crafts and community tourism); deterioration of the environment with net loss of natural resources; impacts of the presence of powerful companies that even deterritorialize the State; among many other pathologies that affect both the life of the human beings and Nature and that are not substitutable by any sum of money (following the idea of "super-strong sustainability" [40]).

Social and environmental costs of the false mining promise

Besides the fact that mega-mining is a broken pitcher that offers false promises of "progress", the social and environmental costs that it generates - beyond the mere economic dimension - are very serious.

On one hand, the mine workers themselves continually denounce their precarious working conditions, the pollution of the environment, the hoarding of water, and the generation of housing shortages, among other complaints. Also, they receive low wages and many are disabled after repeated accidents, besides suffering from serious pathologies such as pneumoconiosis (mineral dust in the lungs) and hearing loss (deafness). To this is added untimely job dismissals, an aggressive and often violent stance with unions, and even harassment for union membership. As a result, the confrontations of workers with the police and security guards are frequent and violent, sometimes involving the deaths of workers.

On the other hand, there are recurrent conflicts between mining companies and communities located near the mines (which suffer permanent police and military aggression). Moreover, the inhabitants of such communities suffer from serious illnesses such as respiratory, skin and eye diseases: with health care costs of cure that are not paid by companies. We can also add the multiple displacements of entire communities in order to cede territories that allow mega-mining activity to be carried out.

For examples of the social and environmental costs described above, and that mega- mining has already generated in Ecuador, we can look to the cases associated with each of the five "strategic projects" already underway in Ecuador (which, unbelievably, were legally registered while already in their respective exploratory phases, a stage that supposedly - according to the industry and the government - does not generate major impacts).

Fruta del Norte: The project is located very close to the "La Zarza" wildlife reserve and is located on land used by mining companies without the consent of the local population, and has caused the displacement of communities and water pollution. [41] This project even allowed transnational investors to profit from stock market speculation during the sale of the project from Aurelian to the Canadian company Kinross, before Kinross sold its stake to Lundin Gold [42].
Mirador: Only with the execution of this project, 326 million tons of waste would be extracted, implying around 3,260 million dollars in estimated remediation costs (Sacher and Acosta, 2012, p.76). Besides that, it would generate 6 times more waste per day than the capital city of Quito and would contaminate, per day, the amount of water equivalent to Ibarra's consumption (the project is next to 227 water sources). In this project there are serious social problems such as the use of violence to evict populations [43], demolitions of homes, restricted access to the area, permanent surveillance, precarious working conditions [44], and even the assassination of anti-mining leaders like José Tendetza [45].
Quimsacocha: For each day of execution of this project, some 3,000 tons of materials will be moved, equivalent to "15 times the daily garbage collection of the city of Cuenca". Such removal of materials would seriously contaminate the water sources of that city (Acosta and Sacher, 2011) [46].
Río Blanco: The project is within the Molleturo-Mollepongo Protected Forest, and forms part of the buffer area for Cajas National Park and the Biosphere Reserve of Macizo del Cajas. Apart from endangering these reserves, the project would affect several water sources that supply the provinces of Azuay, Guayas and El Oro [47].
Panantza-San Carlos: The violence deployed in this project includes the militarization of the territory, declarations of martial law, confrontations with Shuar communities (resulting in the death of a policeman), the persecution of community members, the violent displacement of populations such as Nankintz [48] (This conflict occurred in the midst of the violent evictions of the population), the potential deterioration of 414 water sources, and even greater environmental deterioration than in Mirador [49].

Along with these problems - and in addition to the assassination of José Tendetza- clashes between communities (especially the Shuar community, one of the most affected by projects such as Mirador or Panantza-San Carlos) and State forces have recently led to the deaths of Bosco Wisuma and Freddy Taish [50] among other people. We are also seeing an increase in illegal detentions, like the case of Javier Ramírez in Intag (where the Llumiragua project is located). He was detained for 10 months accused of "rebellion" [51].

If all these social and environmental impacts were not enough, it should be added that environmental remediation expenses are not assumed by the large mining companies, but end up becoming liabilities assumed by the communities; liabilities that, many times, are not even accounted for in an adequate manner (even though such expenses can amount to billions of dollars [52], which makes the economic viability of several mining projects questionable).

We see, in short, that behind the farce of "progress" that mega-mining offers, hides a whole history of "blood and fire."A history where, on the one hand, there are innocent people who are violated, trampled, and criminalized with all the might of State power - only because they struggle to survive. On the other hand, there are transnational investments, particularly Chinese, that, with the support of the State, continue to expand their search for power through the extraction of miserable bits of metal.

An anti-extractivist sentiment wasted (or betrayed?)

On February 4, 2018 the government of Lenin Moreno called a referendum. Question 5 of this referendum asked the following: "Do you agree to amend the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador so that metallic mining in all its stages, in protected areas, intangible zones and urban centers, is prohibited without exception, in accordance with the provisions of Annex 5?"

Within Annex 5 it was basically proposed to modify article 407 of the Constitution to include the prohibition of "all types of metallic mining in any of its phases in protected areas, urban centers and intangible zones".

According to official results, the vote in favor of this question reached 68.62% of the total valid votes [53]. While both the approach to the question and the result obtained at the polls seem encouraging, in reality things are more complex. In fact, Question 5 of the popular consultation of 2018 was just a warmed-over question that really does not strike any new ground [54]. It turns out that Article 407 of the Constitution already indicated that "the extractive activity of non-renewable resources is prohibited in protected areas and in areas declared as intangible zones." In turn, Article 28 of the mining law indicates that mining can not be carried out in urban areas. Thus, Question 5 of the consultation did not accomplish anything.

If it really wanted to address the environmental risks posed by mega-mining, the Moreno government would have included the prohibition of metallic mining near water sources, headwaters of rivers, páramos, protective forests, wetlands and fragile areas, and especially biodiverse areas as proposed by several organizations of civil society and the indigenous movement [55].

In addition, the consultation could have asked about the immediate prohibition of forced displacement of populations caused by mining, as well as demanding the application of Article 117 of the mining law, which imposes the expiration of mining concessions where there is evidence of violation of Human Rights (even the consultation could extend that article to also take into account the violation of the Rights of Nature). Also, why was non-metallic mining - the main problem in the case of urban areas - neglected? And what should happen with rural population centers located within mining concessions?

Evidently, if the consultation had gone beyond the watered-down mining question of February 4 the Moreno government would have guaranteed itself a long battle with the large transnational mining companies operating in Ecuador. The Moreno administration never really wanted stronger mining regulation. Why? Well, remember that it was the government itself that accelerated the mining concessions despite agreeing to the contrary with the indigenous movements in December 2017 (which we mentioned earlier). In addition, note that on October 3, 2017, Ecuador was honored at the Annual Outstanding Achievement Awards of Mines and Money Americas 2017 in Toronto, Canada, as the Best Country of the Year in mining development "for being the most attractive nation for investors in the mining sector"[56]. To that "victory" are added several announcements - with great fanfare - of new investments by transnational miners in 2018 [57].

If the consultation has practically no effect and Ecuador maintains its mining strategy, why was Question 5 included on February 4? Because the purpose was purely electoral: it tried to add incentives to motivate a majority support for the whole referendum.

In addition, it should be added that - paradoxically - a bigger blow to mining interests was achieved through the repeal of the "law of surplus value" (Question 6): it turns out that said law included a reform provision in which mining companies benefited through the exoneration of the payment of taxes for extraordinary income for 48 months after recovering their investment. By repealing the "law of surplus value", this benefit in favor of mining companies was at risk.

The Moreno government ended up demonstrating the level that it would capitulate to transnational mining interests: it proposed, as "compensation", to eliminate the tax on extraordinary income for mining companies, in addition to deeming "temporary" the suspension of concessions that Moreno negotiated with social movements in December of 2017. Such a position, together with the real effects of Question 5 of the popular referendum on mining, show that a popular anti-extractivist sentiment was definitely wasted when it was used for the sole purpose of Morenismo gaining strength in its arm wrestling with Correísmo, but without that popular feeling affecting the transnational mining interests.

To dispute an (anti) mining future

The idea that "the mining sector is the future of economic development for the country" [58] are nothing but a false promise that, in the name of "development", seeks to push us towards an activity that will only be profitable for transnational interests and not for the country. But the question does not stop there, because mega-mining has been imposed in our lands by "blood and fire", completely trampling human beings and Nature. Without doubt, mega-mining is a perverse chimera that still fools the masses even through popular consultations.

Understanding this, there is nothing left but to continue fighting for an anti-mining future. Although the task is very complex, there are rays of hope: the result of the February 2018 consultation may be an indication that there could be a popular anti-extractive sentiment in the country. Sadly such sentiment has been betrayed by Morenismo, which will continue to deliver the country to the big mining companies, just as Correísmo did.

If the political power brokers have fractured anti-mining popular sentiment, it must be recovered and galvanized to publicly expose the real intentions of the perverse mining chimera, which is but one of the many extractive chimeras: those that offer "development" , but in essence are predators. And they have to be, because their father is a predator par excellence: capitalism, a system that survives by preying, through exploitation, on all forms of life, and while killing them slowly - without any remorse - screams progress!

Thus, there is nothing left but to continue fighting for, from below and from the left, alongside the Pacha Mama, an anti-mining future for our country, unless we want it to end up being preyed upon again.

Notes:

[1] Economista ecuatoriano. Ex-ministro de Energía y Minas. Ex-presidente de la Asamblea Constituyente. Ex-candidato a la Presidencia de la República del Ecuador.

[2] Economista ecuatoriano. Profesor de la Universidad Central del Ecuador y de la Escuela Politécnica Nacional.

[3] Algunos datos para el debate sobre el efecto de la “minería” en el “desarrollo” se los puede encontrar en el artículo de Carlos Zorrilla: “La minería y su verdad incómoda”, La línea de fuego, enero 9 de 2018.

[4] Respecto al caso africano, parece existir evidencia estadística del vínculo entre actividades mineras y violencia (desde protestas hasta conflictos armados). Ver al respecto el artículo de Berman et al. (2017): “This mine is mine! How minerals fuel conflicts in Africa ”, American Economic Review, 107(6), pp.1564-1610. De todas formas, dentro de África existen importantes matices sobre el vínculo extractivismo-violencia, como parecería observarse en el caso de Botsuana, como se menciona en el artículo de Gemma Roquet: “ Botsuana: ¿milagro africano? ”, El Orden Mundial en el S. XXI, enero 25 de 2018.

[5] Ver el artículo de South African history Online: “Marikana Massacre 16 August 2012”.

[6] Para algunos detalles adicionales del papel de la minera Lundin se puede revisar el libro de William Sacher (2017): Ofensiva megaminera china en los Andes. Acumulación por desposesión en el Ecuador de la “Revolución Ciudadana”. Quito: Abya-Yala

[7] Ver el mapa de conflictos mineros del Observatorio de Conflictos Mineros de América Latina disponible en: https://mapa.conflictosmineros.net/ocmal_db-v2/conflicto

[8] Ver el artículo de Semana: “Un año después de la tragedia minera más grande en la historia de Brasil”, noviembre de 2016.

[9] Ver el artículo de El Nacional: “Los estragos del Arco Minero”, febrero 25 de 2018.

[10] Algunos breves ejemplos se pueden ubicar en el artículo de Contexto Latinoamericano: “La devastación ambiental de la minería en América Latina”, junio 20 de 2017.

[11] Sobre la corrupción asociada a los extractivismos se puede revisar el artículo de Alberto Acosta y John Cajas Guijarro: “Cruda realidad. Corrupción, extractivismos, autoritarismo”, Rebelion.org, agosto 23 de 2017.

[12] Para una breve reseña sobre los inicios de la minería en el Ecuador -y la reacción de los movimientos sociales anti-mineros- se recomienda el artículo de Alberto Acosta y Francisco Hurtado Caicedo: “ De la violación del Mandato Minero al festín minero del siglo XXI ”, Rebelion.org, julio 30 de 2016. Asimismo, se puede revisar el trabajo de Sacher (2017). También se puede revisar el libro de Alberto Acosta (2009): La Maldición de la Abundancia . Quito: Abya- Yala.

[13] Reiteramos que mayores detalles en estos puntos se los puede obtener del trabajo ya citado de Acosta y Hurtado Caicedo (2016) así como el de Sacher (2017).

[14] Para una evidencia gráfica del apoyo policial-militar que el gobierno de Correa dio a la minería -en particular para desplazar a poblaciones enteras- se puede ver el video publicado por el colectivo Minka Urbana: “¿Qué harías tú si venden tu casa a empresas mineras?”, disponible en: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1mYLAc3wfI

[15] Al respecto se puede ver el trabajo de William Sacher y Alberto Acosta (2012): La minería a gran escala en Ecuador. Análisis y datos estadísticos sobre la minería industrial en el Ecuador . Quito: Abya-Yala.

[16] Para una conceptualización del correísmo se puede revisar el artículo de Alberto Acosta y John Cajas Guijarro (2016): “Dialéctica de una década desperdiciada. Estridencias, orígenes y contradicciones del correísmo”, en el libro Rescatar la esperanza. Más allá del neoliberalismo y del progresismo, Barcelona: Entrepueblos.

[17] Para una comparación de los sectores incluidos en las diferentes propuestas de “transformación productiva” correístas y la inclusión -a última hora- de la minería, se puede revisar el artículo de Pablo Ospina: “Ecuador: el nuevo período de gobierno y el cambio de la matriz productiva”, Informe de Coyuntura, Comité Ecuménico de Proyectos, julio de 2013.

[18] Ver el artículo de El Ciudadano: “‘El mundo nos ha fallado’, dice presidente Correa al anunciar el fin de la Iniciativa Yasuní-ITT”, agosto 14 de 2013.

[19] Ver página 7 de la presentación del Ministerio de Minería titulada: “Ecuador... From Promise to Reality” disponible en: http://www.mineria.gob.ec/pdac-information/

[20] Ver artículo de El Universo: “Las concesiones mineras ocupan 15% del territorio indígena, según dirigentes”, enero 9 de 2018.

[21] Ver artículo de El Universo: “Tras cita con Conaie, Lenín Moreno detiene concesiones mineras”, diciembre 11 de 2017.

[22] Ver artículo de El Universo: “Inscripciones mineras continuaron”, febrero 2 de 2018.

[23] Apenas como ejemplo se puede citar la adquisición hecha por la canadiense Lucky Minerals de casi 55 mil hectáreas conteniendo unas 12 concesiones mineras, tal como señaló el artículo de Yahoo Finance: “Lucky Minerals Establishes a Strategic Foothold in the Heart of Ecuador’s Prolific Mineral District”, febrero 20 de 2018, disponible en: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/lucky-minerals-establishes-strategic-foothold-120000105.html

[24] Ver artículo de El Universo: “Aceptan renuncia del Ministro de Minería Javier Córdova Unda”, enero 30 de 2018.

[25] Ver artículo de El Universo: “Ecuarunari pide extinguir concesiones mineras tras ganar el Sí en la consulta”, febrero 6 de 2018.

[26] Algunos ejemplos de cuán oscura ha sido la expansión megaminera, que van desde atropellos a pequeños mineros informales hasta entregas irregulares de concesiones, se recomienda el artículo de Plan V: “La bomba de tiempo minera”, febrero 20 de 2018.

[27] Ver la presentación del Ministerio de Minería: “ Ecuador... From Promise to Reality ” de octubre de 2017.

[28] Ver artículo de El Universo: “Inversión minera sería de $ 1.000 millones en 2018”, diciembre 16 de 2017.

[29] Ver el artículo de El Telégrafo: “Minería generará $ 8 mil millones en 2025”, septiembre 20 de 2016.

[30] Ver el documento de la Corporación para la Promoción Proactiva de Inversiones INVEC (2012): “ Oportunidades en el Sector Minero a Gran Escala del Ecuador ”.

[31] Ver el artículo de La Hora: “Plantean más críticas a la minería”, noviembre 13 de 2011.

[32] Ver el artículo de Pablo Dávalos en Plan V: “Una élite de 38.700 funcionarios gana más de USD 3000 al mes”, abril 27 de 2016. Dicho sea de paso, en 2015 los autores de este artículo propusimos, entre otras cosas, que para enfrentar la crisis que aqueja a la economía ecuatoriana se podría hacer que “ningún empleado público obtenga un salario mayor a un límite acorde a la realidad nacional de, por ejemplo, 3 mil dólares mensuales; nada descabellado si consideramos que el PIB por persona empleada del Ecuador para 2014 bordea los 1.200 dólares mensuales”; al respecto recomendamos ver el artículo de Alberto Acosta y John Cajas Guijarro: “ Un plan anticrisis desde la izquierda. Elementos para la discusión ”, Montecristi Vive, octubre de 2015.

[33] Ver el artículo de Carlos Zorrilla: “El ABC de la problemática minera en el Ecuador”, La línea de fuego, enero 9 de 2018.

[34] Ver el documento del Ministerio Coordinador de Sectores Estratégicos: “Incentivos tributarios”, disponible en: https://issuu.com/sectoresestrategicos/docs/incentivos_tributarios

[35] Para visualizar cuán graves son los contratos de estabilidad fiscal se puede mencionar un ejemplo: según un informe de prefactibilidad de Aurania Resources, la minera Lundin pagaría impuestos sobre las ganancias extraordinarias solo si el precio de la onza de oro sobrepasa los 2.200 dólares , monto ridículo si se observa que ni siquiera en el mejor momento del boom de los commodities la onza de oro llegó a los 2 mil dólares. Ver el reporte técnico de Aurania Resources disponible en: http://www.aurania.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Aurania- Resources-Technical-Report-2017.pdf

[36] Ver el artículo de Zorrilla, Sacher y Acosta: “21 preguntas para entender la minería del siglo XXI”, Observatorio Latinoamericano de Conflictos Ambientales, octubre 18 de 2011.

[37] Respecto al consumo de agua, solo como ejemplo, se puede mencionar el caso del proyecto Mirador. Según Sacher (2017, p.245), dicho proyecto consumiría 250 litros de agua por segundo, consumo equivalente al consumo residencial de Ibarra.

[38] A manera de ejemplo de tal práctica, se puede revisar el accionar de la transnacional Glencore en Burkina Fasso, recogida en el artículo de Will Fitzgibbon traducido por El Universo: “Los juegos offshore de Glencore en un país minero y pobre”, noviembre 9 de 2017.

[39] A más del libro ya citado de Alberto Acosta (2009), también se puede revisar sobre las posibles patologías causadas por la maldición de la abundancia en el extractivismo ecuatoriano el artículo de Alberto Acosta y John Cajas Guijarro (2016): “Patologías de la abundancia. Una lectura desde el extractivismo”, en el libro de varios autores, Nada dura para siempre. Neo- extractivismo tras el boom de las materias primas. Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar y Universidad de Kassel.

[40] Sobre los diferentes niveles de sustentabilidad, especialmente la “sustentabilidad súper- fuerte”, se puede revisar el artículo de Eduardo Gudynas (2011): “Desarrollo y sustentabilidad ambiental: diversidad de posturas, tensiones persistentes”, en el libro La Tierra no es muda: diálogos entre el desarrollo sostenible y el postdesarrollo. Granada: Universidad de Granada.

[41] Ver al respecto el análisis sobre Fruta del Norte hecho por el Observatorio de conflictos mineros de América Latina disponible en: http://mapa.conflictosmineros.net/ocmal_db/?page=conflicto&id=229

[42] Para más detalles de los estragos sociales-ambientales causados por el proyecto Fruta del Norte se recomienda revisar el libro de María Fernanda Soliz (2018): Fruta del Norte: la manzana de la discordia. Quito: Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar.

[43] Sobre los atropellos que el avance del proyecto Mirador ha provocado a poblaciones locales se recomienda ver el reportaje de Visión 360: “A punto de estallar”, disponible en:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JBbVkVubqY

[44] Sobre todos estos problemas en el proyecto Mirador recomendamos el trabajo de William Sacher, Michelle Báez, Manuel Bayón, Fred Larreátegui, Melissa Moreano (2016): Entretelones de la megaminería en el Ecuador: http://www.accionecologica.org/images/2005/mineria/documentos/entretelones_megamineri%CC %81a_2ed.pdf

[45] Para más detalles sobre el asesinato de José Tendetza y el vínculo con la empresa minera ECSA ver el artículo de PlanV: “¿Quién mató a José Tendetza?”, diciembre 04 de 2014.

[46] Ver el artículo de Sacher, William y Acosta, Alberto (2011): “El agua de Quimsacocha, entre la codicia y la vida”, Rebelion.org, noviembre 3 de 2011.

[47] Para más detalles ver artículo en Observatorio de conflictos mineros de América Latina: “ Defensoras de la Pachamama rechazan licencia ambiental del proyecto minero Río Blanco ”, febrero 29 de 2016.

[48] Sobre los atropellos que el avance del proyecto Panantza-San Carlos ha provocado a poblaciones shuar se recomienda ver el reportaje de Visión 360: “Expulsados de su territorio”, disponible en:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmKEQcxBzNU

[49] Para mayores detalles de este y los demás conflictos provocados por la megaminería, ver el video publicado por el colectivo Minka Urbana: “¿Sabes cómo surgió el conflicto megaminero en Nankints?”, disponible en: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2D99YHGuRU

[50] Para más detalles sobre estos casos ver, por ejemplo, el artículo de Fundación 1000 hojas: “La muerte de Freddy Taish sigue en la impunidad”, junio 15 de 2015.

[51] Más detalles de las condiciones irregulares de detención de Javier Ramírez ver el artículo de El Comercio: “El dirigente antiminero, Javier Ramírez, acusado de rebelión fue sentenciado a 10 meses de privación de libertad”, febrero 10 de 2015.

[52] El caso de Vale y BHP Billiton en el desastre de Minas Gerais es clarísimo respecto a cuán costosa resulta la remediación: a las mineras se les ha planteado juicios por remediación ambiental, donde la suma exigida llega a los 44 mil millones de dólares. Al respecto ver el artículo de CNN Money: “Brazil slaps miners with $ 44 billion lawsuit over dam collapse”, mayo 4 de 2016.

[53] Ver artículo de El Comercio: “CNE difunde datos finales de la consulta”, febrero 8 de 2018.

[54] Esta posición ya la habíamos planteado antes de los resultados de la consulta, como se muestra en el artículo de Alberto Acosta y John Cajas Guijarro (2018): “La reelección indefinida, una traición a la democracia”, enero 20 de 2018.

[55] Para un análisis de los límites de la pregunta sobre minería en la consulta popular se puede ver el artículo de Jackeline Beltrán: “ El país premiado por su desarrollo minero busca limitar la minería con una consulta popular ”, GK city, diciembre 21 de 2017. Igualmente se recomienda el análisis planteado por el Colectivo Geografía Crítica: “ Análisis del alcance de la pregunta sobre minería en el referéndum, Ecuador 2018 ”, enero 19 de 2018. Por su parte, para un análisis

post-consulta puede revisarse el artículo de Belén Páez: “ Minería en centros urbanos: todo lo que la pregunta 5 no tomó en cuenta ”, GK city, febrero 4 de 2018.

[56] Ver el boletín de prensa de la Agencia de Regulación y Control Minero: “Ecuador ganó como Mejor País en desarrollo minero en los Annual Outstanding Achievement Awards”, disponible en:http://www.controlminero.gob.ec/ecuador-gano-como-mejor-pais-en-desarrollo- minero-en-los-annual-outstanding-achievement-awards/

[57] Ver artículo de El Universo: “Mineras ofrecen $ 1.299 millones de inversión”, enero 8 de 2018.

[58] Ver el boletín de prensa de la Agencia de Regulación y Control Minero: “El sector minero es el futuro del desarrollo económico para el país”, disponible en: http://www.controlminero.gob.ec/el-sector-minero-es-el-futuro-del-desarrollo-economico-para-el- pais/

Lee Rhiannon questions AUSTRADE on mining in Ecuador

The destructive push into Ecuador's rainforests and indigenous communities by several Australian mining giants, with the full support of Austrade, was questioned in the Senate Estimates Committee on Friday. BHP, SolGold, Fortescue, and Newcrest own more hectares of exploratory mining concessions in Ecuador than any other country. Many of these concessions overlap protected forests and indigenous territories, in breach of Ecuador's constitution and environmental laws.

*Senator Lee Rhiannon questions AUSTRADE on Australian companies mining protected forest reserves and indigenous reserves in Ecuador.*

Senator Lee Rhiannon questioned Austrade about its role in promoting Australian mining interests in Ecuador, and whether it even considers environmental protection measures when facilitating the eight-fold increase in mining expected over the next three years. She also queried whether Austrade was underplaying the sovereign risks of operating in Ecuador's politically and culturally sensitive environment.

The risks of operating in Ecuador grew dramatically on Friday, following a court order to suspend the mining operations of Ecugoldmining's controversial Rio Blanco copper mine. Judge Serrano also ordered the “demilitarisation” of the area around the mine, which is currently being guarded by around 150 police and military personnel following heated protests at the mine earlier this month. The city of Cuenca joined the indigenous organisation Ecuarunari in calling for the suspension, in order to assess the damage to water sources caused by the mine.

The senator also highlighted how Austrade could be undoing the conservation efforts of AusAID and the Rainforest Information Centre, which helped establish the incredibly biodiverse Los Cedros Biological reserve several decades ago. Los Cedros is one of 43 Protected Forests and wilderness areas in Ecuador now threatened by mining concessions.“Ecuador has the world's highest biodiversity of vertebrate species and endemic plants, despite being a tiny fraction of the world's land area” said Melbourne Rainforest Action Group (MRAG) Convenor, David Ni Castro.

He went on to note that “the threat of extinction for much of this biodiversity has dramatically increased since April 2016, with the Ecuadorian government opening approximately 2.9 million hectares of land for mining exploration, covering around 14% of the country. The numbers are approximate because the government does not frequently update its website, but we know that concessions have continued to be granted in 2018 too.” “Most of the mining concessions are located in the Tropical Andes Biodiversity Hotspot, the most critically endangered and biodiverse of the 36 ‘hotspots’ worldwide, and home to hundreds of threatened species of mammals, birds, amphibians and plants,” he said. He explains that “around 95% of these mega-diverse forests have already been lost in the north west of Ecuador. To mine the last remaining fragments is simply unacceptable. No company can claim to have a social license to push roads into, and mine, such rare and endangered rainforests”.

He notes that “the mining concessions were made illegally without the knowledge or approval of the people living on these lands, and they cover critical headwater ecosystemsand indigenous territories. They also threaten over a third of Ecuador’s protected forest reserves (Bosques Protectores)” explained MRAG convenor, David Ni Castro.

“As of January 2018, 735,597ha of protected forests in Ecuador are under exploratory mining concessions, or more than 30% of the total land area protected by such reserves” said David Ni Castro. He also noted that “among the largest landholding Indigenous groups, approximately 995,426ha are within mining concessions, or approximately 14% of Indigenous lands in Ecuador. Some groups, like the Awa are more highly affected, with nearly 70% of Awá lands and 50% of Shaur territories affected by mining concessions (or over 860,000 ha of Shaur Amazonian rainforests).”

“The concession process has also been plagued by corruption, ongoing human rights abuses including criminalisation and silencing of dissent, and forced displacement of people whose homelands are jeopardised by mining projects. Corruption has occurred at the highest levels, with even the former Vice President Jorge Glas jailed for six years in December 2017 on corruption related charges,” said David Ni Castro.

"The mining concessions were made illegally without the knowledge or approval of the people living on these lands, and they cover critical headwater ecosystemsand indigenous territories. They also threaten over a third of Ecuador’s protected forest reserves (Bosques Protectores),” explained MRAG convenor, David Ni Castro.

“The corruption occurred while he was Coordinating Director for the office of Strategic Sectors. His office was also responsible for promoting and negotiating new mining concessions. Despite his jailing, hundreds of mining concession contracts which his office oversaw, including those with Australian mining companies, are yet to be rescinded,” he said.

“At a referendum in February 2018, 67% of Ecuadorians voted overwhelmingly to roll back mining, particularly in forested areas. Despite this, mining concessions continue to be handed out,” explains David Ni Castro.

Media Release - Austrade questioned about its support for mining in Ecuador's threatened rainforests and protected reserves 4/6/2018

Media Alert - Australian companies leading the charge into protected forests and Indigenous territories of Ecuador 1/6/2018

Australian mining under the spotlight

Quite apart from the ecological impacts of mining in forested areas, mining has significant environmental impacts, including long term contamination of soil and water sources, formation of sinkholes, and the production of large amounts of toxic waste, or tailings.

Australia has strict regulatory watchdogs to ensure safe environmental practices. The news items below however, show that even in Australia, what is purported to be best practice, can be at best described as tokenisitic, and at worst, criminal negligence. Many Australian mining companies are happy to privatise profits, but pass on the costs and risks of their abandoned mines to the taxpayer.

If this is the outcome in a heavily-regulated developed country like Australia, what will the future of Ecuador's "investor-friendly mining regime" actually look like?

"Wandering around Australia, you might want to watch your step — the country currently has more than 50,000 abandoned mines. Some represent a significant threat from contamination; others may pose safety risks; and still others may be losing their value as cultural heritage.

Recently experts met in Brisbane for the four day Life of Mine conference to explore how to leave positive legacies from mining. This included exploring the challenges of, and long term solutions for, our abandoned mines."

The Conversation, 23 July 2014

"Recent incidents in Brazil and Australia have once again put the spotlight on the safety of mining operations, and specifically their dams. In February, Brazil’s environment authorities in the eastern Para State asked operators of the Alunorte alumina refinery to reduce operations by 50 per cent due to concerns over potential water contamination.

Barely two weeks later, a section of the northern dam wall at the Cadia mine, located in eastern Australia’s state of New South Wales, collapsed. The incident forced the mine’s operator, Newcrest Mining, to halt operations at the mine."
UN Environment Report: Dam or be damned - Mining Safety under Scrutiny 22 March, 2018

The ICIJ noted in a 2015 report that since 2004, more than 380 people have died in mining accidents or in off-site skirmishes connected to Australian mining companies in Africa.

The ICIJ report further stated: "Multiple Australian mining companies are accused of negligence, unfair dismissal, violence and environmental law-breaking across Africa, according to legal filings and community petitions gathered from South Africa, Botswana, Tanzania, Zambia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Cote d'Ivoire, Senegal and Ghana."

June News

Today, the Mayor of the Cotacachi Municipality in the Imbabura Province of Ecuador, issued a formal denunciation to BHP Billiton over their mining concessions in the area, with particular concerns over their transgressions in protected reserves and conservation areas.

Mining concessions totalling 22,570 hectares were given to BHP in the Cotacachi Canton despite unanimous rejection by the population of the canton, and in direct opposition of the wishes of local council.

The EcoMinga Fundacion, an Ecuadorian conservation organisation, raised concerns to the Cotacachi Municipality on the 16th of July over BHP employees illegally trespassing onto their property despite formal agreements with company spokespeople banning entry by employees without consent. The employees entered between the 7th and 9th of July, clearing an area of forest for a camp, which is sensitive habitat for the Rhaebo Olalai, an extremely rare Andean toad.

EcoMinga is located west of the Los Cedros Biological Reserve, and is dedicated to the conservation of the unique foothill forests, cloud forests, and alpine grasslands (“paramo”) of the Andes, especially those on the edge of the Amazon basin in east-central Ecuador and those on the super-wet western Andean slopes of the Choco region in northwest Ecuador. EcoMinga has established seven reserves in the upper Rio Pastaza watershed in east-central Ecuador between Banos and Puyo. Most of these reserves adjoin national parks, which protect higher-elevation habitats. The reserve extends protection down into the much more diverse middle and lower elevations which are not protected by national park status.

The Parish Government of Cuellaje is one of four affected by the mining concessions in the Intag region. At the meeting attended by 500-1500 people, they voted overwhelmingly to:

* Ask the government to revert all mining concessions in the Parish and the rest of Intag

* Convene an Intag-wide Assembly to ask all mining companies to leave the Intag area

* Change the Teniente político of Cuellaje (an executive appointee that is facilitating mining socialisation)

* Prohibit the presence of government and mining companies employees involved in socialisation in all the communities

* For all of Intag to join forces.

This decision is significant in the wake of the rejection of the socialisation process in the nearby Parish of Peñaherrera.

Note: This is an unofficial resolution. The local government is yet to publish the official one.

Report shows new mining concessions could severely decrease biodiversity and ecosystem services in Ecuador.

Our results reveal the potential losses that mining could cause: eight critically endangered species, including two primates (brown-headed spider monkey and white-fronted capuchin), 37 endangered species, 153 vulnerable, 89 near threatened, and a large number of less threatened species... The short-term national profits from mining will not compensate for the permanent biodiversity losses, and the long-term ecosystem service and economic losses at the local and regional level.

Ecuador's policy of silencing NGOs that question government policies and programs has gotten the world's attention. UN experts on human rights claim it is a strategy to asphyxiate civil society.

Cuban-born Carlos Zorilla has lived for more than 35 years in Ecuador, where he is a leading activist opposing extractivism. He is the co-founder and former President of DECOIN (Defensa y Conservación Ecológica de Intag), which works to protect the environment and promote the sustainable development of the Intag Valley in North Western Ecuador.

Mining Concessions in Ecuador

Many of the mining concessions being handed out in Ecuador are within protected forests and indigenous reserves in outright violation of Ecuador's Constitution. No prior consultation occurred with affected communities.

The degradation of protected areas, such as Bosques Protectores (Protected Forests), and the spread of mining roads and camps (and eventually mines) within the buffer zones of globally significant areas like the Cotacachi-Cayapas Ecological Reserve, risks hundreds of species listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as threatened, endangered or vulnerable.

One of the protected areas conceded to Australian mining companies is the Los Cedros Biological Reserve which was set up with the help of the Australian Rainforest Information Centre almost 30 years ago, along with a substantial grant from AusAID.

The Los Cedros Biological Reserve consists of 17,000 acres of incredibly rare, premontane wet tropical forest and cloud forest, one of the most biologically diverse and endemic habitats on Earth. Over 95% of this forest type has already been lost.

Los Cedros is not accessible by road, and for this reason has been - until now - both better protected, and less scientifically explored than some other Protected Forest reserves in Ecuador. The biodiversity in this last intact watershed is remarkable, yet most of it remains to be discovered and understood.

*Brown-headed Spider Monkey. Photo: David Ni Castro*

Among the most significant animal species found at Los Cedros is the critically endangered brown-headed spider monkey (less than 250 remain in the wild), the neotropical otter, margay, puma, jaguar, and spectacled bear. Unsurprisingly, Los Cedros is also a bird hotspot. At least 298 bird species have been seen along the short trail system, including numerous endemic species found only in the cloud forests of the Chocó region, secretive species like the lanceolated monklet, and newly discovered species such as the cloud forest pygmy owl. Of the birds seen at the Reserve, at least 10 are endangered, threatened, vulnerable, or near threatened due to habitat loss. The forest is also extraordinarily rich in plant species. A field study estimated an average of 299 tree species per hectare, an estimated 400 orchid species (many of which were first discovered in the Reserve) and a very high number of local endemic species with small ranges.

For a page full of details of the incredible splendours of Los Cedros (along with some spectacular photos) Click here.

Click here to view a 23min documentary about the reserve.

A respected Ecuadorian lawyer is working to put in place a legal injunction to stop the incursions into the Los Cedros reserve. We have been advised that if we can mount a legal case, there’s a good chance of success. This will also be an important test case to set a precedent for the 42 other Protected Forest Reserves and the large tracts of Indigenous Territories currently under mining concessions in Ecuador.

A win for Los Cedros could help save roughly 1.82 million acres, (or more than 30% of the total land area currently 'protected' by these reserves) along with 2.47 million acres of Indigenous Territories.

Funds raised from this crowd funding campaign will support the recently established Los Cedros legal fund to pay for evidence gathering, court fees and other associated legal costs. The reserve volunteers are facing spiralling legal costs and need at least $5000 to put together the strongest legal case possible.

Sign the PETITION calling on the Ecuadorian government to uphold the law and end mining in the Los Cedros protected forest reserve.

Clashes at controversial Ecuadorian mine – Rio Blanco

Heated clashes occurred between community members and security forces at Ecuagold's Chinese owned Río Blanco mine this past week, with several arrests being made and reports that 3 leaders of the Ecuarunari, the national confederation of the Kichwa people, were abducted by mine workers. This mine is one of Ecuador's five strategic mining projects and is currently in the exploitation phase, and is located in the western area of Azuay. The mine has proven reserves of 2.1 million tons of mineralized rock, and is expected to obtain 605,011 ounces of gold and 4.3 million ounces of silver. The useful life of the mine will only be 11 years.

The governor of the province of Azuay, Xavier Enderica, said people outside of the community were responsible for the violence.

Locals (led by seven indigenous communities and campesino groups) alongside conservationists, are concerned about the impacts of mining on the water sources of the area. They have rejected a request for formal talks and insist this project be permanently stopped, having opposed the mine for the last 16 years. In addition, the community members who were part of the protests issued a statement. There, they asked the citizens of the province and the country to join in the defense of water and demanded "the immediate reversion of mining concessions in Rio Blanco and the entire national territory".

The International Mining Conference in Melbourne

Mining conference attracts more than its usual share of zombies

THE FALSE HOPE OF A BROKEN PITCHER

BY ALBERTO ACOSTA AND JOHN CAJAS-GUIJARRO

"Wealth is like salt water: the more you drink, the more thirsty you become. The same goes for glory."

Arthur Schopenhauer

The lies behind progress

The mining expansion between neoliberalism, Correísmo and Morenismo

Small profits, selling out, and unacceptable costs

A wild surrender: the pitcher was always broken

Social and environmental costs of the false mining promise

An anti-extractivist sentiment wasted (or betrayed?)

To dispute an (anti) mining future

Notes:

AUSTRALIAN MINING PRACTICES IN THE NEWS

Irresponsible Australian mining companies in Africa

MUNICIPALITY OF COTACHI FORMALLY DENOUNCES BHP OVER CONCESSIONS IN THE AREA

23 JULY 2018

LOCAL PARISH UNOFFICIALLY VOTES TO PROHIBIT MINING IN INTAG REGION

29 JUNE 2018

19 JUNE 2018

ECUADOR'S EXTRACTIVE POLICIES AND THE SILENCING OF DISSENT

RIO BLANCO MINE SUSPENDED

3 JUNE 2018

Activists celebrate around Yaku Perez, Ecuarunari president, on Friday night in Cuenca after a judge ruled to suspend mining activities at the Junefield Rio Blanco site. Photo: Yasunidos

OIL & GAS EXTRACTION IN INDIGENOUS TERRITORIES

SENATOR LEE RHIANNON QUESTIONS AUSTRADE'S SUPPORT FOR MINING IN ECUADOR'S PROTECTED FORESTS

1 JUNE 2018

Mining represents a short-term investment with great long-term costs to the people of Ecuador. We cannot maintain the illusion that mining can be done without grave ecological and human health consequences, consequences that are well documented in scientific literature.

At a referendum in February 2018, 67% of Ecuadorians voted overwhelmingly to roll back mining, particularly in forested areas. Despite this, mining concessions continue to be handed out.

MINING CONCESSIONS IN PROTECTED FORESTS

LOS CEDROS

NON-PROFIT BIOLOGICAL RESERVE

Scientists have found in Los Cedros:

2 critically endangered species

24 endangered species

99 species listed as vulnerable

59 threatened or near threatened species

Mining concessions now cover 68% of Los Cedros's total protected area

HELP SAVE LOS CEDROS

Support the legal challenge

A win for Los Cedros could help save roughly 1.82 million acres, (or more than 30% of the total land area currently 'protected' by these reserves) along with 2.47 million acres of Indigenous Territories.

CLASHES BETWEEN COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND SECURITY FORCES OVER MINES

As of May 16, 2018, approximately 42 Protected Forest Reserves are threatened by mining concessions.

Members of The Women's Front in Defense of Mother Earth protest against the Rio Blanco mine.

Local community members dug ditches to restrict access to the Rio Blanco mine.

Growing militarisation - 200 policemen and 100 soldiers guard the Chinese owned Rio Blanco mining camp following protests

Militarised mining in Papua - This is what an "investor-friendly mining regime" actually looks like.