Australian mining companies complicit in unrest

The Rainforest Action Group is deeply concerned about the implications of the State of Emergency declared by Ecuadorian president Lenin Moreno on October 3rd. The action gives police and military the power to use extreme force to repress the widespread mobilisation of the populace occurring throughout Ecuador after the implementation of austerity measures known as the paquetazo (package) on October 1.

Alicia Cahuiya, leader of the Waorani women's organisation (AMWAE) standing beside the crowd in the central square of Quito

The US $20 billion fiscal reform package includes axing fuel subsidies – a move that saw diesel prices rise from US$1.03 to $2.30 per gallon, and petrol rise to US$2.39 from $1.85. Public service wages were cut by 20 per cent, and workplace security and job security safeguards removed. Thousands of public-sector employees were also dismissed and education and healthcare spending slashed. The resulting protests have seen hundreds injured and at least one dead, with police shooting unarmed protesters and the government leaving the capital over safety concerns. Hundreds of people have also been arrested.

“The reforms by the Ecuadorian government are part of IMF mandates that seek to open Ecuador further to international investment, and pave the way for widespread copper and gold mining despite resistance from the population. Austerity measures in a country where the level of structural poverty sits at 25.5% and extreme poverty levels of 9.5% is unfathomable. Given the isolated terrain of much of Ecuador, the fuel price rises will see the poorest Ecuadorians and small-scale farmers hit the worst,” says Rebekah Hayden.

“The move directly implicates Australian mining companies in the repression of the populace, who overwhelmingly voted last year against mining in Indigenous territories and protected forests in the Amazon and Andes. Despite this, the government continues to move ahead with plans to increase mining concessions, axing taxes so that mining companies can operate with lower overheads, and providing armed forces to ensure the security on the sites of these proposed mines. The IMF loan was provisioned on foreign investment, particularly the strategic mining projects such as SolGold’s proposed Cascabel mine which acts as collateral for the loans.” Ms Hayden added.

Australian mining companies are leading investment in Ecuador, holding almost 30% of mining concessions across the country, totalling 536,101 hectares in early 2019.

“Australian mining companies like to promote mining as an opportunity to provide jobs and increase local wealth, however these austerity measures by the government indicate that local communities will be far worse off after foreign investment than they were before,” Rebekah stated.

Protesters occupying Ecuador's National Assembly. Click for video.

The Confederation of Indigenous Nations of Ecuador (Conaie) released a statement in mid 2018 denouncing the Government’s selling of around 2 million hectares of Indigenous territories and protected forests to mining companies, and declaring a unilateral stance against all industrial foreign investment projects, including mining, oil and hydroelectricity, in indigenous lands. Last week, in response to the release of the austerity package, indigenous people apprehended and detained around 50 police and military personnel trying to enter communities in the Andean provinces of Chimborazo and Imbabura. To date, many of those held have not been released. In a statement on 3rd October, Conaie declared: “Military and police who approach indigenous territories will be detained and subjected to indigenous justice.’

Meanwhile, also on 3rd October, protestors burned down a mining camp at Río Blanco in the province of Azuay. Río Blanco, owned by Chinese company Ecuagoldmining, has been for several years a social and political flashpoint. Sustained community resistance against the gold mine resulted in a legal case which in June 2018 forced the project to shut down. However, as part of his swathe of new enforcements following the signing of the IMF deal, President Moreno promised to do whatever it took to re-open Río Blanco.

In recent months there have been a number of other declarations released by communities denouncing moves to mine their land. They say they were not consulted about plans to mine. An assembly in the province of Intag on August 20th was attended by 1500 people, who released a statement giving mining companies, including BHP (five concessions in the area) and Gina Rinehart’s Hanrine, two months to withdraw from their communities.

On August 23rd, the Shuar Arutam Indigenous People’s government declared itself free of mining, demanding the exit of mining companies which include Australian companies SolGold, Andrew Forrest’s Fortescue Metals Group, Newcrest (who part-owns the flagship gold mining project Fruta del Norte) and BHP. More than 50% of Shuar territory is covered with mining concessions, and nearly 100% is concessioned to oil companies. At this moment, Shuar Arutam demonstrators are being harshly treated by the military, being gassed, shot at and beaten.

“Australian companies are naively pushing ahead with mining in communities that do not want them to operate on their land, in an environment that is increasingly fraught, and at a time when global concerns about climate change require deeper scrutiny of any new mines – particularly in such vital forests as the Amazon. Any mining in Ecuador can only go ahead with increasing force against the populace – making Australian companies directly responsible for any fatalities that result.” Ms Hayden concluded.

As this is being written, Ecuador is in lockdown due to a nationwide strike and escalating unrest. Citing security fears, the government has temporarily moved from the capital, Quito, to Guayaquil.

Contacts and full media release here.

Environmental concerns at Cascabel

ENSA CEO Jason Ward. Image credit- El Norte

The Cascabel concession is part of the Mira River basin, and is surrounded by mature primary and secondary forests that house endangered species, and protect pristine microbasins. Our primary concerns with mining in Cascabel hinge on the ecosystem impacts of the mine itself and related infrastructure, as well as the toxic waste generated by mining activities.

SolGold itself says says that it will extract 2.4 billion tonnes of ore from the mine. Based on that figure, MRAG estimates the tailings generated by this mine would amount to at least 1km3 (1,000,000,000 m3). To put these figures in perspective, the capacity of Laguna Quilotoa is 0.35km3, making a conservative estimate of tailings produced enough to fill Laguna Quilotoa three times over.

This is a phenomenal amount of toxic waste to dispose of that no amount of “green talk” by Mr Ward can hide away.

Copper spill. Image credit: The Conversation

Tailings vary but may contain or produce cyanide, radiation, alkalinity (high pH) or acidity (low pH), arsenic, high salinity in pore water (pore water is in the spaces between particles of sand, rock or tailings). They can also produce sulphides which creates acid that dissolves any heavy metals in the tailings, like mercury, lead or arsenic into a liquid can be washed away into rivers or streams. Toxic gases may be released due to chemicals within the tailings. Some tailings remain highly contaminated for at least 1000 years. Some facilities may need a longer time to be considered safe.

In their preliminary reports, SolGold states that decisions regarding the management of tailings are still in preparation. Can Jason Ward guarantee that the mined rocks do not contain pyrites or monosulphides, and can he guarantee that SolGold/ENSA will maintain tailings dams in the Cascabel concession for hundreds of years to ensure the toxicity of this waste is safely contained?

Given that the mine is in an area of high rainfall and earthquake risk, can Mr Ward guarantee that the structure of tailings dams built on the Cascabel concession will be sound and will not be vulnerable to earthquakes, overflow from heavy rain or increased waste volumes, as occurred with the Vale/BHP disaster in Bento Rodrigues in November 2015, or that of Brumadihno, where 300 Brazilians died when the tailings pool collapsed in January 2019? We understand that SolGold has a limited experience in the construction of mines - to date it has not built a single mine.  The approval of a record-height tailings dam at Mirador leaves us highly concerned that similar foolhardy constructions will be approved at Cascabel.

Bridge over Rio Mira. Image credit- Andreas Kay

Given the entire Cascabel concession is part of the catchment for the Mira River which then runs through Colombia, contaminants that put this river system at risk could cause an international incident. Additionally, it is probable that contaminants would affect the thousands of users who live downstream of the mine, including municipalities that depend on the river to provide drinking water to their  citizens, farmers, ranchers, aquaculturists, among others. Will all downstream communities and users who rely on the Mira River be consulted and compensated in the event of a disaster?

If tailings dams are not built, the other recourse for waste disposal is to dump mine waste into waterways. This is the case at the Ok Tedi mine in Papua New Guinea where 80 million tons of contaminated tailings and materials from mine-related erosion are dumped each year into the Ok Tedi river system after the tailings dam collapsed in 1984. Established by Australian mining company BHP Billiton, the terrain of the Ok Tedi mine is similar to that of Cascabel.

The river is now effectively unable to sustain life, affecting the lives of 50,000 people who relied on the river for fishing and drinking water. They have experienced numerous health issues, including high rates of cancer and birth defects. More than 1,588 square kilometres of forest died as a result of the disaster. Given Solgold's limited experience with mining in places with such high rainfall, can Mr. Ward ensure that this will not happen in Cascabel?

Can the Ecuadorian state even guarantee that it will have the economic resources and human capital – and political will – to regulate and control the mining of this magnitude, in view of the numerous and proven irregularities reported by the Comptroller General of the State in this same project, as in the case of the Llurimagua mining project?

Our organisation is concerned that Alpala – ENSA/SolGold’s main area of interest – will not be the only mine constructed in the Cascabel concession. From SolGold’s reports, we are given to understand that there are several other ore bodies that ENSA/SolGold are exploring within the concession. Is Mr Ward able to disclose if this is the case, and if these ore bodies will be block cave mined individually, or absorbed into one large supermine several kilometres in size?

SolGold touts block cave mining as a more environmentally friendly option. However, it could be argued that block caving is virtually no different from an open cut mine as the mine falls in on itself after resources are extracted. Block sinking mines are also notoriously complex to build.

As Australians, we can see the incredible beauty of Ecuador’s natural resources, and we feel ashamed that Australian mining companies are exploiting local people’s needs for jobs, health and education, in an exchange that will leave Ecuadorians dealing with the environmental consequences of mining for hundreds of years to come.

El Norte published our concerns in an article here.

Legal problems cast doubt on BHP’s future in Ecuador

A series of legal cases based on constitutional law have created doubts over BHP's operations in Ecuador. These court cases highlight the risks for international mining companies who fail to familiarise themselves with their legal obligations under Ecuador's constitution.

Jose DeCoux, administrator of Los Cedros. Image credit: La Hora

Martin Daley, Rainforest Action Group (Melbourne) stated, “It is the fifth time in just over one year that judges in Ecuador have ruled against extractive industry in protected areas based on lack of community consultation.”

A legal case¹ launched to protect the Los Cedros Reserve in the Intag region of Cotacachi province succeeded in stop work order against Ecuadorean state mining company work on the Rio Magdalena mining project BHP owns and has been exploring concessions (Sabaleta 1, 2 & 3) adjacent to the Rio Magdalena project, and the corner of BHP concession Sabaleta 3 also partially overlaps the Los Cedros Reserve. Read more about the Los Cedros win here.

Last week's court judgement withdrawing registration of concessions was based on Enami's failure to adequately consult with local communities prior to commencement of the project as is required by the Ecuadorean constitution.”

"All of BHP's concessions can be contested if BHP fails to obtain the free, prior and informed consent from local communities," continued Mr Daley.

Ecuador's Ministry of Environment and Water was ordered by the court to publish an apology³ to communities affected by the mining activities which stated, "Therefore, (the Ministry) offers public apologies for said violation and recognises its duty to respect and protect the rights of the environment and nature."

In 2017, one of the plaintiffs from the recent case, the former mayor of Santa Ana de Cotacachi, Jomar Cevallos Moreno, wrote to BHP CEO Andrew Mackenzie requesting that BHP withdraw its concessions in the region”, said Mr Daley.4

BHP may find themselves involved in a similar case if they attempt to build a mine in the area.”

For further media information email us at media@rainforestactiongroup.org or refer to press release to talk to a Rainforest Group representative.

1.[Spanish] ‘Bosque Protector Los Cedros le gana la batalla a la minería’, La Hora, 20 June 2019, https://www.lahora.com.ec/imbabura/noticia/1102252117/bosque-protector-los-cedros-le-gana-la-batalla-a-la-mineria-

2. The same team who won the Los Cedros case have just announced they will now be launching a similar case on the Llurimagua project at Junin which is another Enami project leas than 10 km from Los Cedros.

3. [Spanish] ‘En Junín tomarán nuevas acciones para evitar la minería’, La Hora, 27 June 2019, https://www.lahora.com.ec/imbabura/noticia/1102253731/en-junin-tomaran-nuevas-acciones-para-evitar-la-mineria-

Download media release here. Download letter to BHP from the Mayor of Cotacachi here here.

4. See letter from Jomar Cevallos Moreno to BHP CEO Andrew Mackenzie attached with this media release - in the Los Cedros case, Mr Moreno worked alongside an international team of biological scientists and Ecuadorean constitutional law specialists to ensure this globally significant region for biological diversity was not impacted by mining activities.

 

Los Cedros court win

COURT WIN FOR LOS CEDROS BIOLOGICAL RESERVE

On June 19th, judges in the Imbabura province ruled in favour to protect Los Cedros, the iconic cloud forest reserve in Ecuador's Western Andes, which is under concession for copper and gold mining to Canadian company Cornerstone and Australian BHP.

The judges in the provincial court of Imbabura ruled that there had been a violation of mining-impacted communities' right to be consulted, and revoked the previous sentence of November 2018 in which the Action of Protection was discarded. They also forced the Ministry of Environment and Water to publicise the ruling and formally apologise to the impacted communities.

Most importantly, the environmental license for ENAMI/Cornerstone and BHP to conduct explorations has been revoked, which means they can no longer legally trespass on the area.

This win throws into disarray the future of mining companies in this highly biodiverse water-source part of Ecuador. It is the fifth time in just over one year that judges in Ecuador have ruled against extractive industries in protected areas based on the lack of community consultation.

Brown-headed Spider Monkey. Photo: David Ni Castro

Los Cedros was established in 1988 as a biological and scientific reserve with the help of the Rainforest Information Centre. It consists of 17,000 acres of incredibly rare, premontane wet tropical forest and cloud forest, and numerous critically endangered and vulnerable species, including puma, jaguar and the rare Brown-Headed Spider Monkey.

The judges travelled to Los Cedros in April to see the reserve for themselves, and to interview locals about the operations of the mining companies in the area.

The ruling has helped to set a precedent for protection of Protected Forests at a national level. The requirement that immediate reparation is made makes the ruling historical as well.

The Ministries of Environment and Water must also offer public apologies to the communities affected, with apologies to be published in a national newspaper as well as on the front page of its website, for a period of three months.

Jose DeCoux, administrator of Los Cedros. Image credit: La Hora

José DeCoux, administrator of Los Cedros, celebrated the decision, saying "We are glad that the Court has taken into account our complaint, which spoke of the lack of a consultative process... It is not the first time that we have faced a mining company here in the reserve, and we have left with conservation leading. It is a historical failure [for the mining companies]."

José believes those in governance need to obey the rule of the Constitution. "They must learn that the correct steps must be followed before they issue a mining concession. They must seek approval from the people who will be affected by such a concession."

He says that a recent ruling in Quito, by the Constitutional Court, that denied the request for consultation in the sector of Cascabel, in Imbabura, Carchi, was for procedural reasons.

"The popular consultation request was badly prepared. We think that we can develop a good one, with lawyers that are experts in constitutional law," José says.

However, the battle is far from over. The court’s ruling on mining in Los Cedros was primarily on the grounds that communities in the region were not properly consulted about the environmental license given to the National Mining Company for initial explorations.

Other defenses, which included references to Constitutional Law around the rights of Pachamama, human rights to clean water, and the forbidding of metals mining in protected forests, were not included in the final ruling. This means the other 41 mega-diverse protected forests covered by mining concessions are still at risk.

Ecuador, meanwhile, is pushing brazenly ahead with its plans to become a ‘mining country’. Last month, a Presidential Decree was introduced changing the national mining laws to dramatically weaken legal requirements for prior and informed consultation. While Ecuador’s constitution remains a safe harbour for activists, with its strong focus on human and nature rights, the real battles from now on are going to be at the level of local and regional courts, where proceedings are routinely corrupted by pro-mining interests.

On this basis, the Rainforest Action Group’s focus is currently on establishing a Legal Fund to help those on the frontline get hearings at the constitutional level, and to obtain expert representation in court. Other donations will go to resource production and distribution, and community mobilisations and actions both in Australia and Ecuador.

Click here to donate to the Ecuador Endangered Crowdfund. For tax deductibility, donate here.