Re-envisioning Riverscapes and Urban Riverfronts in India: Toward Ecological and Social Harmony

By Namrata Kabra & Sanya Saroha

Namrata Kabra is a legal researcher with expertise in environment, biodiversity, and climate laws. She is a Program Associate, Water & Climate Security at Kubernein Initiative and Research Coordinator of the South Asia Bioregionalism Working Group.

Sanya Saroha is a policy researcher with expertise in foreign policy, urban water governance, and climate change. She is a Research Analyst, Water and Climate Security at Kubernein Initiative.  

Introduction

As India undergoes rapid urbanization and experiences a surge in urban population, the issue of urban water security, intertwined with impacts of climate change, looms larger than ever. Amidst these pressing needs, a concerning trend to “develop” and “beautify” riverfronts in urban areas has emerged.

This trend is perhaps best exemplified by the much-heralded Sabarmati Riverfront Development Project, which is located in Ahmedabad in the State of Gujarat, western India, and claimed to provide a meaningful waterfront environment to reconnect the city with river.[1] This is a highly arguable model that has not only exacerbated drought-like conditions in the Sabarmati River but also led to inadequate groundwater recharge. These cost-intensive riverfront development (RFD) projects involve alteration of the natural course and ecosystem of rivers and raise questions about the misallocation of public investments. These projects are ecological and social disasters, as indicated by a multitude of protests, legal proceedings, and poor results from preliminary studies assessing their effectiveness. For over a decade, experts in river ecology have been warning against prioritizing cosmetic beautification of rivers over their genuine restoration and revitalization.[2] Himanshu Thakkar, an environmental activist working on water related issues with South Asia Networks on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), highlights the importance of considering a river’s “character, purpose, and cultural value,” stating that neglecting these factors could result in more problems than solutions.[3]

The misallocation of public funds for such projects neglects alternative approaches such as Rights of Nature governance for river restoration and rejuvenation initiatives, which would better serve environmental conservation and community interests. The Rights of Nature approach is increasingly recognized as a vital alternative to anthropocentric models. This shift paves the way for justice and environmental resilience, viewed through an ecocentric perspective. It not only acknowledges the obligations owed to people affected by the deterioration of river ecosystems but also lays the groundwork for climate resilience and adaptation, ensuring a more promising future for humanity and the planet. For example, the right to healthy drinking water, a human right, is dependent on rivers’ inherent rights to fulfil their ecological functions and flow freely in their floodplains. Disturbing river ecologies disrupts the natural balance and also exacerbates climate risks, heightening the threat of disasters and endangering species, both human and non-human. Governance and policies need to prioritize inclusive and sustainable practices to maintain the delicate balance of river ecosystems, ensuring the well-being of both the environment and the communities that depend on rivers.

Ecological and Social Fault Lines of Riverfront Development Projects

Riverfront development is perceived as an avenue to reconnect urban residents with rivers[4] and claims[5] to be addressing environmental improvement;[6] mitigating floods; cleaning, retaining, and replenishing rivers; creating a continuous public realm; strengthening surrounding public amenities and projects; supporting social upliftment; and effecting sustainable development and beautification of the area. However, these claimed goals come at the expense of disrupting the natural flow of the river. Such disruptions elevate flood risks by interfering with floodplains, heighten vulnerability to climate-related hazards, and jeopardize aquatic biodiversity and the well-being of local communities that subsist on these rivers. Rather than creating a direct connection between people and rivers, such RFD projects can lead to further distortion of and alienation from rivers.

The livelihoods and shelters of millions of people are being displaced, and river streams are being diverted, causing huge impacts to ecology, hydrology, and native biodiversity. For instance, the Sabarmati RFD project led to the relocation of around 5000 families.[7] Likewise, the transformation of the Gomti River in Lucknow in the State of Uttar Pradesh, Northern India, following riverfront development has resulted in a notable decline in fish species, with significant repercussions for the livelihoods of fisherfolk. In 2013-14, the river was known to support approximately eight distinct fish species; it now harbours only one species.[8]

The indiscriminate copy/pasting of the Sabarmati RFD model across 100+ cities in India, devoid of genuine stakeholder engagement, is encountering widespread resistance across the country, as evidenced in cities such as Pune, Kota, Ahmedabad, Delhi, and more. These resistances have culminated in legal battles at the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and various State/Federal High Courts, indicating serious discontent and opposition to such dangerous projects. The NGT has taken suo motu cognizance[9] in challenging environmental violations in the Netravati RFD in coastal city of Mangaluru in the State of Karnataka, Southern India, and the Joint Committee constituted by NGT against the Chambal RFD in Kota, in the State of Rajasthan, North-Western India has found violations of green norms.[10]

Initial findings from the compilation of ten RFD projects paint a concerning picture of widespread destruction affecting livelihoods, biodiversity, rivers, and public finances.[11] Consider the following list of RFDs in different Indian cities and the projects’ associated social, ecological, and economic challenges:

Source: Authors’ Analysis, referenced citations from 12 to 27.

Inappropriate Importation of European Riverfront Development Project Models

Many of India’s contemporary urban RFD projects are inspired by the designs of European models such as the Thames and Seine River fronts. Such imported models, however, fail to recognize the unique paths carved by Indian rivers. Rivers in South Asia, often originating from mountains, carry a lot of silt and sedimentation. The meandering of such rivers not only adds to the beauty of the landscape but also renders many ecological and social services and slows down the flow of the gushing rivers. The sediments deposit in the plains, creating the riverbanks that sustain millions of lives and livelihoods. Through the sedimentation process, rivers store and recharge the groundwater along their paths and thereby feed the lifeline of India.

By 2025, it is anticipated that one out of every two Indians will live in cities.[28] Concrete and grey infrastructure such as is incorporated in the RFD models contradict efforts to revitalise rivers and mitigate urban flooding effectively. Rejuvenation of rivers is necessary, and restoration of public spaces around rivers is needed beyond aesthetics. River fronts in cities must be open public spaces that allow for social-cultural-spiritual engagement and connection with rivers. “What” kind of river fronts are designed, and “who” designs them for the benefit of “whom,” is key to ensuring the public places are enjoyed by everyone. The current trend of RFD is catering to only particular aesthetics and sects of the society. The booming real estate market (riverview apartments) and tourism activities along the riverfront means that low-income residents, particularly those displaced by the project, no longer have equitable access to the river.[29] Digvijay Singh, CEO of Indore Smart City, touts the Kahn River project’s success, citing a 40% rise in property prices while disregarding access to housing for the marginalized.[30] The social and ecological fault lines of such RFDs lead to exclusive access, further marginalizing those whose livelihoods depend on the rivers.

Embracing Rights of Rivers and Ecological Flow of Rivers

​​Rights of Nature is emerging as a governance approach for protecting our ecosystems and their inhabitants. It essentially recognizes Nature—in this case, rivers—as legal entities with intrinsic rights, akin to human rights, to protect them from environmental degradation and exploitation. This approach seeks to shift the legal paradigm from viewing rivers solely as resources for human use to recognizing them as living entities with their own rights.[31] Around the world, the movement for granting rights to rivers is growing and is believed to lead to more responsible environmental stewardship and a more holistic approach to conservation and development.[32]

The legal Rights of Nature movement in India[33] stemmed from judicial decisions from several State High Courts.[34] These began with a landmark judgment from March 2017 (In Mohd. Salim vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors., Writ Petition (PIL) No. 126/2014) by the Uttarakhand State High Court, granting legal recognition to entities such as the Yamuna and Ganga Rivers.[35] This recognition was soon extended to their tributaries and glaciers by another order from the Uttarakhand High Court (In Lalit Miglani vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors., Writ Petition (PIL) No. 140/2015).[36] However, the Uttarakhand High Court orders were quickly stayed by the Supreme Court (In State of Uttarakhand vs. Mohd Salim & Ors., SLP (Civil) 16879/2017), in April 2017.[37] The Uttarakhand Government had argued for reversal of the order for reasons including the impractical imposition of duties on the rivers and concerns about transboundary jurisdictional issues. While this matter is yet pending before the Supreme Court, other judgments granting legal rights to nature have been passed by various other High Courts of India. For example, cases related to the following subjects:

• Animal Kingdom (In Narayan Dutt Bhatt vs. Union of India & Ors)[38]

• Sukhna Lake (In Court on its Own Motion vs. Chandigarh Administration)[39]

• Mother Nature (In Periyakaruppan vs. Principal Secretary to Government & Ors., WP (MD) 18836/2018)[40]

Historically, India has always and continues to revere nature through customs and traditions, although many of these practices have now become symbolic. Court rulings such as that from Uttarakhand may not offer immediate solutions to prevent the exploitation of natural resources, but they hold the potential to shift legislative paradigms towards prioritizing environmental protection over developmental projects. For example, local and Indigenous communities preserving ecosystems via practices such as protecting Sacred Groves are safeguarded by laws like the Forest Rights Act (FRA), enacted in 2006 in India. The FRA empowers tribal (Indigenous communities known as Adivasis) and other forest-dwelling communities to assert legal ownership over ancestral forest lands.[41] It rectifies historical injustices by granting them rights previously denied, including management authority and access to forest resources.

The rights of rivers primarily include the right to flow freely without pollution and the right to flood its floodplains. Therefore, implementing urban floodplain zoning and preventing encroachments in buffer zones are crucial steps to enable rivers to swell and shrink through changing seasons. A case in point is the August 2023 heavy rainfall and floods in New Delhi in the Yamuna floodplains.[42] No plan or action has been put in place to address these issues with an understanding of “pattern of rainfall and pattern of land use,” making this a recurring phenomenon.[43] Concurrently, the Yamuna RFD plan is underway for a 22 km stretch of the floodplains with the goal to enhance the area’s beauty, rejuvenate the floodplains, and provide better public access.[44] An increase in grey infrastructure over and around rivers has created a huge disturbance with the flow of the Yamuna river. There are currently 14 bridges on the riverbed for roads, railways, and metro, and two more in the planning stage.[45] The recent flooding, during which the Yamuna reclaimed its centuries old original course, serves as a significant lesson highlighting the importance of understanding floodplain dynamics and the potential hazards linked to altering the natural flow of rivers through concretized encroachments.

Over the years, with an increasing number of dams for hydropower generation and rising impacts of climate change, Indian rivers, especially in urban areas, are facing the dichotomy of water scarcity and flash flooding. The solution to both problems lie in ensuring that the ecological flow of rivers (linear, horizontal, and vertical) across all the seasons is maintained. It has been recognised and legally mandated by the National Green Tribunal in OA 498 of 2015, “all States to maintain a minimum environmental flow of 15-20% of the average lean season flow in their rivers.” While the minimum of 15-20% can be challenged itself, the recognition of maintaining ecological flow of the river is a welcome decision. In their Action Plans for rejuvenating polluted rivers, the River Rejuvenation Committees have mandated maintaining ecological/environmental flows.[46]

Advocating Action for Harmonious Coexistence with Rivers

Rivers are beautiful, life-giving, productive, self-restoring natural ecosystems on which our survival, and that of all lifeforms, depends. Rivers have inherent ecological functions, such as to feed and be fed by their aquifers and to provide home to aquatic natural biodiversity. As city dwellers in rapidly urbanizing India, we must stand up in action for rivers against maladaptation practices, such as cosmetic encroachment upon rivers and their hydrology, that threaten water security, cultural significance and reverence, climate resilience, and equal access to rivers. The loss and damage caused by urban flooding is a result of throttling the rivers by narrowing their channels for concretized development and recreation.

To truly restore rivers and enjoy their beauty, we need to create and sustain democratic participatory processes that include mapping hydrology and stakeholders (including non-human) of the rivers. Thereafter, we need to successfully implement Rights of Nature by recognizing rivers’ right to exist and regenerate, as seen in the Ecuadorian Constitution, and the protection of the rights of local communities and Indigenous Peoples (Tribals/Adivasis in India) who have historically safeguarded nature.[47] It is compelling that we prioritize bioregional governance and strategies for addressing the looming climate and biodiversity crises. By embracing the solutions offered by nature, we can pave the way for restoration and regeneration and secure our future.

At the policy level, the River Cities Alliance in India serves as a platform facilitating the exchange of best practices and lessons among river cities.[48] Drawing insights from the challenges encountered in RFDs, particularly concerning social and ecological concerns, offers valuable learning opportunities for other river cities to avert similar pitfalls. As the leader of the Global River City Alliance, India has the opportunity to demonstrate its leadership through action and ideology by setting a precedent for advocating a river-centric perspective and endorsing the rights of rivers as fundamental principles for the 275+ global cities within this alliance.[49]

Citations

[1] https://sabarmatiriverfront.com/

[2]https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/from-kashmir-to-kota-indias-riverfronts-are-undergoing-a-makeover/articleshow/107784236.cms

[3] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/from-kashmir-to-kota-indias-riverfronts-are-undergoing-a-makeover/articleshow/107784236.cms

[4]https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/indias-cities-are-transforming-their-waterfronts-101706464299346.html

[5] http://www.tapiriverfront.com/

[6] https://sabarmatiriverfront.com/

[7] https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/water/the-dark-side-of-sabarmati-river-development-63728

[8] https://india.mongabay.com/2019/02/after-pollution-riverfront-development-chokes-lucknows-gomti/

[9] https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/water/netravati-riverfront-project-ngt-takes-cognisance-of-crz-environmental-norm-violation-allegations-seeks-report-95189

[10] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/chambal-riverfront-project-violated-green-norms-panel/articleshow/107738395.cms

[11] https://sandrp.in/2022/06/21/river-front-development-projects-damaging-rivers-wasting-public-money/

[12]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/107706945.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

[13] https://ballotboxindia.com/ap/Riverfront-projects-in-India/5182095549/

[14]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/107738395.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

[15] https://sandrp.in/2022/06/21/river-front-development-projects-damaging-rivers-wasting-public-money/

[16]https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/governance/ganga-riverfront-construction-work-stopped-in-bihar-s-bhagalpur-for-violating-wildlife-sanctuary-act-82623

[17]https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/rs-1600cr-later-dravyavati-riverfront-is-squatters-hub/articleshow/88131513.cms

[18]​​https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/140921/government-shelves-musi-riverfront-development-project.html

[19]https://india.mongabay.com/2022/05/punes-proposed-river-rejuvenation-project-does-not-consider-ecology-hydrogeology-and-climate-change-say-experts/

[20] https://www.counterview.net/2021/04/chhattisgarhs-apra-riverfront-imitates.html

[21]https://india.mongabay.com/2023/07/environmentalists-raise-concerns-as-work-on-jks-tawi-riverfront-continues/

[22]https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/gomti-riverfront-development-scam-cbi-raids-40-locations-in-up-101625461000696.html

[23] https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/water/the-demise-of-rivers-59881

[24]https://prcindia.in/publications/reports/yamuna-riverfront-development-project-a-culmination-of-the-struggle-between-planned-and-unplanned/

[25] https://www.counterview.net/2021/07/citizens-object-to-utterly-destructive.html

[26]https://prcindia.in/publications/reports/emerging-fronts-and-dwindling-ganga-a-preliminary-report-on-patna-riverfront/

[27] https://sandrp.in/tag/riverfront/

[28]https://www.orfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/ORF_OccasionalPaper_317_BlueGreenInfrastructure.pdf

[29] https://urbanvoices.in/riverfront-projects-are-new-tools-for-urban-revitalization-globally/

[30] https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/indias-cities-are-transforming-their-waterfronts-101706464299346.html

[31] https://www.globalassembly.de/en/rights-of-nature/case-studies/rights-of-rivers-india

[32] https://www.earthlawcenter.org/river-rights

[33] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvPf2IR8cQs

[34] https://india.mongabay.com/2020/06/commentary-righting-the-wrong-rights-of-rivers-in-india/

[35] https://www.ielrc.org/content/e1704.pdf

[36] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/92201770/

[37] https://webapi.sci.gov.in/jonew/courtnic/rop/2017/10359/rop_917276.pdf

[38] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/157891019/

[39] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/87436538/

[40] https://ecojurisprudence.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Madras-High-Court-Ruling-Rights-of-Nature.pdf

[41] https://tribal.nic.in/FRA.aspx

[42]https://frontline.thehindu.com/environment/how-extensive-urban-development-in-yamuna-plains-increases-risk-of-floods-in-delhi/article67142123.ece

[43]https://scroll.in/article/1053060/delhi-floods-political-spat-over-provincial-water-management-covers-up-for-municipal-inadequacies

[44]https://prcindia.in/publications/reports/yamuna-riverfront-development-project-a-culmination-of-the-struggle-between-planned-and-unplanned/

[45]https://www.urbanprecis.com/bridges-over-yamuna-in-delhi/#:~:text=Map%20depicting%20location%20of%20bridges,in%20planning%20and%20construction%20stages.&text=New%20Yamuna%20Bridge%20as%20a%20replacement%20for%20Old%20Yamuna%20Bridge's%20railway%20traffic.

[46] https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1782294

[47] https://www.thethirdpole.net/en/climate/opinion-time-to-recognise-and-respect-rivers-legal-rights/

[48] https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1795103

[49] https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1985500

Peru's Marañón River Wins Recognition of Rights and Indigenous Guardianship in Court

Earth Law Center (ELC) celebrates an important victory obtained for the Marañón River on March 18, 2024. The Kukama Indigenous women of Santa Rita de Castilla, and legal nonprofit Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL), obtained a historic ruling recognizing the river as a holder of inherent rights—the first such ruling in Peru. With ELC’s Latin America Legal Program having supported the case since its inception, we are thrilled to see this development.

In a decision that will reverberate for years through Peru and the international environmental community, the judge representing the Mixed Court of Nauta ruled in favor of the Federation Huaynakana Kamatahuara Kana (HKK), an association of the Kukama people based in the heart of the Peruvian Amazon, who have defended the river from oil spills for more than a decade.

In the application for protection in the case, the Kukama women, through the president of their federation, Mrs. Mariluz Canaquiri, requested the court to recognize the Marañón River as a subject of rights and for its intrinsic value. In the worldview of the Kukama people, the river is a living being that is home to different forms of life, as well as the Kukama ancestors.

The Kukama women also requested that a basin council be established so as to bring Indigenous communities into the decision-making process in relation to the conservation and protection of the river. The members of HKK have now been appointed guardians of the river, and the oil company Petroperú has been ordered to update its environmental management plan and to better maintain the oil pipeline that for years has contaminated the flow of the Marañón River.

The defense of the case has been carried out since 2020 by lawyers Juan Carlos Ruiz and Maritza Quispe from IDL, which advises and supports the legal defense of Indigenous peoples and communities in Peru. The request for protection that IDL drafted was key to giving a voice to the Kukama women so that they could participate in the legal process to protect the river that they consider to be sacred.

Constanza Prieto-Figelist and Javier Ruiz of the ELC Latin American Legal Program have been involved with the river defenders in several ways, including running a capacity development workshop in November 2023 in the Kukama territory of the Amazon. The workshop’s aim was awareness and skill-building regarding the exercise of rights of access to information, participation, and justice in environmental matters—all of which are aspects of the implementation of the Escazú Agreement, a regional environmental treaty involving several dozen nations in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Prieto-Figelist and Ruiz have supported the case itself since its formulation and, together with Monti Aguirre of International Rivers (IR), led one of the three amicus curiae briefs that were presented at the November 2023 hearing of the trial. Other organizations, including the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature; the Justice and Corporate Responsibility Project; the Center for Environmental Law, based at the University of Victoria, Canada; and the University of Essex, United Kingdom, joined the specialized briefs.

Javier Ruiz, ELC’s environmental policy and climate change specialist, was present at the hearing in Nauta on November 9, 2023 to explain the importance of recognizing the rights of the Marañón River. He also emphasized the urgency of applying the precautionary principle in environmental matters—the idea that judges should rule against practices or developments whose impact on the environment presents uncertain but plausible risks—to help guide a decision in favor of the river and the Kukama women.

The amicus curiae presented by ELC and IR clearly had a positive influence on the case. The judge applied the precautionary principle in the face of serious threats to the Marañón River, such as continued oil spills from and lack of maintenance of the Petroperú company’s oil pipelines. She also made use of the consultative and jurisprudential criteria of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to establish a legal link between the right to a healthy environment and the rights that were recognized for the Marañón. Furthermore, she made reference to the applicability of the international standard of human rights of Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization’s Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention. 

Highlights of the Ruling

In the resolutions of the sentence, the judge declared the Marañón River and its tributaries as the holder of the following inherent rights:

• The right to flow;

• The right to exist in and support a healthy ecosystem;

• The right to flow free from all contamination;

• The right to feed and be fed by its tributaries;

• The right to biodiversity;

• The right to be restored;

• The right to the regeneration of its natural cycles;

• The right to the conservation of its ecological structure and functions; and

• The right to protection, preservation, and recovery.

She ordered the Peruvian State to recognize and protect the aforementioned rights, and further ordered that the Regional Government of Loreto (GOREL) carry out the pertinent procedures before the National Water Authority for the creation of a water resources basin council for the river and its tributaries, urging the authorities to include the participation of Indigenous communities.

She named the Indigenous communities and the Peruvian State through its authorities as guardians, defenders, and representatives of the Marañón River and its tributaries. 
The judge also ordered the Petroperu company to prepare and present an updated Environmental Management Instrument within a period of six months, stipulating that said instrument include a comprehensive evaluation of the impacts that the company is making upon the river in carrying out transportation and hydrocarbon activities. She likewise ordered the company to assume commitments regarding environmental and human rights, including consultation with Indigenous peoples about updating its environmental instruments.

Elements of Indigenous worldview and human environmental rights in the ruling

There are two points that we must take into account to understand why rights were recognized for the Marañón River, when so many other such cases have not succeeded.

The first point is that the plaintiffs are Indigenous women, which meant not only the inclusion of an Indigenous worldview in the court case but also the pertinence of a body of legal work related to Indigenous human and environmental rights. Currently, the Kukama territory is made up of the lands located on the Huallaga, Marañón, and Nucuray-Pavayacu Rivers within the Alto Amazonas Province in Loreto, Peru, and there is a second, eastern block located in the Pacaya and Samiria Rivers around the National Reserve of that name and in the Puinahua channel in the lower Ucayali. The Kukama culture and worldview has an aquatic orientation, in which the Marañón River is a living being and is conceived as an entity that harbors life. The first ancestor of the Kukama lineage is said to have been born from the river, and the Marañón is the vertebral column that articulates their culture and identifies them with the territory adjacent to the river.

There is an extensive body of work related to human rights of Indigenous peoples applicable to the Latin American region. The international system recognizes the rights to culture and territory of peoples, such as ILO Convention 169, and the United Nations Declaration and American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Likewise, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on repeated occasions has issued binding jurisprudence regarding the effects on the environment, culture, water, and territories of Indigenous communities. This new ruling on the rights of the Marañón thus has a solid basis in the standards of cultural and territorial rights of Indigenous peoples and sets a new precedent for future cases.

The second point is that the judge in the case relates constitutional human rights already recognized in the Peruvian Constitution to the Rights of Nature. The main starting point is the criterion set by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its Advisory Opinion 23/17, which holds that the right to a healthy environment must protect the elements of Nature for their intrinsic value and that it is possible to recognize Nature’s rights.

In addition to developing the constitutional content of the right to a healthy environment based on the standard set by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the judge set the ecological scope of her ruling in relation to the Constitution of Peru. The Constitutional Court of Peru issued a ruling in case 322/2023, stating that biocentric and ecocentric approaches to the protection of Nature have constitutional validity. Taking this argument into account, as well as the language regarding intrinsic value of Nature adopted in the new Kunming-Montreal Framework’s Convention on Biological Diversity, the judge recognized the rights of the Marañón River.

This ruling is a critical first step toward vindicating the rights of the Kukama people, marking positive progress in the fight undertaken by Indigenous women in Peru and beyond. “In our worldview, rivers are sacred, but with oil pollution we saw how they were damaged by heavy metals and the population became sick,” said Mariluz Canaquiri. “That is why we ask that their rights be respected.”

For IDL lawyer Juan Carlos Ruiz, the sentence is very important: "Because by recognizing rivers as living entities with rights, the actions of the State are constrained. That is to say, it will make any State action that puts rivers in danger subject to nullification."

“We are very happy to receive the ruling, it is the first in Peru to recognize an element of nature with its own rights,” said ELC’s Javier Ruiz. “It is a ruling that provides justice for the Kukama women and their people, recognizes them as guardians and defenders of the river, in addition to ordering that they be consulted in accordance with the standards of ILO Convention 169.”

ELC will maintain its commitment to supporting the legal defense of the Marañón River and its Indigenous women defenders. The ruling from the court is a first-instance resolution that can still be appealed by the Peruvian authorities and that will require extensive legal work and support from all allies in the case.

Consult the ruling [Spanish]

For further reading on this case:

1. Historic ruling recognizes the Marañon River as a subject of Rights

2. Landmark ruling: The Peruvian Court of Nauta recognizes the rights of the Marañón River and the Indigenous communities as its guardians

3. Historical event in the Amazon: Kukama women get Peru to recognize the rights of a river 

4. Loreto: judicial ruling declared the Marañon River as a subject of rights

5. Historic ruling: The Peruvian Court recognizes the rights of the Marañon River 

6. Historical judgment: Peruvian Court recognizes rights over the Marañon River 

7. After Years of Indigenous-Led Campaigning, Court Grants Rights to Peru's Marañón River

8. Historic ruling: Loreto Court recognizes the Marañon River as a subject of rights 

9. Historic ruling: Peruvian Court recognizes rights over the Marañon River 

10. Historic ruling recognizes the Marañon River as a subject of rights 

11. Landmark Peruvian Court Ruling Says the Marañón River Has Legal Rights To Exist, Flow and Be Free From Pollution

12. Rights of Nature granted to one of the River Amazon’s main sources

Coalition Spotlight: Ríos Protegidos

Earth Law Center (ELC) is proud to announce joining the Ríos Protegidos initiative, which seeks to strengthen the protection of Chile’s rivers by applying existing tools, recognizing gaps and opportunities in river conservation and restoration, and promoting new legislation on protected and restored rivers.

On February 22, 2024, ELC’s Latin America Legal Program participated in a workshop to promote the conservation and permanent restoration of rivers in the Aysén region—a huge, sparsely populated area in southern Chile that is home to volcanoes, massive ice fields, and other natural wonders.

Coyhaique, Chile. Photo credit: Palicp. Public domain.

The Ríos Protegidos workshop, held in the regional capital of Coyhaique, took place with the support of Patagonia Chile. More than 50 people, including scientists, researchers, teachers, artisanal fishermen, and athletes, took part. An intersectoral panel, including Gabriel Benoit, an expert fly fishing athlete and ambassador of Patagonia, and Jaime Lancaster, a local community member and kayaker with more than ten years of experience, led the workshop. The panel also included expert environmental lawyers who are members of the coalition: Ricardo Frez, Director of the NGO "Defensa Ambiental"; Pía Weber, Freshwater Expert at the Pew Charitable Trust; and Bastián Núñez, attorney at ELC.

Left to right: Pía Weber, Freshwater Expert at the Pew Charitable Trust; Bastián Núñez, attorney at Earth Law Center; Ricardo Frez, Director of the NGO "Defensa Ambiental.”

The event began with a showing of this wonderful introductory video detailing the “Ríos Protegidos" initiative. Then, Ricardo Frez talked about NGO Defensa Ambiental’s experience working to protect rivers in the Ñuble and Biobío region, which face problems such as the extraction of aggregates from the river watershed, the construction of dams and hydroelectric infrastructure, the installation of thermoelectric projects, and more. Later,  Pía Weber explained the legal framework for protecting Chilean rivers and the mechanisms that authorities and the civil population demand to conserve their water quantity and quality of this riparian ecosystem.

The workshop set a collaborative dynamic, such that the audience participated in the analysis of case studies, contributing ideas for possible protection mechanisms based on their perspectives and connections with the Patagonian rivers. At the end of this activity, Gabriel Benoit and Jaime Lancaster emphasized the importance of caring for and developing the bond between Nature and society.

ELC celebrates the interdisciplinary work of the Ríos Protegidos. We support initiatives such as these, wherein we can hear the voices of the rivers through their riparian communities. Such collaborative explorations seek to unify forces and knowledge to promote legislative and policy transformations in order to adopt and implement effective mechanisms for the permanent protection of rivers.

Earth Law Center reaffirms its commitment, made at the 2024 UN Water Conference, to advance “Earth-centered legal initiatives [to] provide mechanisms to ensure that natural systems do not collapse… seeking the incorporation of standards and laws to guarantee the necessary support for the health of ecosystems in accordance with Nature's needs.”

Dam Removal 101: Why Earth Law Supports Free-Flowing Rivers

By Sandi Schwartz, Beth Styler Barry, and the ELC Team

Earth law—also known as ecocentric law or Earth jurisprudence—recognizes the interconnectedness of all life and seeks to protect the Earth’s ecosystems, including the preservation and restoration of free-flowing rivers. This view is rooted in a deep understanding of the vital role that rivers play in sustaining both natural ecosystems and human communities, and that rivers should be considered living entities deserving of legal rights and protections. 

Since Earth law highlights our moral and sacred obligation to prevent species extinction and catastrophic ecosystem degradation, it places paramount importance on the fact that free-flowing rivers are essential for maintaining healthy ecosystems and biodiversity. They provide critical habitat for numerous species of fish, birds, mammals, and other wildlife; facilitate the natural processes of nutrient cycling and sediment transport; help regulate climate and hydrological cycles; and mitigate droughts, erosion, and some types of floods. 

Juvenile Little Blue Heron hunting. Photo credit: Sam LeGrys.

Despite all these clear benefits, free-flowing rivers are increasingly threatened by human activities such as dam construction. In response to these threats, Earth law advocates for the adoption of legal frameworks that prioritize the protection and restoration of free-flowing rivers. This includes measures to recognize rivers as legal entities with enforceable rights, which will ensure the long-term health and vitality of these essential ecosystems.

The Earth law preference for free-flowing rivers is not an ideological position: clearly, there are instances where small dams, weirs, or other artificial riverine infrastructure is what’s best for ecological health or to balance ecology and human needs. Yet, in the U.S. and most countries around the world, that balance currently falls much too far on the side of preferring dams, especially in the case of massive dams that choke rivers and profoundly damage their natural life systems. 

But isn’t hydropower a good idea?

Hydropower, or hydroelectric power, is one of the oldest and largest sources of renewable energy, accounting for 28.7 percent of total U.S. renewable electricity generation and about 6.2 percent of total U.S. electricity generation. Over 9,000 dams throughout the country use the natural flow of moving water to generate electricity in what is often thought of as a green alternative to fossil fuels. 

While hydropower may seem positive at first glance, it has unfortunately caused well-documented harm to fish, wildlife, and humans. From the moment construction begins, dams disrupt river ecology, cause the loss of aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity, and impact people through displacement or damage to their food systems and agriculture. 

The National Hydropower Association presents hydropower as “a climate-friendly energy source, generating power without producing air pollution or toxic by-products.” To be deemed green, however, energy must be produced without emitting greenhouse gasses and in a way that protects the natural environment. Hydropower does not satisfy either requirement. 

Although dams provide renewable energy and store water to prevent flooding, they also worsen the impact of climate change by releasing greenhouse gasses and destroying carbon sinks in wetlands and oceans. Furthermore, they deprive ecosystems of nutrients, disrupt fish migration, destroy habitats, increase sea levels, waste water, and displace under resourced communities. Poorly maintained dams also create a flood risk, endangering lives and putting significant financial strain on local governments and industry.

Earth law takes climate change seriously, but, as documented in Environmental Protection Agency research and elsewhere, it turns out that large dams emit a huge amount of greenhouse gasses. When rivers are not able to flow freely, more carbon and methane are released into the atmosphere. See for instance this DamSense article on methane emissions from the lower Snake River dams.  

Scientists estimate that the world's free-flowing rivers transport 200 million tons of carbon to the ocean annually. Rivers dammed for hydropower are no longer part of that natural system that flushes carbon from land to the ocean, thereby reducing the amount of carbon that returns to the atmosphere in the form of heat-trapping carbon dioxide. [1]

Dam removal: major cases

Although it may seem drastic, dam removal is the most obvious and effective way to restore rivers to a free-flowing state. Since dams require ongoing maintenance and renovations, without which they threaten catastrophic unplanned breaches, dam removal can and should be considered as a viable option in far more circumstances than is currently the case. Here are a few of the major examples of completed or prospective dam removal in the United States. 

Elwha River 

The Elwha River is the site of one of the biggest dam removal and river restoration projects in history, with the federal government spending over $327 million to remove the Glines Canyon and Elwha dams and regenerate the river’s surrounding ecosystem. The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe fought for decades to achieve dam removal, primarily to recover salmon populations. 

Despite these efforts, industrial logging in the region continues to impact the Elwha River, with trees being cut down sometimes within 1,000 feet of the river. Even though the river has been restored to be free-flowing, it will continue to suffer if there isn’t ecosystem restoration and if logging isn’t halted. Earth law advocates for holistic ecosystem restoration that continues long after a dam has been removed. 

Earth Law Center (ELC) is working tirelessly with community members and partners to raise awareness about logging in the Elwha River watershed and share the importance of legacy forests. Protecting the remaining 850 acres of unprotected legacy forest on Washington State lands is critical to the state’s climate change mitigation efforts and to bringing back the natural habitat in this watershed. 

On June 30, 2023, ELC, along with the Center for Whale Research and the Keystone Species Alliance, filed a notice of appeal to challenge the 150-acre “Power Plant” timber sale. The community group Elwha Legacy Forests, of which ELC is a founding member, simultaneously launched a crowdfunding campaign to buy out the extractive timber harvest lease by replacing the funds that beneficiaries would otherwise receive from the harvest. The combination of ELC’s community organizing, political pressure, and this lawsuit led to the cancellation of this sale in December 2023, with 69 acres slated for permanent protection—something almost unheard of for an already-sold tract. Learn more about our work by visiting ELC’s Elwha Legacy Forests page.

Klamath River

For nearly 100 years, dams on the Klamath River in Oregon and California have blocked salmon and steelhead trout from reaching more than 400 miles of habitat. The dams have also encroached on Indigenous cultures, and harmed water quality for people and wildlife. The Klamath Dam Removal, which began in 2023 and is currently underway, is one of the largest dam removal projects in history, aiming to restore the river to its natural state by removing four hydroelectric dams: J.C. Boyle, Copco 1, Copco 2, and Iron Gate. The decision to remove these dams was reached through a collaborative effort between Native American tribes, environmental groups, government agencies, and energy companies. 

The Klamath River has long been a vital life source for the region, supporting diverse ecosystems and providing water for agriculture, tribal communities, and recreational activities. But the construction of the dams resulted in severe consequences for the river’s health and biodiversity, including disrupting fish migration, degrading water quality, and contributing to the decline of salmon populations.

By removing the dams, the restoration of fish passage is expected to allow salmon and other migratory fish species to access their historical spawning grounds upstream. This will help in the recovery of salmon populations and the overall health of the river ecosystem. Additionally, removing the dams will improve water quality and sediment transport, benefiting both aquatic life and the communities that rely on the river for drinking water and irrigation.

The Klamath Dam Removal accords with the wishes of the Yurok Tribe, members of which led the fight for it to occur. In 2019, the Yurok passed a resolution on the rights of the Klamath River that gave it legal personhood under tribal law. The resolution establishes “the Rights of the Klamath River to exist, flourish, and naturally evolve; to have a clean and healthy environment free from pollutants; to have a stable climate free from human-caused climate change impacts; and to be free from contamination by genetically engineered organisms.”

Snake River

The Snake River dam removal initiative is a contentious and multifaceted issue centered around the potential removal of four dams on the lower Snake River in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. These dams—Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite—were built in the 1960s and ‘70s primarily for navigation, flood control, irrigation, and hydroelectric power. Over the years, their environmental impacts have sparked significant debate and calls for their removal.

The primary concern for advocates of dam removal is the decline of wild salmon populations in the region, and, in turn, the decline of the Southern Resident Orca population, as the orcas depend on consuming salmon for their survival. Construction of the Snake River dams has obstructed salmon migration routes, leading to reduced spawning grounds and destruction of habitat. Removing the dams would potentially restore salmon habitats, improve water quality, and revitalize salmon populations. 

In 2020, the Nez Perce General Counsel passed a resolution, which ELC helped draft, recognizing rights of the Snake River. “The Nez Perce Tribe recognizes that the Snake River is a living entity that possesses fundamental rights, in accordance with longstanding Nez Perce tribal beliefs and practices,” states the resolution. “. . . The Snake River and all the life it supports possess the following fundamental rights, at minimum: the right to exist, the right to flourish, the right to evolve, the right to flow, the right to regenerate, and the right to restoration.”

Opponents of Snake River dam removal have raised concerns about the potential economic impacts on local communities and industries that rely on the dams. This project has been in litigation under the Endangered Species Act for about 30 years. So, it was significant when, in December 2023, the Biden administration announced its support for preparing to remove the four Lower Snake River Dams in the Columbia River Basin through an agreement with four tribal nations, two states, and several conservation groups. The agreement acknowledges that Lower Snake River dam removal is necessary to restore abundant salmon and commits to a package of federal actions to pave the way for dam removal. 

Yet, this drawn out pathway hinges on congressional authorization of the dam removals. In other words, we can continue to operate these relics of dominion over nature, knowing that they are a death-knell for endangered species, until Congress agrees it is time for them to go. Endangered salmon and orcas can’t wait the additional decade or two it is likely to take for Congress to act. It is our moral obligation—and really the highest law—to care for the Earth and all its species. 

ELC supports a growing cohort of advocates who see a pathway toward breaching the lower Snake River dams through immediate Executive Branch action, such as an Executive Order to create a new national monument or a directive by the US Army Corps of Engineers, which operates the dams, to halt their operation. ELC’s Director of Legal Advocacy, Elizabeth Dunne, Esq., authored a comprehensive law review article on this topic. In it, she quotes Naxiyamt´ama (Snake River-Palouse) elder Carrie Jim Schuster: 

Back on the Snake River where I was raised we lived with the fish and animals. There were lots of beavers living all over. They made pools in the streams to cleanse the water, trees grew along the river banks and cooled the water for the salmon, and we had safe places to play. But now our rivers and streams have become nothing but lifeless reservoirs and concrete canals. [2]

Can rivers have rights?

When evaluating hydropower and the use of dams through an Earth law lens, it is clear that many of the problems could effectively be addressed if rivers had rights. Certainly, hydropower plants fail to respect the rights established in the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Rivers (Declaration), signed by more than 100 organizations from over 20 countries as part of the larger Rights of Nature movement. The Declaration acknowledges that “rivers are essential to all life by supporting a wondrous diversity of species and ecosystems, feeding wetlands and other aquatic habitats with abundant water, delivering life-giving nutrients to coastal estuaries and the oceans, carrying sediments to river deltas teeming with life, and performing other essential ecological functions.”

Photo credit: Sam LeGrys.

There are three main reasons why rivers should have rights with respect to hydropower, according to the Declaration. 

Hydropower infrastructure deprives a river of its essential right to flow. According to the Declaration, “flows must, at minimum, follow natural flow patterns and be sufficient in quantity to maintain the ecosystem health of the entire river system.” Dams exist to block natural flow patterns.    

Also lost to a dammed river is the right to perform essential functions within its ecosystem.  These functions include “maintaining horizontal and longitudinal connectivity, flooding, moving and depositing sediment, recharging groundwater, providing adequate habitat for native flora and fauna, and other essential functions.” Critical river functions that significantly affect the natural dynamics of downstream freshwater and coastal ecosystems cease when rivers are dammed. 

Lastly, damming rivers strips them and their ecosystem of the right to native biodiversity. The global biodiversity crisis has caused an 83 percent decrease in the overall populations of freshwater species, and up to 30 percent of freshwater ecosystems have been lost. [3] Dams have a devastating effect on fish migration and significantly reduce the number and diversity of fish and other aquatic life that depend upon free-flowing freshwater. Fish migration, including that of threatened and endangered species, is brought to a halt when a river is dammed. Even when fish ladders or other “mitigation methods” are used, timely and effective upstream and downstream fish passage is drastically reduced. 

Conclusion

Decarbonization is critically important, but if we do it in a way that continues to put short-term human benefit miles ahead of everything else, we’ll continue to see biodiversity loss, including extinctions, as well as the degradation of more of our wild places. Using dams to produce hydropower, which in effect destroys the natural flow of rivers, is not the best solution to climate change, and only creates a loop of additional environmental problems for current and future generations if not addressed.  

What we have learned from the prolonged battles over dam removal is that US law lacks a voice for the river ecosystem itself. Unless changed, the legal system will continue to help maintain the status quo, to the peril of beloved and iconic endangered species such as salmon and the Southern Resident Orcas. While multi-stakeholder forums play an important role, they should not drown out the suffering of dying species and the health of entire ecosystems. If we recognize that these river ecosystems, too, have rights and that we, in turn, have a moral and sacred obligation to ensure their health and well-being, we will all thrive. Together.    

[1] Valier Galy, Bernhard Peucker-Ehrenbrink, Timothy Eglinton. “Global carbon export from the terrestrial biosphere controlled by erosion,” Nature, 2015; 521 (7551).

[2] Originally quoted in River Song, Naxiyamt´ama (Snake River-Palouse) Oral Traditions from Mary Jim, Andrew George, Gordon Fisher, and Emily Peone, collected and edited by Richard D. Scheuerman & Clifford E. Trafzer (2015) at Foreword, p. xiv.

[3] David Tickner et al., “Bending the Curve of Global Freshwater Biodiversity Loss: An Emergency Recovery Plan,” BioScience, Volume 70, Issue 4, April 2020, pgs. 330–342, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaa002.

Earth Law Center Advocates for the Rights of Peru's Marañón River

Update:

March 18, 2024: In a landmark ruling, the Peruvian Court of Nauta has recognized the rights of the Marañón River and appointed a federation of Indigenous communities as its guardians. The Marañon River, a magnificent free-flowing river that runs for 1,600 miles from the snowy peaks of the Peruvian Andes into the heart of the Amazon, has thus become the first river in Peru to be declared as having rights. Read more about the ruling in this subsequent blog post.

Original article:

The Marañón River, long storied as the primary source of the Amazon River, has begun taking center stage in national and international discussions about the Rights of Nature and human environmental rights of Indigenous groups. A major court ruling on a case against Peruvian state oil company Petroperu, as well as the Regional Government of Loreto and other state entities, is expected soon. It has the potential to establish the river as a rights-bearing entity, which would make it the next in a growing list of rivers in Latin America and elsewhere around the world to have been recognized as having rights.

“If this is the case, we could say that a new stage in environmental law is opening in Peru,” said Constanza Prieto Figelist, director of Earth Law Center’s (ELC) Latin America Program.

With its headwaters about 160 kilometers northwest of Lima, the Marañón has been subjected to decades of adverse environmental impacts, including contamination from illegal gold mining, as well as dozens of oil spills from the NorPeruano Pipeline. Diverse Amazonian Indigenous groups, such as the Kukama Kukamiria, Awajún, and Wampis, have suffered the ecological and health effects of these spills and have led the effort to protect the river from further damages, including as plaintiffs in multiple lawsuits. “We have no other source of drinking water,” said Mari Luz Canaquiri Murayari, president of the Huaynakana Kamatahuara Kana (HKK), an Indigenous women’s Kukama federation with representatives from 29 communities, in this article by David Hill. “But there have been over 50 years of oil spills and they are killing us slowly.”

The river, like other Andean tributaries of the Amazon, now also faces the cumulative danger of numerous planned hydroelectric projects in its basin. These threaten an array of damaging impacts to resident Indigenous communities, aquatic life, and normal silt deposition, which is an important factor in both ecosystem stability and the functioning of the carbon cycle.

In order to support the campaign to protect the Marañón River and recognize its rights, ELC’s Latin America team has been working on multiple fronts of legal advocacy.

Amicus Curiae Brief in the Lawsuit for the Protection of the Marañon River

On November 9, 2023, in Nauta, Peru, ELC’s environmental policy and climate change expert Javier Ruiz was present as amicus curiae at the only in-person hearing on the case. Ruiz delved into the viability of judicially recognizing the river as a subject of rights and urged the judge to apply principles of international environmental law as the precautionary principle to resolve the case. The Kukama Kukamiria’s constitutional lawsuit, brought with support from ELC, Instituto Defensa Legal, and International Rivers, seeks to grant the Marañón rights including those to exist, to flow, to be free of contamination, and to the restoration and regeneration of its natural cycles.

ELC’s Javier Ruiz speaks at the in-person hearing on the case.

At the hearing, the Indigenous women defenders of the Marañón River, who are plaintiffs of the case, presented the damages they have incurred due to the continuous oil spills in the river, arguing that constitutional acknowledgment of the river’s rights is a necessary step to prevent the continuation of such harms. As noted in this article in El País, these women river defenders have “witnessed the many ways in which the pollution of the Marañón affects the lives of the Kukama, especially women: from skin diseases, pregnancies that end in spontaneous abortions, to cancer.”

Maritza Quispe Esq. and Juan Carlos Molleda Esq., both attorneys of the  Instituto Defensa Legal representing the plaintiff, HKK, presented the allegations of form and substance for which the Marañón River should be recognized as a subject of rights.

“As a subject of rights but unable to speak in its own defense, the river would need a guardian who would look after its interests,” notes this article on the case, co-authored by Ruiz, in Peruvian outlet La República. “In the lawsuit, the women of Huaynakana have asked the court to appoint the Kukama people as guardians of the Marañón.”

Escazú Agreement Trainings for Indigenous Women River Defenders

On November 4-5, 2023, in coordination with strategic partner NGO Defensa Ambiental, ELC conducted an in-person training workshop on the rights of access to information, participation, and justice in environmental matters for about 30 members of  the HKK of the Marañón River. 

HKK members display their signs expressing kinship and support for the Marañón River.

Over the two days, ELC’s Javier Ruiz facilitated discussions on environmental rights for women defenders of the Marañón River, including the Rights of Nature. The program, which has also been held with Indigenous communities in Chile, aims to connect these Indigenous women river defenders with rights under the Escazú Agreement, a regional treaty signed by some two dozen countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. Although Peru itself has not yet signed this agreement, the training helps empower the Indigenous women to advocate for the Peruvian government to join it.

The Escazú Agreement trainings are crafted to address barriers to environmental justice including: 

• the remote locations of many Indigenous communities, placing them far from political centers, courts, and ally groups 

• ethnic or cultural discrimination that creates barriers to their participation in environmental decision-making

• gender-based discrimination at both regional and local levels, which excludes Indigenous women from the education, mobility, and group coordination necessary to assert their rights participation and environmental justice

ELC’s Latin America team plans to expand the Escazú Agreement trainings to other interested Indigenous communities in the Amazon and beyond.

Nederland Appoints Guardians for Boulder Creek Watershed

The town of Nederland, Colorado, located in the mountains west of Boulder, has appointed two guardians on behalf of Boulder Creek and its watershed, whose rights they previously recognized via town resolution. This move is being celebrated as the first time people have been appointed legal guardians for Nature within the U.S.

Earth Law Center worked with our friends Save The World’s Rivers (formerly Save the Colorado) and Boulder Rights of Nature on the town's foundational Rights of Nature resolution, which passed in 2021 (with similar resolutions subsequently adopted by the Colorado towns of Ridgway, Grand Lake, and Lyons). Since then, Save the World’s Rivers Executive Director Gary Wockner and Nederland residents have been working to give the creek and watershed a voice in local governance, which is now put into effect.

The town’s board of trustees created a guardian subcommittee consisting of two individuals, the first two being local residents Alan Apt, an author and former board member, and Rich Orman, a retired lawyer. The guardians are tasked with writing a report at least once every 12 months “on the health and state of the Creek and Watershed,” to include summary indicators for the watershed such as water quality, wildlife habitat and corridors, recreation and visitor impacts, wetlands protection standards, native species and noxious weeds, stormwater management, and impacts of industrial and commercial activities on the creek and watershed.

The guardians are further tasked with including in their report “recommendations for advancing and ensuring the welfare and sustainability of the Creek and Watershed,” with reference to opportunities for:

● Improving water quality

● Enhancing healthy wildlife corridors and habitat, and wildlife protection

● Increasing wetlands protection and wetlands restoration

Having seen communities in Florida and Ohio pass Rights of Nature laws in recent years only to have them preempted by state-level legislation, Nederland decided to take a measured approach, in part by not giving the guardians the authority to sue or be sued on behalf of the creek or watershed.

“We’re working within the confines of the Colorado and U.S. legal systems, and nibbling away at them,” said Wockner in this Inside Climate News article on the new measure. “It’s absolutely a long game, but there are a lot of people who think this way.”

U.S. law has long recognized the need for legal guardians to represent the interests of, for example, children and incapacitated adults, and it has extended “personhood” to corporations and other non-human entities, but the Earth law application of these legal concepts in the U.S. has faced stiff headwinds. Nevertheless, the precedents set by other countries and Indigenous nations, as well as growing interest from communities in widely varying areas, demonstrates their workability and promise.

With endless possibilities of who can serve as a guardian or proxy for Nature, and how, in jurisdictions that acknowledge personhood or rights for Nature, one of the biggest takeaways from Nederland’s Boulder Creek guardianship structure is that we can learn by doing. We are excited to see where this goes and hope it inspires other governments in Colorado and beyond to take similar measures. 

Q&A with Gary Wockner of Save the Colorado

Interview by Chloe Heskett for ELC.

In early July, Nederland - a small town situated in the foothills of southwest Boulder County - became the first Colorado municipality to pass a resolution recognizing the rights of a body of water. The town’s Board of Trustees approved a Rights of Nature resolution recognizing the inherent legal rights of Boulder Creek and its watershed. We spoke with Gary Wockner, Executive Director of the group Save the Colorado, who was instrumental in achieving this victory with the help of Boulder Rights of Nature and other partners.

The interview has been edited for clarity.

ELC: To start, can you give me a little background on Save the Colorado and the work you do?

GW: Save the Colorado’s mission is to protect and restore the Colorado River. Our primary programs prior to this year were about fighting against proposed new dams and also dealing with some current dams.

In January this year, we started two new programs. One aims to protect rivers around the world, so that we could branch out and expand our mission. The other is a Rights of Rivers program. So in January, we launched our Rights of Nature for rivers program working with Earth Law Center as a partner and we’re currently in communications with about ten towns and cities in Colorado and Utah, exploring Rights of Nature programs.

ELC: I know that you have been involved in advocacy work for the Rights of Rivers before you began working with Earth Law Center--how did you get involved with that work? What drew you to it?

GW: I’ve known about it [Rights of Nature] for quite a long time. I think the fundamental tenet or argument of Rights of Nature is that our current laws are inadequate - and they certainly are inadequate. In the United States, most of our laws are 50 years old, and they were not intended to protect rivers or ecosystems. The rivers and ecosystems in the United States, across the planet really, are under extreme threat. So we need new laws.

ELC: What are the goals of the partnership between Earth Law Center and Save the Colorado?

GW: The program that we have launched is trying to work with communities and do kind of a soft, friendly version of Rights of Nature where we pass resolutions at the local level that help communities recognize that rivers should have their own rights and also have the right to exist and keep flowing through their communities.

There’s another piece to why we launched this program: the rivers that are around the Colorado basin are under extreme assault. There’s been an increasing movement of Wall Street types, big investors and hedge funds moving in and buying up ranches, farms and water rights. So, rivers and communities are increasingly under assault because of the increased privatization and monetization of water. This program is a start to try to move the conversation in a new direction and give communities some tools to at least protect rivers that flow through their towns.

ELC: Where is the focus of that work at the moment?

GW: We’re having this conversation in Nederland, Boulder, Lyons, Fort Collins, Steamboat Springs, Vail, Eagle, Durango, Moab, [and] Bluff. Those conversations are all at different levels = some are introductory and some are a bit farther.

ELC: How does the Rights of Nature framework fit into the work Save the Colorado has been doing the last several years? Has it substantially changed your mission?

GW: We were primarily a law enforcement organization, enforcing federal laws, state laws and local laws. We launched this new program because the laws are weak. In the state of Colorado for example, the local laws vary dramatically. In some places they can be very strong, in some places they don’t exist at all. So there’s a vacuum and there’s a need for stronger laws. We recognize this is a long process, but we want to be at the beginning, at the ground floor you might say. We wanted to help it grow, and that’s what we’re trying to do. I think it’s important for us to just think more proactively about the future, too, and where the legal system and environmentalism in general needs to go.

In the United States the environmental movement has gotten sucked into these big bureaucratic, administrative processes. There are some places where there’s on-the-ground action and work, but it’s primarily big, green organizations who have corporate or large foundation funding and they’re just kind of, in my opinion, stale and old and stuck in a 50-year-old paradigm. Or worse, the environmental movement is being dragged into what I would call a neo-liberal approach to environmentalism which is around markets and market-based environmentalism, and especially around [creating] water markets as a tool to try to protect rivers.

ELC: Do you think the counterfactual to that neo-liberal model starts with the kind of work you’re doing with these individual townships or cities?

GW: Yes, I think we’re trying to create points of light and we’re trying to connect those throughout the watershed. Over time we’re trying to grow a movement. It’s small, it’s dramatically underfunded, but in my opinion, it’s going in the right direction. It’s work that needs to happen if we’re actually going to protect nature and it’s work that I want to do.

ELC: What do you think about the potential for Rights of Nature resolutions or ordinances at the local level to spread and become integrated into state or even federal law? How far down the road do you think that is?

GW: That would be the ultimate goal. What we’re trying to do at Save the Colorado is a softer and friendlier approach than what other Rights of Nature advocates have tried. We work to start a conversation and create points of light. Every resolution that we create will have a clause stating the community’s goal here is to slowly over time change state laws. We’re not being confrontational [and] what we’re doing is not enforceable by law. We’re creating resolutions that are really a statement of opinion about how communities feel about Nature and watersheds and then over time the concept would be that it would start to change the public dialogue. I think once we get one, two [or] three cities in the state of Colorado, the conversation will grow.

What are the primary challenges you see, not just for Save the Colorado, but specifically for the Rights of Rivers movement and this partnership project with ELC?

The good news is that an increasing number of people and decision makers have heard of it [Rights of Nature]. Five years ago, it wasn’t even on the map. But still, when you’re dealing with town boards and city councils, you’ve got to realize that this is new territory for most of them and you’ve got to respect where they’re at and where they’re coming from rather than just try to hit them with something and knock it down their throat. It’s got to be softer and gentler, and it’s got to be introductory.

It takes a lot of legwork. You’ve got to find someone on a board or a commission or find a friendly council member and just have a friendly conversation.

The challenge is you’re introducing a new topic that can seem too far out there or controversial, so you have to be cognizant that you’re talking to people who might be open to new ideas, but they’re going to have to venture into some new territory and learn some new stuff, and that’s a process.

ELC: Finally, what’s your personal take on the Rights of Nature movement?

GW: It’s not a new or foreign concept to me. It’s been part of my mindset since I was in college in the late 1970s. So this has been a part of my life throughout my professional career, and now I’m at a point in my career where I can do exactly what I want to. This is the story I want to tell, this is the story I think needs to be told, and this is the direction that the environmental movement needs to go.

Earth Law Center is excited to continue working with Mr. Wockner and Save the Colorado to advance Rights of Nature conversations in local communities throughout the Colorado watershed. If you are interested in starting a conversation about Rights of Nature in your community, reach out to Gary Wockner (gary@savethecolorado.org) or Grant Wilson (gwilson@earthlaw.org).

Exploring the Earth Law Toolkit with ELC

An exciting new body of law is gaining attention with legislators, activists and legal professionals around the world: Earth law. Earth law takes an ecocentric approach as opposed to a purely anthropocentric one, bringing together diverse legal movements including the legal recognition of Nature’s rights, Indigenous and biocultural rights, the rights of future generations, and the right of humans to a healthy environment, among other legal frameworks.

Earth Law Center (ELC) has been at the center of the Earth law movement from its inception, and provides expert legal advice to governments, activists, litigants and other groups or individuals navigating this relatively new legal ground. In fact, ELC literally wrote the book on Earth law, having recently released the first law school textbook presenting cases and guidance on how to use Earth Law to protect and restore Nature.

To provide an idea of how that work is done, below are some of the key tools and frameworks of Earth law that ELC has helped shape and successfully deployed.

Crafting legislation that codifies Earth law

By writing Earth-centered protections into legal codes, municipalities and regional governments can give Nature a voice within local government and create stronger protections for local ecosystems . However, with a long history of treating Nature as a resource and legislating its use only as it relates to extraction and human benefit, it is not always easy or intuitive to turn from anthropocentric to ecocentric thinking.

This is where ELC’s expertise can be deployed. Most recently, ELC worked with Save the Colorado to draft a legal model that will enable U.S. municipalities to grant rights and protections to local rivers and watersheds and establish local guardianship bodies to protect those rights. Already, several municipalities in Colorado are considering local laws or resolutions that draw from these templates (exciting news soon to follow!).

Molding the models: Creating toolkits, frameworks, guidelines and Nature’s rights declarations

In addition to working on the local or regional level to help codify protections for Nature, ELC has worked on broader reaching, cutting-edge legislation to protect Nature, including co-drafting the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Rivers and launching a standalone website where you can sign on in support, developed with ELC partner International Rivers and others. This declaration serves not only as a legal explanation for the rights of rivers, but as a legislative starting point for governments around the world interested in establishing the rights of rivers within their jurisdiction.

ELC has also played a foundational role in the Rights of Nature movement by creating toolkits and guidelines for those interested in advocating for Nature. For example, Michelle Bender, ELC’s Ocean Campaign Director, has led the creation of various Oceans-related toolkits, such as the Marine Protected Area toolkit and Rights for Coral Reefs toolkit.

ELC’s team of legal experts is writing a new DNA for legal systems around the world based on living in harmony with Nature, and making those legal models replicable and scalable.

Working with Indigenous Peoples to advance both Nature’s rights and Indigenous rights

Much as legal systems provide for guardianships for children or other individuals who cannot adequately represent or advocate for their interests, a key framework of Earth law is the establishment of legal guardianships for Nature. A useful model for this framework comes from New Zealand, which in 1978 granted legal personhood status to the Whanganui River in accordance with Maori beliefs.

While determining “who speaks for Nature” can be challenging, it is clear that it should be an independent body free of government or commercial interest and that it must represent a diversity of viewpoints. The exact guardianship model used can vary widely depending on the local community’s culture, beliefs, and traditions, but creating guardianships is a wonderful opportunity to build an inclusive governing body, and typically includes representation from local Indigenous communities, underrepresented communities, and non-profit and ecosystem protection organizations and local activists.

Advocating for the rights of future generations to a clean and healthy natural environment

In 2019, a district judge in the state of Oaxaca, Mexico, ruled in favor of protecting two of the most contaminated rivers in Mexico, the Atoyac and Salado Rivers. ELC, among others, provided an amicus brief to the court in favor of protection, and was excited to discover that the Court drew from several of the legal arguments presented in the brief, including the argument that both present and future generations have a right to a healthy environment.

Since then, the legal argument that current and future generations have a right to protected, healthy natural environments has gained ground. Most recently, Germany’s highest court ruled in April that the federal government must amend their climate law, drawing up clearer reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions. The decision came after nine individuals, several of them young people, argued in court that as the climate law stood, it did not do enough to assure their right to a humane future.

The key frameworks outlined here are a few of the ways ELC’s legal experts are using Earth law to advance the protection and rights of Nature. ELC is excited to continue utilizing these tools and developing and advancing Earth law around the world. If you would like to get in touch with ELC’s Earth law experts, email info@earthlaw.org.

First River to Have Recognized Rights in Canada

The Magpie River, Muteshekau-shipu in the Innu language, is now more protected than ever before. In a first for Canada, the Magpie has been granted legal personhood and endowed with basic rights and protections. On February 16, 2021, the regional municipality of Minganie and the Innu Council of Ekuanitshit passed similar resolutions to protect the river from future threats.

Why the Magpie River?

The Magpie River represents many things. To the Innu of Ekuanitshit, it is ancestral territory that connects their past, present, and future. To white water enthusiasts, it is 200 kilometers of world-renowned rapids. To Hydro-Quebec, the Quebec government's energy corporation, it represents potential future hydroelectric projects.

Despite regional consensus to protect the Magpie River, Hydro-Quebec has resisted attempts to formalize a plan to protect it because of its potential for future projects. With one hydroelectric dam already built and no official protections to prevent future development, the river needed assistance to protect the biodiversity, tourism potential, and cultural significance of the river to the Innu.

Recognizing this need, the Muteshekau-shipu Alliance—the Innu Council of Ekuanitshit, the regional municipality of Minganie, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society Quebec and the Association Eaux-Vives Minganie—stepped in to help. Civil society group observatoire international des droits de la nature (OIDN), a close partner of ELC, also provided legal support in the campaign.

Protecting the Magpie for the Future

To overcome the Quebec government’s reluctance to grant the Magpie River official protected status, the Muteshekau-shipu Alliance developed a guardianship model of protection modeled on an initiative in New Zealand. Similar projects in Mexico, Ecuador, and other countries have successfully secured protections for waterways.

The Magpie guardianship, a unique co-governance approach, took the form of separate resolutions adopted by the regional municipality of Minganie and the Innu Council of Ekuanitshit. Each resolution granted similar legal rights to the river and established guardians to act on its behalf to ensure its nine fundamental rights were protected. Likely, the most important of these rights is the right to sue because the river’s guardians would have standing to represent the Magpie River in court cases to protect its rights.

What’s Next?

The Magpie River blends the traditional culture of the Innu with the modern-day tourism potential of a world-renowned white water river. Similarly, a progressive guardianship model of river rights allows the Magpie to have a voice in how it navigates its future challenges. Now, advocates are working towards rights of the St. Lawrence River and other waterways.

The Earth Law Center expresses our enthusiastic support for our partners in Canada! We also promote river rights through its support of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Rivers. The declaration’s language served as a model for laws, declarations, and other legal instruments to establish the rights of rivers across the world.

There are many ways that you can help us to further the spread the guardianship model of nature:

• Donate to ELC

• Volunteer with ELC

• Connect with us on social media and sign up for our newsletter

• Contact ELC if you want to work on your own river rights campaign

Oaxaca’s Congress Weighs Rights of Rivers

A proposed law would recognize rivers as subject of rights, including fundamental rights to exist, thrive and evolve

By Jason Baran

For decades, the Atoyac and Salado Rivers in the Mexican State of Oaxaca have been considered two of the most polluted and damaged rivers in Mexico. This pollution poses a profound threat to the ecosystem, since it is the primary water source for municipalities, industry, and cropland irrigation. Many of the region's citizens suffer from the contaminated water.

Today, however, there is hope as the government and people of Oaxaca are beginning to recognize rivers as subject to rights. After years of community- and education-based outreach and multiple legal challenges, Oaxaca’s Congress is now considering a proposed law that recognizes the Rights of Rivers and other Water Sources. Earth Law Center lawyers drafted the proposed law late last year, with input from Litigio Estratégico Indígena A.C. and the team of Congressman Fredie Delfín.

“Oaxaca is one of the states in Mexico that has more indigenous peoples who preserve their traditions and their connection with Nature. This law proposal is the answer to the petition of these guardians so that now their voice on behalf of the rivers and other water sources will also be heard in the courts.”

— Claudia Brindis, ELC Mexico Program Lead

“The law, if ratified, would recognize that rivers and other water sources have an autonomous voice that can be exercised through their guardians and Oaxaca’s citizens,” said Grant Wilson, Earth Law Center’s Executive Director and Directing Attorney. “Moreover, a law recognizing rivers' rights in Oaxaca strengthens international support for this cutting-edge area of the law.”

Mexico’s Conservation Progress

Mexico and the State of Oaxaca are following in the progressive footsteps of New Zealand, Ecuador, Colombia and Bangladesh in recognizing rivers’ rights with the overall goal of humans and ecosystems thriving together in harmony. While Mexico’s overexploitation of water resources has had many ill-effects, the country is now acknowledging that water recovery and security are a means to achieving economic growth, environmental sustainability and climate change resilience.

The Atoyac River in the State of Oaxaca in southern Mexico is one of the most contaminated rivers in Mexico. Source: Oaxaca Life, June 6, 2019

Here is a timeline of recent Earth Law progress in Mexico:

• In 2017, Mexico City adopted Rights of Nature language into its new constitution. In addition, efforts continue to establish legal rights for the Magdalena River, Mexico City’s last and only free-flowing river.

• In 2019, the State of Colima passed a state constitutional amendment recognizing the Rights of Nature. The amendment establishes Nature’s right to exist, to restoration, to regeneration, and to conservation of its ecological structure and functions. Earth Law Center assisted in legal drafting and revisions on the constitutional amendment.

• In 2019, Earth Law Center submitted an amicus brief calling for the protection of the Salado and Atoyac Rivers. This resulted in a court order to restore the health of the two rivers based on human environmental rights.

• On December 8, 2020, Oaxaca’s Congress was presented with the drafted law for the recognition of the Rights of Rivers and other Water Sources. In addition, Earth Law Center filed a constitutional reform to recognize the Rights of Nature in the Oaxaca Constitution.

• In January 2021, Earth Law Center, Litigio Estratégico Indígena A.C. and the UN Harmony with Nature Programme hosted virtual forums to discuss Oaxaca’s project of law.

“We’ve seen tremendous progress around Rights of Nature in Mexico and within Oaxaca,” according to Claudia Brindis, ELC’s International Rights of Nature Lead. “While Earth Law Center continues seeking recognition of the Rights of Rivers and Other Water Sources at the national level in Mexico, our immediate hope is that the State of Oaxaca will legally recognize the Rights of Nature. Ultimately, our objective is to strategically establish and enforce this new paradigm throughout Mexico.”

Wilson’s colleague, Constanza Prieto Figelist, agrees. “We have been consulting lawmakers at the state and federal levels regarding the Rights of Rivers in the State of Oaxaca and nationally,” she said. “This bill seeks to establish that rivers no longer be considered as objects of exploitation, and instead treated like subjects capable of demanding respect for their minimum rights to exist, thrive, and evolve." Figelist is Earth Law Center’s Latin American Legal Lead.

What’s Next?

Oaxaca’s Congressional Water Commission is reviewing the proposed law. In the very near future, we expect the proposed law to have a second reading, as well. Then, Oaxaca’s Congress will vote. 

If and when the law is approved, Earth Law Center will host a press conference Litigio Estratégico Indígena A.C., the UN Harmony with Nature Programme, and Congressman Fredie Delfín and his team, and other congresspersons who have been in support of the proposed bill. The date of the press conference will be shared as soon as it is confirmed.

 In the meantime, there are many ways that you can help us achieve Rights for Rivers and Other Water Sources in Mexico and beyond:

• Donate to ELC

• Volunteer with ELC

• Connect with us on social media and sign up for our newsletter

• Contact ELC if you want to work on your own River Rights campaign

World Wetlands Day 2021: 50 Years Later

By Margaret Stewart

February celebrates Black History Month, Galentine’s Day for female friendship AND World Wetlands Day which recognizes one of our most vital ecosystems.

Environmentalists and the eco-conscious have celebrated World Wetlands Day for 50 years. Wetlands enhance water quality, control erosion, maintain stream flows, sequester carbon, and provide a home to at least one third of all threatened and endangered species around the world.

However, Earth loses wetlands at three times the rate of forests, with 71% of the world’s wetlands gone. That’s a rate of 60 acres an hour! The EPA notes the worsening of flooding due to wetland loss.

Wetland Protection to date 

Wetlands enjoy some Federal protection under the Clean Water Act of 1972, while 23 states require permits for dredge and fill activities in wetlands. Of those, 15 provide comprehensive coverage to all coastal/tidal and freshwater wetlands and eight states provide protection to only coastal/tidal wetlands. The IUCN dedicated a report to wetland protection globally.

Although the Everglades has lost half its surface area - 1.5 million acres remain. After the signing of the Federal level Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan in 2000, many groups including the State of Florida and The Nature Conservancy have stepped up protection efforts.

Credit: LivingLandscapeArchitect via Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Earth Law for Wetlands

Increasing awareness of the critical role wetlands play in Earth’s environment has led to expanding approaches to protect wetlands. One of these is Earth Law, an ecocentric approach to building a body of law and lawyers to allow Nature a chance to regenerate and thrive.

For how this might apply in Florida check out lawyer Liz Drayer’s blog for Earth Law Center. Applying an ecocentric approach to enhance existing protections for the Everglade could take inspiration from the Universal Declaration of Rights of Rivers which offers guidelines for recognizing the right to flow and the right to be free from pollution among others. If applied to the wetlands, this could help not only reverse it’s continued loss but allow this unique ecosystem to regenerate and flourish.

If you’d like to learn more about Earth Law and how it can protect our wetlands, or support the Earth Law movement, you can:

• Sign up for Earth Law Center’s newsletter

• Donate to Earth Law Center

• Read my chapter in our newly published legal textbook Earth Law: Emerging Ecocentric Law - A Practitioner’s Guide. It covers the successes and failures of the environmental policies to date. You can also find interesting (and free!) reports regarding wetlands on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service website.

• Sign up for your community, city or county government newsletters so you can stay up-to-date on any local environmental policies coming up for discussion. If something makes your ears perk up, we encourage you to reach out to the Earth Law Center for advice. 

Klamath River Dam Removal Project will Proceed as Biggest in US History

The largest dam removal project in US history has been green-lighted for 2023, when four antiquated dams will finally be demolished, ending a twenty-year environmental battle to save the Klamath River and its salmon runs. The river flows 257 miles from the Oregon desert into California and the Pacific Ocean. It traverses the forested tribal lands of the Karuk and Yurok and other native peoples, who have depended upon the river for physical and spiritual nourishment throughout their histories. The four dams were built on the Upper Klamath to divert water for farming and to produce hydroelectric power. Two of them are over fifty years old (which is the generally accepted life expectancy of a dam); the others two are over 100 years old. In recent years, toxic blue-green proliferated in the reservoirs behind the dams, and the already declining salmon runs plummeted precipitously.  

The campaign for dam removal began over 20 years ago.  Mounting a grass roots movement supported by fishermen and mainstream environmental groups, the Klamath basin tribes protested first at the headquarters of PacifiCorp, the dams’ owner, in Portland, Oregon. Later they took their campaign to Scottish Power, Pacific Corp’s parent company, in Edinburgh Scotland, where they challenged Scottish Power’s reputation as an environmental champion by publicizing the decimation of the Klamath salmon populations. In response, Scottish Power acknowledged that it was open to the possibility of dam removal; but, instead, it sold PacifiCorp to Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffet’s holding company. The tribes and their supporters persisted, shifting their protests to Berkshire Hathaway’s annual meetings in Omaha and to its corporate offices in six U.S. cities.

In 2008, PacifiCorp made its first public commitment to removal.  Years of negotiations followed between the tribes, which were supported by environmental groups and fishing associations, the states of Oregon and California, and PacifiCorp., which was supported by farming interests. A deal for the Klamath River Renewal Project was eventually signed, contingent on authorizing legislation, funding and environmental review. The federal government finally signed onto the deal in 2016, approving dam removal as early as 2020.  But, the federal regulatory agency (FERC) blocked implementation, allegedly based on concerns about Pacific Corp’s refusal to accept any responsibility for unbudgeted liability potentially arising from the removal. That obstacle was partially overcome when the two states agreed to shoulder risks of unbudgeted costs.  Then, in late July of this year, California Governor Newsom wrote to Warren Buffet, personally and publicly urging him to act “on behalf of this remarkable environmental and cultural restoration.”  

Pressure mounted, and ELC joined the chorus of those supporting the tribes’ efforts. Grant Wilson wrote to Warren Buffett, urging consideration of an Earth-centered perspective: “ The salmon populations nourish humans, both physically and financially; and they keep the forest healthy. The forest provides an invaluable climate buffer, keeping temperatures down, air clean, and rivers flowing. All presently living things have evolved in a climate which is fast disappearing. For their own present and future welfare humans and human organizations need to slow this change and stabilize the climate. The Klamath River Dam Removal Project is an important contribution to that effort. It … will serve as a model of governmental and private sector cooperation and foresight.”

It will also serve as an inspiring example of Native American leadership, coalition building, grass roots organizing, and perseverance. In November, PacifiCorp withdrew its last objection to the dams’ removal, virtually assuring that they will be razed. ELC salutes all those who have worked so long and hard on this project.  

Now we can turn to other rivers for which dam removal would help restore them to health. ELC has long advocated for the rights of the Snake River. This year, the Nez Perce General Council passed a resolution recognizing the rights of the river, including its right to flow. We hope this campaign will provide new support for removing the Lower Snake River dams, which devastate salmon populations as well as related marine species, such as Southern Resident Orcas.

Rights for a Free Snake River

“Snake River in Idaho” by Becherka - Own work, Public Domain

By Eliana Miller

Introduction

The four hydroelectric dams on the lower Snake River have pushed salmon populations to the verge of extinction. Their depletion has spelled disaster for a native ecosystem of over 135 other flora and fauna, including killer whales, otters, and old-growth trees. Experts are unequivocal that the removal of the dams is the only way to save salmon. Yet after decades of failed lawsuits, federal decrees and court decisions the salmon population continues to drop at alarming rates. In this blog post, Earth Law Center argues for a rights-based legal approach to revitalize and restore salmon in the Snake River.

Environmental Background of the Snake River 

The Snake River’s history is a case study in environmental damage and disregard for natural ecosystems. Once populous salmon populations have suffered at the hands of overzealous damming, of which there are now fifteen on the river, including four dams on the Lower Snake River alone. The four dams situated on the Lower Snake River have received notable opprobrium for their pernicious effect on native Salmon, with little economic or renewable energy benefit to justify their continued existence.

Advocates for the removal of the dams have cited high mortality rates of juvenile and adult salmon as they complete their migrations, with the USGS writing that Snake River Sockeye Salmon are “probably the most endangered salmon” and scientists predicting complete extinction of Columbia basin Salmon within the next two decades. A report released in 2019 revealed some of the lowest rates of salmons returning after their run, with only 15% of pre-dam returns for sockeye and chinook and only 3% for steelhead.

The disappearance of native salmon is also an existential threat to predator species including the Southern Resident Orcas. In late 2018, six leading killer whale scientists penned a letter to Governor Jay Inslee expressing an urgent need to “permanently restore the Snake River by removing the lower Snake River dams,” without which the continued survival of Orcas would be threatened. The parasitic eel-like Lamprey, a food source and symbiotic partner of the salmon, is also experiencing concerning drops in population.

The degradation of the Snake River has also had a disproportionate effect on tribes who live in the Columbia River Basin, including the Nez Perce, a federally recognized tribe located in north-central Idaho. As reported by the National Resource Defense Council, the current depletion of salmon threatens not only their access to nutrition – what John Sirois, committee coordinator for the Upper Columbia United Tribes has called a “food justice issue” – but also their cultural heritage, they cast lines in the same places that their ancestors fished. Julian Matthews, treasurer for Nimiipuu Protecting the Environment, a nonprofit organization led by Nez Perce tribal members, expressed concern that these traditions will not exist for future generations if the salmon populations fail to recover.

The four dams on lower Snake River © OpenStreetMap contributors

A Legal History of the Snake River ‘Salmon Wars’

The four dams on the Lower Snake River have been met with more than just decades of public consternation – they have also been the subject of legal response. The history of the ‘salmon wars’ can be traced back to 1855, when the United States government convened a series of sham treaty councils to coerce the Columbia Basin tribes, including the Nez Perce, to sign away millions of acres of land in the Pacific Northwest. Although both major treaties of 1855 and 1863 stipulated that ancestral tribal fishing rights would be left intact, in practice these treaties quashed what little was left of native sovereignty over the river.

In response to growing public outcry over the plight of the river, by Nez Perce tribe members and non-tribal members alike, Jimmy Carter signed the  Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act into law in 1980. The law was drafted ostensibly with the purpose of balancing a public desire for energy with environmental conservation, but in reality, it would do little more than provide a governmental fiat for continued hydroelectric dam use at the expense of salmon populations.

In Steven Hawley’s book Recovering a Lost River: Removing Dams, Rewilding Salmon, Revitalizing Communities – the product of meticulous research and interviews with the hydropower industry – Hawley writes that the reforms that the law specifies, a coequal and mutually beneficial relationship between hydropower and salmon, failed to meet the bare minimum necessary to protect salmon populations. Over three decades after the Act was signed, there have barely been any changes to provide river flows and spills to facilitate salmon migration.

In the 1990s, after petitions from conservation groups, Columbia River Basin salmon were added to the Endangered Species Act (ESA); however, much like the Northwest Power Act, this development would offer only a false assurance that conditions on the river would change. Despite the introduction of multiple biological opinions (BiOps) during the Clinton, Bush, and Obama eras that were purported to lay out a plan for revitalizing the river, and despite a 2001 lawsuit that alleged that gross federal mismanagement was driving Snake River salmon to extinction, the Columbia Basin remains disproportionately in the hands of the hydroelectric industry.

Illustration by Karen Holt from page 210 of Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Salmon Recovery Hearing before the U.S. Senate (1996)

Recent Legal Efforts to Restore the Snake River 

The salmon wars continued into the 21st century. The brinkmanship continues to follow a tiresome pattern of lawsuits and judicial rulings lobbed back and forth between industry and environmental advocates. To illustrate this point: in 2017, conservation groups filed a lawsuit demanding more spills or releases of water over the dams that aid Salmon in their migration.  Federal District Court Judge Michael Simon responded affirmatively and ordered to increase spills on the river. The National Marine Fisheries Service, the United States federal agency responsible for the stewardship of national marine resources, along with two other federal agencies appealed this ruling to the chagrin of environmental advocates and the courts. In 2018, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals responded by affirming Judge Simon’s original ruling. 

However, advocates have repeatedly stressed any judicial attempts to mediate or mandate over the dams is an inferior strategy to removing them. Many conservationists are unequivocal: the dams have to go.  In 2020, after an almost thirty-year battle over the existential rights of Snake River salmon, the outcome is still uncertain.

Proposed Solutions to Save the Snake River

In 2011, journalist Steven Hawley wrote that the early history of the salmon wars was marred by “a skillfully directed symphony of public-relations scams, filthy politics, and crooked science.” This argument holds weight today. The federal government’s symbiotic relationship with industry, an impotent court system, and bad science weaponized by hydropower all help illustrate why previous legislative efforts have failed.

 However, such failures could never have occurred if our legal system didn’t treat Nature as expendable property, only stepping in to protect it when resources or animal populations are near extinction. In this way our environmental legal system is unsound and incoherent. It is nearly impossible to exploit a resource without destroying it, nor is such a strategy sustainable. It is akin to tight-rope walking while your rope burns at one end. The salmon of the Snake River are a perfect illustration of this point, as their existence hangs on the brink, we have to contend with the fact that much of the damage already done is irreversible, and the efforts to undo what we can will be far more arduous then they needed to be, had we not gotten to this point.

The idea that Nature is property also proves problematic when it silences one side of the legal battle. The salmon wars have never been a fair fight. Since the River and the salmon are presumed to be mere property and resources, the voices of hydropower hold primacy. This happened even as decades of public, scientific and judicial oversight argued the opposite – that our collective right to exist within Nature had a stronger argument than the hydropower industry. The decimation of salmon populations in the Snake River is a strong case study for why our environmental legal framework will need to radically change before we will be able to pass law that provides full and lasting protection for Nature.

Ice Harbor Dam on Lower Snake River, Public Domain

Advocacy to Gain Legal Rights for the Snake River

A better way to conceptualize environmental justice comes courtesy of the Nez Perce, who have lived alongside the Snake River for over ten millennia. Their longevity in the area has recently been confirmed by archeological evidence dating back 16,000 years, which would place the Nez Perce as one of the earliest, if not the earliest, aboriginal group to settle on the North American mainland. The tribe’s storied history alongside the river, and their subsequent disenfranchisement as their ancestral lands, fishing sites and cultural traditions have been stripped away by U.S. policy, has given them an intimate connection to the plight of the river –yet, throughout this the Nez Perce have professed a progressive environmental justice framework.

The Nez Perce environmental advocacy organization Nimiipuu Protecting the Environment in particular have been key advocates for a traditional ecological knowledge theory which co-founder and president Elliott Moffett describes as a belief that “all things are connected and sacred.” Moffett compounds on this by speaking about the way in which the Nimiipuu approach poverty eradication, a critical subject considering that the loss of Nimiipuu fishing sites has had a substantial impact on the livelihood of tribal members.

Contrary to certain historic assumptions that environmental conservation is a competing issue to economic concerns, the Nimiipuu argue that poverty eradication and environmental sustainability are inextricable – with human survival and prosperity being predicated on the existence of a healthy natural landscape. As a result, the Nimiipuu have made ecological conservation a part of their poverty eradication program. Furthermore, Nimiipuu Protecting the Environment believes that the best way to achieve these aims is to recognize legal rights for the Snake River. Moffett reiterates his group’s goal as, “prepared to help lead [the] effort to recognize the Rights of the Snake River to exist.”

As a practical application of Moffett’s philosophy, each year his environmental group holds the Nimiipuu River Rendezvous. This event, formally known as "Free the Snake" Flotilla is a mass camp-out on the banks of the Snake River and manages to be simultaneously political protest, community building, environmental advocacy and a public conversation between tribal members, anglers, orca lovers, Idaho residents and Rights of Nature advocates, who all share a goal of restoring the River. As reported by Earth Law Center volunteer Katy Scott, who had the opportunity to attend the event as a featured presenter in 2019, the event was replete with discussions led by tribal members and volunteers about the effect of dams on the River, and what it would take to advance an effective Rights of Nature initiative.

“Free The Snake Flotilla” from Nimiipuu Protecting The Environment

If given legal rights, the Snake River would not be the first in the United States. Earlier this year, the Yurok Tribal Council passed a resolution recognizing Rights of the Klamath River, as a major part of the plan for the largest dam removal and river restoration in the country. Other tribes have recognized the Rights of Nature, as well, including the Ponca Nation (which passed a Rights of Nature statute), the Ho-Chunk Nation (which is advancing a Rights of Nature amendment to its tribal constitution) and the White Earth Nation (who gave legal rights to wild rice). These examples demonstrate the leadership capacity of tribes in advancing Rights of Nature as well as a greater national awareness of alternative systems for conceptualizing environmental law. This feeds into the growing trend internationally for indigenous peoples (along with other frontline communities) to serve as legal guardians of Nature, a role for which they have unmatched legal, cultural, and ethical standing.

The Nez Perce and other tribes have used their environmental justice framework, that humans and the environment must exist symbiotically, to advocate for the revitalization of Nature and more crucially to divest from our current legal conception of Nature as mere property. Earth Law Center believes in this principle, that Nature should be given equal rights, as our existence depends on the existence of our environment.

To that end, Earth Law Center proposes, through working with and supporting tribal leaders, that we adopt alternative solutions to address the salmon wars. Alongside groups such as Nimiipuu Protecting the Environment, we agree that the species that live in and depend on Snake River should be given a voice in the political process. We believe that they have a right to be represented by a legal guardian in decisions and disputes that affect their rights and health, and to be afforded the same fundamental right we give to all humans, including the right to exist and thrive.

Furthermore, these proposals suggest rights for the Snake River itself.  Conceptualizing the issue as one of ‘River Rights’ serves to reinforce and remind us that the River is an interdependent ecosystem. The rights of humans, salmon and orcas can only exist if we have rights for the river as a whole. This idea is not new, rights have already been granted for numerous rivers already, including the Whanganui River in New Zealand, the Atrato River and seven others in Colombia, the Vilcabamba River in Ecuador, and all rivers in Bangladesh. Following on these successes, Earth Law Center plans will include The Snake River in future initiatives with the hope that it, too, may secure its basic rights.

Such a policy will heighten the status of the Nature, solidify its rights to existence as a first principle, and thus lead to environmental law policy that will be in the greater interest of the whole, not just the few.

Learn more about the campaign by emailing Grant Wilson at gwilson@earthlaw.org.

Volunteer

Donate

Local Communities Take the Lead on Addressing Environmental Issues

Figure 1 Photo by mali maeder from Pexels

By Haley Soboslay

In the face of national inaction towards climate change, local leaders have stepped up to provide solutions. From states taking action to protect coral reefs (Hawaii banning 2 sunscreen ingredients) to local towns passing Rights of Nature ordinances, has grassroots activism expanded to a new level? From Capannori, Italy to Santa Monica, CA - many examples serve as inspiring models for other communities who want to be part of the solution.

National governments aren’t protecting the environment

A perfect example of national government inaction starts with the Paris Agreement. In 2016, the Paris Agreement was signed and put into effect, however, few countries are doing what the Paris Agreement lays out. Under the agreement, 195 countries pledged to cut their greenhouse-gas emissions to try to keep global warming under two degrees Celsius.

The Climate Action Tracker has monitored the progress of 32 countries in meeting the Paris accord goals. Sadly, they found that most major polluters are making few, if any, efforts to meet their goals. Most countries have failed to even write up a plan to cut emissions let alone take action. Of the 32 countries tracked, just seven countries have made commitments or efforts to achieve the goal of the Paris accord. 

 It is important, however, to acknowledge the countries that have taken action including Morocco, Gambia, India, and Britain. Morocco launched large-scale renewable energy projects to reach their goals. They have commissioned the largest concentrated solar power plant in the world and have also cut back on fossil-fuel subsidies. Gambia has committed to a massive reforestation project. This plan will help to stop environmental erosion and degradation. India has also focused on a renewable energy program. They have committed to cease the production of new coal-fired plants and have strengthened promotion of electric vehicles. Britain is in fact struggling to meet emissions goals, but they do get an honorable mention for being the only country to design a way to track how well the country is meeting its Paris Agreement commitments.

Figure 2 Camels in Merzouga, Morocco. Photo by Inbal Malca on Unsplash

These countries show that efforts at a national level can be effective, however, these efforts are sadly few and far between. Overall, national governments are not doing their part in protecting the environment.

Local governments step up to protect Nature

So, how are cities and states taking independent action to answer the questions of environmental crisis?

Figure 3 The earth hero

These actions are spurring other action, adding momentum, raising awareness at a local level in the face of federal inaction. Let’s look at the banning of single use plastics and plastic straws. The movement of banning single use plastics and straws has spread rapidly across the United States and around the world. Vancouver, Scotland, and Taiwan have all banned plastic straws and Taiwan has also banned single use plastics by the year 2030. Twelve states in the United States are tackling this issue by enacting plastic bag bans and fees and in some cities plastic straws have been banned. Other numerous states are in the process of enacting similar bans and fees throughout the United States.

Also, numerous individual businesses, nonprofits, and schools have opted to ban straws in the United States and around the world. In Tirana, Albania the mayor and citizens organized 100,000 trees to be planted. The mayor stated that this would be the beginning of a new era of environmental care for the city. This is a perfect example of how civic concrete actions and positive energy can help to combat the environmental crisis. 

Hawaii recently banned two sunscreen ingredients, effective 2021. This ban includes the sale, offer of sale or distribution of any sunscreens containing oxybenzone or octinoxate without a prescription from a licensed health care provider. Both ingredients have been found to be harmful to coral reefs. When the sunscreen is washed off a beachgoer’s skin and into the water; it can cause bleaching, deformities, DNA damage and ultimately death in coral. 

 In Capannori, Italy locals were at the center of a waste removal revolution. In 1997, local activists defeated a proposal for an incineration plant that was set to be built in town. Instead, they chose an alternative waste tax which rewards residents for reducing non-recyclable waste with an aim of reaching zero waste. The town monitored and tracked household waste to understand habits resulting in waste tariffs levied in certain villages to reduce the amount of total waste. These examples demonstrate the power of local communities to not only take action, but tailor those actions to the unique situation of their environs. 

Societal evolution has always started locally

When it comes to rights-based movements local activists seem to be at the heart of them. From women's suffrage to the abolition of slavery, most actions started locally which lead to changing laws which then spread to states and provinces with national government (at least in the US) often being the last to join the movement. Think about the successful campaigns for gay marriage, women's suffrage, and the abolition of slavery. 

The legalization of gay marriage serves as a great example of a major rights-based movement that started locally. The fight for marriage equality began locally when a non-profit group called Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders started a suit against the Massachusetts Department of Public Health on behalf of seven gay and lesbian couples who had been denied marriage licenses.

At this time, no other state had legalized marriage and the battle seemed to be an uphill one, however, by 2004 the state had ruled that barring same-sex couples from marrying violates the Massachusetts Constitution. This made Massachusetts the first state to legalize same-sex marriage. This set a precedent for other states. In 2008, Connecticut became the second state to achieve marriage equality. Next, came Vermont and Iowa the next year, then New Hampshire, New York, Maine and Washington, and by 2015 it became legal at the federal level. In this way, the legalization of same-sex marriage began locally and worked Its way up to becoming legal at the federal level many years later.

Figure 4 Map of world homosexuality laws. Dark green means gay marriage is legal.

The women's suffrage movement started locally almost a century before women gained rights in the eyes of the constitution. On August 26, 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was finally ratified, however, the movement started almost a century earlier by local activists and reformers.

In fact, the women's suffrage movement began decades before the Civil War. At this time in the United States reform groups were being created all across the United States and women played important roles in most of them including temperance leagues, religious movements, moral-reform societies, anti-slavery organizations, etc.

At the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 It was discussed that women were autonomous individuals who deserved their own political identities. Overtime, the movement went through highs and lows but ultimately gained momentum and by 1910 Individual states began to grant women the right to vote. By 1920, all women would have the right to vote with the passing of the 19th amendment, but it all started at a local level with reform groups and conventions. 

The abolition of slavery follows a similar pattern. Americans soon realized after the Constitution In 1776 that slavery was a hypocrisy to the document. This inspired Vermont to abolish slavery in its state constitution in 1777. By 1804, all Northern states had abolished slavery. Freed slaves residing in these states became determined to fight for those enslaved in other parts of the country.  Their support of the Underground Railroad was vital in helping thousands of slaves to escape before slavery was abolished nationally.

The unrest in the United States was a catalyst to the start of the Civil War. Ultimately, by the end of the war in 1865, the 13th amendment would be ratified signaling the end of slavery in America. Again, this shows how actions started locally and eventually spread to national laws. Ultimately, history shows that change starts local and a local action should be shown to be effective when It comes to an environmental solution as well.

Earth Law an innovative part of the environmental solution

Earth Law Center (ELC) believes that Rights of Nature is the next major rights-based movement in the US and the world.

Earth Law is the idea that ecosystems have the right to exist, thrive, and evolve—and that Nature should be able to defend its rights in court, just like people can. Current laws around the world only protect Nature for the benefit of people and corporations, however, Earth Law suggests that Nature be given the same rights as humans. Courts then assess monetary awards by looking at restoring the environment back to its natural state as opposed to the current view which assess awards based on the environmental damage that must violate a person's own rights because the environment has no rights of its own.

By giving nature Its own rights, we are acknowledging the deeply connected relationship between humans and Nature. Both humans and Nature are dependent on one another. Earth Law acknowledges that in order for humans to thrive, Nature must be protected and if it is not, we will all suffer greatly. There are many examples from around the world that can be looked at to see Earth Law In action.

Figure 5 Santa Monica Beach. Korvenna

Santa Monica, California was the first city on the West Coast to implement a rights of nature ordinance. This ordinance was created to enforce Santa Monica’s Sustainable City Plan, rights to clean air, water and soil, and the rights of nature above corporate entities’ privileges and powers. This ordinance helps to join efforts by groups within the city to protect the health and well-being of Nature within their city.

Crestone, Colorado offers a great example of Earth Law in action. In 2018, the Town of Crestone’s Board of Trustees unanimously approved a resolution recognizing the rights of nature. Crestone’s mayor, government, and the community all worked collaboratively to make this happen. Once the mayor and others in the community started considering Earth Law as a way to strengthen the protection of Crestone’s natural environment, Grant Wilson, Directing Attorney from ELC, was invited to speak at a local rights of nature event. The event allowed the community to ask questions, discuss what Earth Law might mean to them and how this would support their efforts to protect their local aquifer. After this event, a genuine interest in protecting nature began to spread throughout the community. The resolution which passed two weeks later refers to humans as being environmental stewards and also commits to recognizing the rights of nature in Crestone.

Colima, Mexico became the first state/province in North America to recognize the Rights of Nature. In June 2019, the state of Colima, Mexico passed a constitutional amendment recognizing the Rights of Nature. ELC helped research and draft the final language. The decision adds momentum to current ELC initiatives in Mexico to seek recognition of the rights of rivers at the national level in Mexico as well as for the Magdalena, Atoyac and San Pedro Mezquital Rivers. 

The Kofan people of Sinangoe in the Ecuadorian Amazon won a landmark legal battle to protect the headwaters of the Aguarico River in 2018. This river is one of Ecuador’s largest and most important rivers. This is a win for not only indigenous nations across the Amazon but also for land defenders worldwide and will continue to be an inspiration for others seeking Rights of Nature.

For communities who would like to learn more about what an Earth Law initiative could look like in their town, this Community Toolkit is available for free download.

Conclusion 

What we have learned from these examples in particular is how important community involvement is. Collaboration is at the heart of rights of nature resolutions. We have also learned that with knowledge comes power. When residents had ample information, they could make an informed decision. When it comes to the environmental crisis we face today - knowledge, commitment, and passion provide a way forward to address these issues. 

Local governments protect the environment in ways that national governments have not. Throughout history we have seen that societal evolution has often started locally and the environmental movement follows this pattern.

Local action has shown that human communities often protect national communities and that when national inaction is the norm, local level action helps drive the evolution of rights recognition and that’s what we need today. 

Empowering nature empowers communities: when advocates see themselves as rights defenders rather than responsible stewards of nature for human ends, the stakes are raised, and the relationships between people and the environment is transformed. You can join the movement to effect a radical change in how we view and interact with the natural world.

---

Actions you can take today:

• Sign up for the newsletter

• Volunteer your time

• Donate to protect Nature

Meet Burnham Beeches: an Important Ecosystem Shaped by Traditional Farming

Figure 1 Trunk of one tree growing into another. Photo by author, Helen George.

By Helen George

On a warm, sunny day in July my friends and I went to visit Burnham Beeches, a site of special scientific interest near London in the United Kingdom (UK). This 383.71 hectare woodland is a popular beauty spot where visitors can walk for hours under near continuous tree cover. 

We admired the woodland for its beautiful beeches, ancient oaks and the unusual number of ant nests. Burnham Beeches is one of the UK’s richest sites for invertebrates that depend on dead or decaying wood. It’s also home to nationally important epiphytes (mosses, liverworts, lichens, algae and micro-fungi).

Burnham Beeches supports a complex ecosystem of flora and fauna. If it were to disappear, much more than trees would be lost. Fortunately, early proposals to build the HS2 high speed rail link just less than 400 metres away were abandoned.

Many of the trees at Burnham Beeches have an unusual shape. That’s because the woodland is a former beech wood pasture, where pollarding was regularly practised up until 200 years ago.

Pollarding is a method of pruning. The top of the tree is cut off, encouraging a dense growth of new branches from the poll (head) of the tree. Pollarding enabled country folk to gather leaves, twigs and bark for animal fodder, bark for tanning, and wood for fuel and charcoal. 

(At Burnham Beeches a 400 to 500 year old pollarded beech known as the Cage Pollard appeared in the Kevin Costner movie Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves in 1991!).

Of the woodland’s original 3,000 pollards, only 400 remain. The lack of pollarding for two centuries led to very heavy branches growing on slim stems and many trees collapsed. The City of London, which owns the southern part of Burnham Beeches, has resumed pollarding to maintain the woodland.

In the UK it’s not unusual to find important ecosystems that depend on human management to stay healthy. Traditional fruit orchards are another example involving trees.

Figure 2 Woodland management includes leaving deadwood on the ground for the invertebrates. Photo by author.

The UK’s human population has shaped much of the countryside for hundreds of years. Nature has been forced to adapt around traditional farming practices. In the UK maintaining established ecosystems sometimes requires a knowledge of farming history.

Much of today’s wildlife crisis is caused by the shift away from traditional methods to larger scale industrialised farming. The removal of hedgerows to make fields bigger and the use of chemicals has had significant impacts on biodiversity.

In woodlands the move to commercial forestry methods and the decline of pollarding and coppicing has led to loss of habitats.

Meet the UK’s denuded landscape: a legacy of centuries of human activity

Most British people probably know that the island used to be heavily wooded. What may surprise some is how early deforestation began. I asked a British friend to guess the date. “At the industrial revolution?” He guessed, wrongly.

Britain lost most of its forests long before the 18th and 19th century period of industrialisation. In the 5th century (when the Romans withdrew from Britain) total tree cover on the entire island was a mere 15 percent! Thousands of years earlier, at the start of the Stone Age, Britain was almost completely forested.

With just 9.9 percent cover England is now one of the least forested areas in Europe. And Scotland’s famously beautiful but austere Highland slopes shouldn’t be like that either. The Highlands also used to be heavily wooded.

Figure 3 This ancient oak is a valuable habitat for small organisms. Photo by author.

Deforestation’s early impact on Britain means that its ancient woodlands have been drastically reduced from what they once were. In England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, the description “ancient woodland” is applied to any woodland that have existed since at least the year 1600. In Scotland the cut off point is 1750. 

The value of even the youngest ancient woodland is that ecosystems have had several centuries to become established in the soil. For this reason, ancient woodland soil is irreplaceable. Woodland soil ecosystems include many types of fungi, invertebrates and worms. 

The loss of woodland habitat has caused problems that extend beyond the loss of the trees themselves. Together with hunting, deforestation has had serious consequences for larger mammals in Britain. Brown bears disappeared around 1,500 years ago, lynx 1,300 years ago, and wolves 400 years ago in the 17th century.

Science has found that large predators help to keep ecosystems healthy. Predators control prey populations and maintain the balance of ecosystems. Today Britain’s largest mammal predators are knee-height at best: red foxes, badgers and the rare European wildcat, which exists only in Scotland. What would British nature be like if our larger predators had survived?

Britain’s largest wild mammals are now deer, accidentally reintroduced wild boar, and wild ponies. Without natural predators to keep their populations under control, these animals can cause damage to ecosystems through grazing, browsing and trampling.

Britain is an island. When animals disappear from an island they are permanently lost until humans reintroduce them again. This is why rewilding is such a popular topic of conversation among conservationists here. The Rewilding movement supports the reintroduction of lost animals to the UK.

Rewilding has already shown positive results. In recent years Eurasian beavers, missing since the 16th century, have returned to England, Scotland and Wales.

The new beaver population in Devon, southwest England, has noticeably improved biodiversity. By building dams, thinning out dense vegetation and creating pools and deadwood, the beavers are improving habitat structure and diversity. Researchers found improvements in the populations of bats, invertebrates and bryophytes.

Figure 4 A Tree showing evidence of pollarding through the upward rise of its branches. Photo by author.

What could rewilding do for ancient woodlands? An exciting project in southwest England will show how the return of bears, wolves and lynxes could help woodland ecosystems.

Run by Bristol Zoo and officially opened to the public on 25th July 2019, Bear Wood is 7.5 acres of ancient woodland surrounded by barriers. Wolves and bears live together in one part of the wood. Lynx and wolverine (extinct in Britain for 7,000 years) live together in the other part.

The Bear Wood project aims to highlight what’s been lost and will also demonstrate what could be gained by future introductions of large predators.

Unfortunately, with woodlands at risk and most of Britain still deforested, it’s unlikely that the island will be able to provide big predators with all the habitat they need. 

Meet the Woodland Trust: defenders of British woodland 

Founded in 1972, the Woodland Trust exists to defend ancient woodland, promote the planting of new trees and influence government policy towards trees. Deforestation in Britain has been so severe that every ancient woodland site must be protected with vigour.

Since the 1930s almost half of ancient broadleaved woodland in England and Wales has been planted with commercial conifers or cleared for agriculture. Britain only has three native species of conifer: the Yew, the Juniper and the Scots Pine. Many of the conifers grown on plantations are species that originate in North America and Scandinavia.

Only 3,090 square kilometres of ancient semi-natural woodland remain in Britain. That is less than 20 percent of the total wooded area.

Thanks to the Woodland Trust and others, the government’s 2019 National Planning Policy Framework for England contains new protections for trees.

The Framework is used by local governments in England when they decide on permission for new construction projects.

The revision to the Framework is a victory for trees and for the ecosystems they support. The Framework states:

“development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats (such as ancient woodland and ancient or veteran trees) should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists.” 

The Woodland Trust has released the Planners’ Manual for Ancient Woodland and Veteran Trees to raise awareness of the new policies. 

In England, members of the public can make formal objections at certain stages of the planning permission process. Therefore, the manual is a useful guide not only for local government officers but also for the public.

The manual gives advice on ways to protect and support trees and woodlands near construction projects. 

One useful tip is that developers should plant buffer zones of trees and shrubs between ancient woods and new developments. These newly planted buffer areas, sometimes more than 100 metres wide, can shield ancient woodlands from noise and light pollution, invasive garden plants, wandering pets and other disturbances.

Another useful piece of advice applies to veteran trees. Veteran trees are trees of any age which show ancient characteristics due to damage. Ancient characteristics vary between species but tend to include a wide, hollowed trunk and a low fat, squat shape.

Veteran trees have ecological importance because of the species that live on deadwood habitats and in structurally complex branches.

The manual suggests placing felled veteran trees next to surviving veterans to give communities the chance to migrate to a new habitat.

The Woodland Trust’s manual highlights the ecological value of woodlands that have been very heavily shaped by human management. It encourages the public and local government officers not to dismiss woodlands that may appear to have little ecological value, such as commercial conifer plantations.

In 1900 Britain’s woodland coverage was at an all time low of 4.7 percent. It increased in the 20th century because the government established plantations of conifers for commercial use.

Unless well managed, the plantations are not great news ecologically. Dark, densely packed forests of non-native trees are a habitat for some wildlife but not attractive to all the natural communities that could live in a woodland. Regeneration of these woodlands includes ensuring a mosaic of tree species, letting light onto the forest floor and maintaining open areas.

When plantations stand on ancient woodland soil that is very good news. The ancient woodland’s soil ecosystems may still survive. For this reason Plantations on Ancient Woodland Sites are protected under the National Planning Policy Framework. 

The protection offered by the Framework is a boost for conservationists working to improve biodiversity on these plantation sites.

The Woodland Trust’s manual and the Framework also calls attention to ancient woodlands with only 20 percent tree cover. To the untrained eye these areas may look like open fields with a few trees scattered around them. Developers might imagine that building a few houses on these sites does no harm.

However, in England these low density woodlands may be very old, originating in medieval hunting forests, shared grazing land, and the landscaped parklands of the aristocracy. Many collections of ancient trees can be found near the grand houses of Britain’s nobility.

Meet Earth Law: a way to increase protection for ancient woodlands and all trees

The National Planning Policy Framework is a significant step forward for trees but it’s not perfect.

Figure 5 Ancient tree with hollow trunk at Burnham Beeches. An ancient tree is a tree that is old for its species. All ancient trees are veteran trees, but not all veterans are ancient. Photo by author.

It does not mention urban trees. These are important to the urban ecosystem as habitats, air filters and carbon storage mechanisms. In London there are 8,421,000 trees. The total tree canopy cover is 21.9 percent! That makes London an urban forest.

Another problem with the National Planning Policy Framework is that it allows for human needs to be placed above the needs of ancient woodland in cases such as “nationally significant infrastructure projects … where the public benefit would clearly outweigh the loss of deterioration of habitat.”

At present, as highlighted by the Woodland Trust, 108 ancient woodlands are threatened by the controversial HS2 high speed rail project. The proposed rail line will travel from London to the north, connecting Birmingham, London, Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Edinburgh and Glasgow.

The National Planning Policy Framework places human transport needs above the needs of irreplaceable ancient woodlands. It is not an Earth Law Framework at present, but in the future that could change. The Framework has been revised in the past and will be revised again in the future. One day it could include Earth Law thinking.

Earth Law gives equal value to the needs of all members of the natural community. Under Earth Law economic benefits to humans are never of greater importance than an ecosystem’s right to thrive and survive. Earth Law practitioners understand that healthy ecosystems ensure the long term survival of the human species.

If planning policy already included Earth Law thinking, 108 ancient woodlands would not be under threat from HS2. Instead, the rail project would always prioritise looking for alternative routes and ways to pass through the landscape without disturbing it.

Britain is a heavily deforested island but the situation for trees is improving thanks to the hard work of the Woodland Trust and other organisations. Introducing Earth Law to England, Wales and Scotland would help to protect all trees.

If you are a tree supporter in Britain or anywhere else in the world, contact Earth Law Center for advice and information on Earth Law:

• Sign up for the newsletter

• Volunteer

• Donate
  
  
  

Dark Sky Reserve Networks Usher in Earth Law

Figure 1 Stars over Rocky Mountain National Park, US. Photo by Jeremy Thomas on Unsplash

If you’ve ever tried to see the stars at night, you may also have found that it’s nearly impossible because there’s so much light everywhere. So much light floods our night skies that the term “light pollution” has emerged, describing any adverse effect of artificial light including sky glow, glare, light trespass, light clutter, decreased visibility at night, and energy waste.

In June 2016, it was estimated that one third of the world's population could no longer see the Milky Way. This included 80% of Americans, and 60% of Europeans.

Main types of light pollution

The three main types of light pollution include glare, light trespass and skyglow (in addition to over-illumination and clutter).

Glare from unshielded lighting is a public-health hazard—especially the older you become. Glare light scattering in the eye causes loss of contrast, sometimes blinds you temporarily and leads to unsafe driving conditions, for instance.

Light trespass occurs when unwanted light enters one’s property, for example, by shining unwanted light into a bedroom window of a person trying to sleep.

Skyglow refers to the glow effect that can be seen over populated areas. Skyglow is the combination of all the reflected light and upward-directed (unshielded) light escaping up into the sky (and for the most part, unused).

Figure 2 Sky glow. Griffith Observatory, Los Angeles US. Photo by Denys Nevozhai on Unsplash

Shielding lights significantly reduces all three of these types of light pollution.

What’s the problem with too much light?

Light pollution affects many animals since light and dark often signals when to eat, sleep, hunt, migrate, or reproduce. That means light pollution alters and interferes with the timing of necessary biological activities. Artificial light at night disrupts nocturnal pollination networks and has negative consequences for plant reproductive success. In one study, artificially illuminated plant–pollinator communities, nocturnal visits to plants were reduced by 62% compared to dark areas. 

Could light pollution be contributing to the decline of coral reefs? More than 130 different species of coral on the Great Barrier Reef spawn new life by moonlight. Every October or November after the full moon, the reefs spew sperm and eggs into the ocean in what looks like an underwater blizzard. When the two sex cells combine amid the flurry, fertilization begins. Bright urban lights can mask the moon’s phases, throwing the corals’ biological clocks out of sync, according to Oren Levy, of Bar-Ilan University in Israel. This can cause the reefs to release their reproductive cells late or not at all, decreasing their chances of producing offspring.

Since most songbirds migrate at night, light pollution disrupts their circadian rhythms and can disorient birds during migration. Bright lights at night on large buildings attract birds in the same way that bright porch lights attract moths, which can result in fatal collisions.

Figure 3 Baby sea turtle. Wildlifeppl at en.wikipedia

Sea turtles lay their eggs on beaches, and when they hatch, the hatchlings move away from the dark silhouettes of the sand dunes toward the brighter horizon of the ocean. However, many coastal areas are becoming heavily populated and these artificial lights draw the baby sea turtles away from the safety of the ocean towards land where they can suffer dehydration, encounter predators, or be run over by cars. Any reduction in the amount of artificial lights near beaches can help protect newly hatched sea turtles.

Florida’s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission states, “Even one artificial light source can disrupt normal flight activity, long-distance migrations, or even attract insects that don’t normally move from their habitat.” When these bugs stay on the light for too long, they tend to die from overheating. Moths are typically the victim, which then affects the birds and bats that feed on them because they lose a food source.

Light pollution also affects the life cycle of plants and can prevent them from growing flowers and reproducing. This affects the pollinators of these plants and also their own life cycles. It also affects humans. According to the National Academies Press’ Booklet “Resources on Pollinators,” one-third of human food requires a pollinator.

Amphibians are an important part of forest and aquatic ecosystems; and because they are very sensitive to environmental changes, they serve as an important indicator species of the health of ecosystems. However environmental stresses have caused their populations to decline around the world and light pollution may play a big part by changing both foraging and breeding of nocturnal amphibians.

Zooplankton called Daphnia normally dwell deep underwater in the day and ascend to the surface at night to feast on algae. Darkness triggers their migration. But marine ecologists have found that nighttime lighting can prevent the zooplankton from floating up to their meals, which could lead to algae blooms that overwhelm the other life in a lake.

Trees evolved with regular day to night cycles so they can measure light with a kind of molecular clock. This clock tells them how long the sun is out for, the season and distance from other trees measured by the shadows those trees cast.  From this information, trees decide when to photosynthesize, when to send out leaves in spring, leaf coloring and when to shed leaves. Artificial light wreaks havoc with this system by extending the length of a day which changes flowering patterns and storing up energy to survive the winter.

Light pollution also affects human beings. Humans, too, need natural darkness for sound sleep and good health. Cool blue white light at night from sources such as LEDs, fluorescent and metal halide lights interfere with the body’s circadian rhythms by suppressing melatonin and increasing cortisol, a brain chemical released when we are stimulated or excited. High cortisol levels make it difficult to fall asleep or experience deep sleep, which our immune systems need to fight illness and disease.

What’s being done to reduce light pollution

Light pollution is one of the easiest pollutions to clean up. Taking steps to reduce light pollution doesn't mean living in the dark - it's about making light more efficient and beneficial.

Dark Sky Reserves

An IDA International Dark Sky Reserve is a public or private land area possessing an exceptional or distinguished quality of starry nights and nocturnal environment that is specifically protected for its scientific, natural, educational, cultural, heritage and/or public enjoyment. Reserves consist of a core area meeting minimum criteria for sky quality and natural darkness, and a peripheral area that supports dark sky preservation in the core. For a list of certified dark sky parks: https://www.darksky.org/our-work/conservation/idsp/parks/

The Central Idaho Dark Sky Reserve is a 1,416-square-mile (3,670 km2) dark-sky preserve near the Sawtooth National Recreation Area, in the U.S. state of Idaho. It was designated on December 18, 2017 and is the first gold-tier dark sky preserve in the United States.

Figure 4 Mama and baby Grizzly bears in Jasper Park. Photo by Michelle Bender, used with permission of author.

“Jasper National Park is one of 17 designated Dark Sky Preserves in Canada,” says Myriam Bolduc, marketing manager for Tourism Jasper. “At 11,000 square kilometers, we are the second largest Dark Sky Preserve in the world, and we are the largest accessible Dark Sky Preserve—meaning there’s a town within the limits of the preserve.”

To become a Dark Sky Preserve, the area had to eliminate visible artificial lighting while putting measures in place to educate the public and nearby towns about light pollution. The sky glow from outside the border of the preserve had to match that of a natural sky glow. Today, 97 percent of the park is a designated wilderness area, free of light pollution, with roads and trails providing easy access to year-round stargazing sites.

Governments Act to Reduce Light Pollution (and energy costs)

From 2014-2016 the US Department of Energy’s Outdoor Lighting Accelerator (OLA) worked with 25 partners (including three states, 16 cities and 6 regional energy networks) committed to upgrade 1.3 million street lights that will ultimately save cities an estimated $48 million/year.

Across the pond, the European Union adopted new roadway lighting guidelines, employing a ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable‘ (ALARA) principle. The specific guidelines, intended to reduce energy use as well as light pollution, are consistent with the Low Impact Lighting (LIL) standard promoted by German, Italian and Slovenian members of the European Environmental Bureau in the past decade.

Many cities have taken the lead in re-doing their lights to reclaim the night and decrease energy waste. Flagstaff, Arizona, was the first city to be designated a Dark Sky Community by the International Dark-Sky Association, and Chicago is in the process of retrofitting its fixtures. So far, concerns about dimmer, sparser lighting possibly causing an uptick in crime or decreased safety at night have not been supported by the data; in Chicago’s West Garfield Park, more brightly lit alleys actually led to an increase in reported crime. And anecdotally, people are finding that less glaring lighting makes it easier to see in unlit areas, because our eyes adapt more quickly to the dark.

Figure 5 Different levels of light shielding. Created by ELC for this blog.

What cities can do to reduce light pollution

Motion sensitive street lighting is a pretty self-explanatory idea, and one that has become reality on this Barcelona street. Lights come on as people and moving objects approach, illuminating an area in advance, thus reducing wasted light and wasted energy.

Street lighting encased above and to the sides channels light downwards – where it is needed – and reduces the amount of wasted light. Known as ‘cutting off light at the horizontal’, this ensures that light is used to illuminate the ground, not the sky.

Switching to low watt bulbs is a straightforward way of reducing light pollution. Moving away from bluish-white lighting could be a bigger contributor to reduced light pollution on an urban scale. Replacing LED with warm-white lighting creates a win win situation. The Spanish market city of Vélez-Málaga (seems the Spanish are big on lighting innovation) recently adopted a dimmable warm-white light system for its streets, giving it lower watt lighting on demand and better illuminating its historic streets in the process.

Earth Law as an additional solution to light pollution

Earth Law Center is building an international movement from the ground up, one that gives better grounding to the idea that humans have a responsibility for how we impact the world around us. The belief that nature - the species and ecosystems that comprise our world - has inherent rights has proven to be a galvanizing idea, and we work with local communities to help them organize around the rights of nature to protect their environment from the threats that they see.

The heart of the ELC approach is to seek legal personhood for ecosystems and species, a designation similar to that given to corporations in U.S. law, and one that if done well will imply both rights for the entities so designated and responsibilities on the part of human beings and societies to respect those rights.

Our work includes helping governments adopt and implement laws, policies and practices that protect other species, ecosystems, and the elements of the natural world -- water, air and land.   Our work also includes providing education about how individual people and communities can live better as part of Nature and as its stewards, rather than its masters.

Restoring the natural Dark Skies of night is consistent with our commitment in that it takes a more holistic view of ecosystems and fellow species by respecting the rights of all living things to exist, thrive and evolve.

What individuals can do to reduce light pollution

In addition to motion sensors, shielded lighting, blue to warm light and low watt bulbs – solutions abound for reducing light pollution.

• Install reflectors to outline a driveway instead of putting in a row of lights. Reflectors are cheaper to purchase, free to use and are unaffected by power outages.

• Dimmer switches on household lights, both indoor and outdoor save energy and reduce light pollution

• Eliminate, reduce or turn off late night decorative lighting and/or outdoor lighting during late night hours when outdoor areas are not in use.

• Some power companies bill you for “Nearby Outdoor Lighting” which could mean the lamp across the street. Check your bill for the $5 - $10 a month for this service and call to ask for the charge to be terminated and the light be removed.

• The IDA Fixture Seal of Approval for dark sky friendly fixtures which minimize glare, reduce light trespass, and keep the night sky dark.

---

Here’s more you can do:

• Sign up for the monthly newsletter

• Volunteer

• Donate

Young Doljanka River Defender Needs Your Help

Figure 1 Photo of the Doljanka River by Anes Podic.

First, a bit about the initiative. The Bosnia River Action Network Advocacy (BRANA) in Bosnia and Herzegovina seeks recognition of rights for the beautiful Doljanka River, one of the few wild rivers left in Europe and now threatened by a hydropower plant. Members of BRANA include Earth Law Center (ELC), Eko akcija (“eco action”) and Gotusa.

Read more about the initiative on ELC’s blog here.

Intro to the Doljanka River

The Doljanka is a tributary of Neretva river in North Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Running for about 18 kilometers and reaching an altitude of about 400 meters, it arises from sources on the far northeast slopes of Vran mountain. It runs through a limestone canyon and flows through the village of Doljani.

The Doljanka flows into the Neretva River between Jablanica and Mostar, and provides critical passage to spawning trout from the Neretva river. Its riverbed is both rocky and sandy, which shelters brown trout and its natural food sources. The difference in water level in summer compared to winter is quite large.

Dinaric karst water systems, of which the Doljanka is part of, support 25% of the total of 546 fish species in Europe, many endemic – found only here and nowhere else in the world.

The Neretva River, together with four other areas in the Mediterranean, has the largest number of threatened freshwater fish species. Multiple fish species are geographically limited, thus more  vulnerable, so they are included on the Red List of endangered fish as of 2006.

The Adriatic basin has 88 species of fish, of which 44 are Mediterranean endemic species, and 41 are Adriatic endemic species. More than half of the Adriatic river basin species of fish inhabit the Neretva, the Ombla, the Trebišnjica, the Morača Rivers and their tributaries, and more than 30 are endemic.

Threat of hydropower: the fake green energy

Figure 2 Destruction of the Doljanka River.

Did you know that hydroelectric dams create more greenhouse gas than coal-fired power plants? Dams cause organic material—vegetation, sediment and soil—to stagnate and decompose I  reservoirs thus releasing methane and carbon dioxide.  into the water and the air throughout the generation cycle.

Philip Fearnside, a research professor at the National Institute for Research in the Amazon, in Manaus, Brazil, and one of the most cited scientists on the subject of climate change, has called these dams “methane factories." And, according to Brazil's National Institute of Space Research, dams are “the largest single anthropogenic source of methane, being responsible for 23 percent of all methane emissions due to human activities." 

Because of their disastrous impact on river ecosystems and species. Some experts hold that dams cause climate change. Dams drain and dry up downstream wetlands that are “carbon sinks" holding vast amounts of greenhouse gases in soils. This draining and dry-up causes additional carbon and methane to be released and emitted into the air. 

The project to build a hydropower plant on the Doljanka River has met with fierce local community resistance. Dženan Šašić, 22, has made it his life’s work to defend and protect the natural environment. BRANA speaks with Dženan so you can hear from him directly.

So tell us a little bit about yourself?

Figure 3 Dženan and Svjetlana Nedimovic by Doljanka River. Photo by Dzenan.

Dženan: I earned my Bachelor degree in Information Technology and currently work in Sarajevo as a back-end developer. I was forced to leave Jablanica because the local authorities absolutely did not like what I was doing. Nevertheless, I come home every weekend.

My brother and father work in Slovenia as drivers. They [the local authorities] threatened me the night before the protest, and even before they heard about the initiative. I was getting messages that they would knock my head off and I'd be thrown in Doljanka. They sent messages to Father that the darkness would eat him.

What's the history of your family with this river?

Over 100 years ago, my family settled on the banks of the Doljanka. I am the fourth generation to live by this river.

In addition to bathing, the river provided us with water for crops. When I was a boy, my father was forced to leave Bosnia due to lack of work.  Every time he comes here, if the weather is nice, we spend time on the Doljanka.

Now, my father intends to return to Bosnia for good and spend his retirement by the Doljanka, the plans for construction of the hydropower plant could deprive him of that.

How did you come to be defending the Doljanka River?

I conducted a petition in two local communities adjacent to the Doljanka river.  The conclusion was that local people oppose the construction. But this was just to discover the mood of people.

Later I found out what different experts, ecologists, ichthyologists, geographers, mechanical engineers, and lawyers thought. Pretty much every media outlet in Bosnia and Herzegovinia reported around how problematic the construction of small hydropower plant is. This is not just anecdotal. 

Currently, I serve as the coordinator for the civil society nonprofit Association for the Doljanka River and the NGO has data on how detrimental this project is to the health of the river and its inhabitants.

Can you share with us something unique and personal about the river that others might not know?

Figure 4: Dzenan with Amela Krnjic, Naza Spahic

A former coach of the French soccer club Paris Saint-Germain and current coach of Nantes is a resident of the village Jelačići, whose population has signed the petition and is actively fighting against the small hydropower plant.  He grew up on the Doljanka river. Last time I saw him there swimming in the summer of 2012.  This is a man who can spend his vacation anywhere in the world and yet he decides to spend it right here, on Doljanka.

During the summer, children spend the holiday at Doljanka. The elderly gather on weekends. Every year, people from the village gather at the river and hang out together. Doljanka is the most popular destination on the Labor Day.

What is the impact if the hydropower plant construction is allowed to continue?

The hydroelectric power plant will deny us the use of potable water, farming, it will result in the disappearance of fish stocks. Countless endangered species, not found anywhere else will disappear from the world.

It will also deprive the people in the village of their main summer pastime and endanger my community. Studies have found that these hydropower plants are really not that green, and in addition to creating standing water, decreasing oxygen levels, depriving fish of enough water – they can also add toxins to the food we grow and eat. 

What gives you hope?

People around me. They are heroes. On several occasions, they blocked the machines with their bodies. They are not afraid of the authorities, or the system; what interests them is getting to truth and justice, and that's not easy at all.

Women are the most active in the association. I would highlight three of them — Amela Krnjić, Naza Spahić, Lejla Behrem and Zuhra Sarajlić. They are from three different generations. Lejla is a student of agronomy and is engaged in preparing of the letters to other environmental organizations. Amela is a middle-aged woman and spent a lot of time educating the Jablanica population about Mini hydropower.

A woman who is most fascinating with her energy and persistence is Naza. She is a former social worker and now retired, she is almost 70 years old. Every day she coordinates with lawyers and other legal organizations. The majority in the association are women. Recently, Svjetlana Nedimovic, a political analyst and social critic, visited them. She was also impressed by their courage.

What do you need help with?

Soon there will be court hearings, and we have filed a number of legal complaints.  Since we have financed everything on our own so far, we have spent several thousand marks (USD1,000+), financial support would mean a lot to us and help us continue to defend our beloved river.

You can also sign the petition here to protect the Doljanka River, and share the news with your friends.

What's the one message you want to give to the world?

The truth must always be defended, by every authority. It is important to live and act honorably and honestly, fighting for rights that belong to all human beings. Water is one of the basic human rights so we must continually work towards environmental justice.

---

To join us in protecting Nature:

• Sign up for ELC’s monthly newsletter

• Volunteer

• Donate

Rights Recognition for the Caroni River in Trinidad and Tobago

Figure 1. Michel Jean Cazabon (1813-1888) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

By Olivia Alexander-Leeder

Welcome to Trinidad and Tobago

Figure 2. CIA [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Complex, beautiful, and delicate are three words that come to mind when describing the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, but “home” may best describe the islands for their nearly 1.3 million human inhabitants.  The two southernmost islands of the Caribbean, Trinidad and Tobago host a biodiverse community in a lush tropical and equatorial micro-climate. The islands are home to many of the world’s most stunning and exotic species including the scarlet ibis, leatherback sea turtle, and mountain immortelle. Similarly, diversity is found in the islands’ vibrant multicultural history, with their African, Indian, Spanish, and South American roots.

The World Bank describes Trinidad and Tobago as a high-income economy, but the United Nations recognizes the republic as a Small Island Developing State (SIDS) meaning the economy remains highly susceptible to natural disasters and climatic changes. The country is thoroughly industrialized as it continues to experience a large amount of economic success due to the exploitation of large natural gas and oil reserves. Blossoming tourism and waning agricultural exports trail as second and third economic contributors.

The dynamic topography of Trinidad and Tobago’s mountains and waterways accents the thriving economy and luxurious environment. High average rainfall has created four major river systems: the Caroni, Oropouche, and Navet rivers in Trinidad; and the Hillsborough river in Tobago. Of the nation’s rivers, the most significant is the Caroni in Trinidad.

The central position of waterways, specifically the Caroni River, in the geography, environment, and culture of Trinidad and Tobago makes it important that they are protected.

The Importance of the Caroni River

The Caroni River begins in the Northern Range near Valencia and stretches 40 kilometers westward through the northwestern region of Trinidad. The river meanders throughout Caroni county before emptying into the Gulf of Paria, beneath  Port of Spain. Stunning mangrove channels accompany the river along its outflow through the Caroni Swamp, which is a protected habitat for the aforementioned scarlet ibis.

Figure 3. Leoadec [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], from Wikimedia Commons

In addition to being an important hub for flora and fauna in Trinidad, the Caroni River contributes to the country’s largest dam, the Caroni-Arena. The Caroni-Arena Dam provides drinking water via the Caroni Water Treatment Plant and is a resource relied upon by the central portion of the island. Culturally, the Caroni River has a rich history as it made possible the first European settlement, San Jose de Oruna, and later served as the major shipping thoroughfare across the island. Today, the Caroni River serves as a spiritual site for Hindu cremation ceremonies, and has commercial and recreational uses.

Ecologically, the Caroni River -- predominantly the outlet at the Caroni Swamp -- has always been a hotspot for the island’s biodiversity. With land types ranging from mudflats to mangrove marshes, there are ample opportunities for life to thrive along the Caroni banks. Recently, conservationists and researchers have taken great interest in the  ecological composition of the Caroni River. Conservation and research projects have produced valuable knowledge about the diversity of species along the Caroni River, a list that includes Black Mangrove trees, Silky Anteaters, Blue Land Crabs, and Crab-eating Raccoons -- to name only a handful. The wealth of the Caroni River and its ecosystems is a resource for the life, economy, and culture of Trinidad and Tobago.

Threats to the Caroni River

Man-made pollution and degradation is the most immediate threat to the modern Caroni River. While the river is also susceptible to tropical storms and climate change, anthropogenic degradation is exerting a negative effect on the natural flow, biodiversity, and ecosystem services of the Caroni River and Swamp. Degradative effects of land-use changes can be seen in most waterways in the Caroni River Basin. Specifically, point-source pollution as a result of land-use change is seen in the channels of the river basin and has greatly affected the Caroni River, including the Caroni Water Treatment Plant, in the recent past.

Mining for oil and natural gas in Trinidad and Tobago has led to land-use changes such as vegetation clearing and open-pit mining. Specifically, mining activity has changed the landscape surrounding Valencia, at the headwaters of the Caroni River. The conversion of the land has led to siltation of the Caroni tributaries and petroleum hydrocarbon pollution of the Caroni River. In February 2015, petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the water at the Caroni Water Treatment Plant, affecting the drinking water leaving the plant. While the issue was addressed quickly by the Emergency Response and Investigations (ERI) team, it shed light on the effects of pollution in the Caroni River and served as a call to action for water conservation.

Pollution doesn’t only stem from industrial activities in Trinidad and Tobago. Many sources of pollution in the Caroni River Basin come from municipal sources. Trash and litter that flows downstream from surrounding channels is highly visible along the Caroni River banks and in the Caroni Swamp. The magnitude of the trash disposal issue in the river is highlighted by the fact that chemical pollution is the only environmental abuse that has a policy-designated punishment in the form of fines. Loose trash, methane clouds, and smoke from trash fires are three pollutant types that affect the Caroni River and are sourced to Beetham Landfill. The proximity of Beetham Landfill located north of the Caroni River and within the protected wetland area, indicates a significant pollution threat as there is no system to protect the wetland from the emissions of the landfill.

Additional degradation of the Caroni River stems from non-point pollution such as sewage and agricultural runoff. Fertilizers used in agricultural practices and untreated sewage from areas outside sewered areas wash into the Caroni River either directly or via connecting tributaries. Sewage and agricultural runoff is rich in nutrients and cause eutrophication of waterways, the effects of which are low dissolved oxygen and greater bacterial or algal blooms. Eutrophication in rivers and connecting tributaries has potentially catastrophic effects on wildlife and can greatly affect the naturally-occurring biodiversity. Unhelpful to runoff mitigation efforts is the pervasiveness of deforestation. The demand for arable land, urban sprawl, and road construction has initiated a cascade of deforestation, soil erosion, and watershed degradation. The ill-effects of deforestation are wide-spread and observed in ecosystem death, habitat fragmentation, and biodiversity loss.

The topography of the Caroni River Basin has changed rapidly since the 1920’s due to development and agriculture. Rice cultivation along the banks of the Caroni River and modification of the Caroni Swamp for urban construction has greatly changed the natural flow of the river and the ecosystem services that it provides. Notably, the reduction in vegetation cover integrity throughout all of Trinidad, including the Northwestern Range, has led to increased incidence of flooding and habitat fragmentation in the Caroni River Basin. Flooding and degraded land surrounding contributing tributaries to the Caroni River also increase sedimentation rate. Higher amounts of sediment can take a toll on drinking water prices and availability by stressing the filtration equipment at the Caroni Water Treatment Plant, leading to the need for frequent repairs.

Current Protections of the Caroni River

There are laws in Trinidad and Tobago to protect the nation’s water resources. Two government bodies, outlined in the Environmental Management Act of 1995, oversee environmental affairs: the Environmental Commission and the Environmental Management Authority. Together, the two governing bodies can regulate emissions permits and dispense consequences for violations, powers which are checked by parliament and the prime minister). Both the Environmental Commission and the Environmental Management Authority represent regulation and enforcement of water protection — but do not necessarily represent rights for waterways or aquatic ecosystems. The view of waterways as property illustrates the general mentality of environmental value defined solely in terms of human use. 

In addition to the Environmental Management Act, there are three acts that impact waterway protection and conservation in Trinidad and Tobago: the Water and Sewerage Act (1980), the Waterworks and Water Conservation Act (1980), and the Public Health Act (1950). The four acts provide guidelines for water management and pollution prevention as a part of the maintenance of overall environmental health. Namely, the Water and Sewerage Act and the Public Health Act, specifically prevent waterway pollution. Accountability and consequences for waterway pollution is either designated by the Environmental Commission or included in written policy, as is the case with the Water and Sewerage Act. There have been attempts to prevent offenses such as pesticide/chemical runoff, illegal dumping of waste, and dangerous petroleum extraction. There is a regulated permitting and licensing process, but the measures have no real teeth. There is no minimum punishment required by law; all punishments are subject to the discretion of either the Parliament or the Environmental Commission.

Earth Law as a Method to Evolve River Protection

What if rivers had their own legal rights? How might this affect the conservation of the Caroni River?  

River rights designations are a growing global movement. The Whanganui River in New Zealand gained legal status as an entity in March of 2017, setting a powerful example for the rest of the world. The Atrato River in Columbia and the Vilcabamba River in Ecuador have similar legal protections as entities. The policy precedent set by these three rivers are important for the recognition of rights for other rivers, including the Caroni River, and serve as examples for the global community.

Towards establishing legal rights for all rivers worldwide, Earth Law Center has led an initiative to create a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Rivers. This document was drafted by civil society leaders worldwide to establish the basic rights to which all rivers are entitled. These rights include, at minimum,

1. The right to flow;

2. The right to perform essential functions within its ecosystem;

3. The right to be free from pollution;

4. The right to feed and be fed by sustainable aquifers;

5. The right to native biodiversity;

6. The right to rehabilitation and restoration.

However, these rights do not restrict use or enjoyment of the rivers and surrounding tributaries for recreation or municipal utilization. In fact, the rights of rivers paradigm encourages the full realization of human environmental rights, including the right to clean water within our waterways. 

Considering ecosystems as entities to be respected and protected for their intrinsic value will foster an identifiable system of sustainable use and preservation. With a new era of legal considerations outlined in the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Rivers, a future of responsible water usage, ecosystem health, and continued enjoyment is possible for the Caroni River and other beloved rivers around the world. 

It remains to be seen when the rights of rivers will catch on in Trinidad and Tobago and many other countries worldwide. Earth Law Center is working tirelessly to present this new environmental paradigm to lawmakers, civil society leaders, and local communities with the goal of helping establish a new blueprint of environmental law – one based in the rights of nature – that allows humans and nature to thrive together in harmony.

---

How You Can Get Involved

• Sign up for the Earth Law Center Newsletter

• Volunteer with Earth Law Center

• Support Earth Law Center by donating

Rights for Doljanka River in the Blue Heart of Europe

Figure 1 Source: Doljanka River by Omer Zebić

by Anes Podic

The Bosnia River Action Network Advocacy (BRANA) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, seeks recognition of rights for the beautiful Doljanka River, one of the few wild rivers left in Europe which is now being threatened by a hydropower plant. Members include Earth Law Center, Eko akcija (“eco action”) and Gotusa.

Primer on the Balkans

The Balkan Peninsula, or Balkans, is the historic and geographic name of southeastern Europe. The Balkans lay south of the rivers Save, Drava, and Danube and is surrounded by the Adriatic and Ionian Seas in the west, the Mediterranean Sea in the south and the Aegean, Marmara, and Black Seas in the east.

The countries that make up the Balkans today include Greece, Albania, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, rump Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), and Bosnia Herzegovina (referred to as Bosnia throughout this text). 

Figure 2 By NordNordWest [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

The Blue Heart of Europe

The blue heart of Europe refers to the wild rivers that still exist, primarily in the Balkans. Over 80 percent of these vital lifelines have good or even very good ecological status.  By comparison, only 10 percent of Germany's rivers are still classified as near-natural, whereas 60 percent are heavily regulated.

Forty percent of Europe's endangered species of freshwater molluscs (bivalves and snails) live in the rivers and lakes of the Balkan peninsula. In addition to this, the region has the distinction of having a high density of endemic fish species; there are 69 fish species that occur only in the Balkan rivers and nowhere else in the world.

Produced by the firm Patagonia, a new documentary Blue Heart highlights how 3,000 hydropower plants planned across the Balkans will destroy the last wild rivers in Europe. Dams destroy the natural ecosystems of a river. The Save the Blue Heart of Europe campaign is getting a lot of traction worldwide and building momentum to save the wild rivers of the Balkans.  EcoAlbania won its first court battle against one of the largest approved dam projects along the Vjosa near the town of Poçem. Local residents are fighting back in other parts of the Balkans too.

Three quarters of the rivers in the Balkans are so ecologically valuable that they should be completely off limits for hydropower development, according to a recent assessment published by Riverwatch and Euro Natur.

Destruction of the Doljanka River

The power station scheduled for Doljanka is one of around 250 hydroelectric projects that have been approved or are under construction across Bosnia.

Financed by the former NBA Player Mirza Teletović, construction and development teams started destroying the river banks in order to lay 2 meter diameter pipes at a pace of 20-30 meters a day, according to Anes Podic, of Eko Akcija (Eco Action) in Bosnia. They have obtained an environmental permit based on flawed impact studies.

''This is just the latest example - we now see and hear almost weekly of the Balkans wild rivers being destroyed by rampant private businesses, both local and EU-based, with the help of local political elite, financed by Austrian, German and Russian banks. In this light, it may be disconcerting to some but is in fact very indicative that neither the EU nor the World Bank have even mentioned environmental problems in their latest strategy for the Western Balkans power and energy strategies. While the EU may not care, the local communities do: they have nothing to gain and a lot to lose from these projects,'' says Podic.

The sacrifice of the river isn’t even worth it. Most of the small hydro plants in the region produce no more than 1 megawatt (MW) each — roughly enough to power 750 homes, but environmentalists say they disrupt fish migration routes and pose a threat to dozens of species, including the Danube Salmon and Balkan Lynx.

“In a world in which the climate is changing, the value of hydro becomes more uncertain,” says Peter Gleick of the Oakland, California–based Pacific Institute. “We know that one of the worst impacts of climate change will be impacts on water—on droughts, on floods, on demand [via increased evaporation].”

Eco-Tourism

With almost a decade of ethnic conflict now fading into memory, the Balkans are rebuilding their economies on tourism, not only promoting their rich history but also marketing to eco-tourists seeking wilderness adventures such as hiking, kayaking, white-water rafting and caving.

Figure 3 Henrik søvang [CC BY 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Ecotourism means responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people. Growing interest in fly fishing in Bosnia indicates the potential for ecotourism as a way to align economic growth with protecting natural ecosystems.

The women of Bosnia have united to stand against the rash of dam-building, defending Bosnia-Herzegovina’s freshwater resources and areas of rich natural biodiversity.

Locals are well aware of this. “Ninety-five percent of villagers in the area where Doljanka flows have signed a petition against the hydro plants, which would destroy local community’s plans to develop fly-fishing and sport fishing,” the Coalition for the protection of rivers in Bosnia, the NGO, said in a statement.

Call to Action to Defend Doljanka

At the moment, five excavators are destroying the river flow of Doljanka at the beginning of the season of the mulching of the endemic trout “glavatica”.  This type of hydropower plant does not use dams, but huge pipes inserted below the river bed, and this is planned for over three kilometers of the river.  The installation of these pipes completely and irretrievably destroys all life in the river.

The local community was not adequately involved in the process of obtaining a "permit", nor did a proper ecological study took place. The Environmental Impact Assessment for Doljanka scarcely mentions the river and claims that there will be “no negative ecological impacts on the river”. This document is an appeal to urgently stop the irreversible destruction of the Doljanka River and its complete ecosystem, which is of great importance for the municipalities of Jablanica and Neretva, one of the most beautiful and biodiverse European rivers (Doljanka is its right tributary).

Get involved today

• Watch the video

• Stay informed

• Volunteer

• Donate

More about partner organizations 

Eko akcija, based in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, is working on pressing environmental problems in Bosnia and Herzegovina such as protection of its rich biodiversity, water supplies, air pollution, garbage disposal thru grassroots campaigns. They are founded by Green Visions who pioneered eco-tourism movement in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Gotusa are a grassroots community organizer from Fojnica and have been instrumental in the fight so far.

Earth Law Center works to transform the law to recognize and protect nature’s inherent rights to exist, thrive and evolve. This includes advancing the inherent rights of rivers through initiatives with local partners to secure rights recognition. 

ELC’s Universal Declaration of Rights of Rivers (available in English, Spanish and French) lays out the range of rights to protect and restore river ecosystem health, which can serve as input into local legislation. Dams, in particular, violate a river’s right to flow.

The Doljanka River is ELC’s second initiative in the Balkans, along with a bid to create a pesticide free zone in Serbia to save the endangered white-tailed eagle, in partnership with Earth Thrive.

Rights for the Saint Lawrence River

Figure 1 Saint Lawrence River in winter from Le Massif near Baie-Saint-Paul, Quebec, Canada Source: Picture taken by Jan Zatko, Creative Commons

Yenny Vega Cárdenas, President of the International Legal Center for Nature’s Rights (CJID or Centre Juridique International des Droits de la Nature) and Nathalia Parra Meza, Vice-president of the same Centre, read about the Atrato River in Colombia gaining rights recognition which inspired them so much and then they decided to co-found CJID. Earth Law Center speaks with them about their initiative seeking rights recognition for the St. Lawrence River.

Meet the St. Lawrence River

Known by the Tuscarora as Kahnawáʼkye and by the Mohawk as Kaniatarowanenneh, (meaning "big waterway"), the Saint Lawrence River lies in the middle latitudes of North America.

The Saint Lawrence River flows in a roughly north-easterly direction, connecting the Great Lakes with the Atlantic Ocean and forming the primary drainage outflow of the Great Lakes Basin[i]. It traverses one part of the Ontario province In Canada, and is the hearth of the Province of Quebec (Canada) because the shores of the river are home to over 80% of Québec’s population[1].

Importance of the St. Lawrence River

For thousands of years, the Algonquin and Iroquois peoples have lived along its banks. From the 16th century onwards, the St. Lawrence served as a gateway for European settlers, explorers and fur traders. Habitants cultivated its shores in long narrow farms that gave each family access to the river.

River otters, beluga whales and more than 100 species of fish live in the St. Lawrence River. Meanwhile, its sandbanks and river reefs provide a seasonal staging area for massive flocks of migratory birds, including almost all of the world’s snow geese.[ii]

Figure 2 Taxiarchos228 [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/)], from Wikimedia Commons

Threats to the St Lawrence River

“One of the biggest threats to the health of the St. Lawrence River is what the Petroleum Resources Act allows – oil and gas drilling and hydraulic fracking on Quebec’s territory,” states Carole Dupuis, general coordinator of the Quebec Hydrocarbon Vigilance Collective (RVHQ).

A study conducted in the US Appalachian basin and published in 2013 in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences reveals that shale gas exploitation by means of fracking can have long-term effects on biodiversity and over an unusually large geographic area compared to other industries. The main long-term impacts, which are likely to be perceived over a large area, are habitat loss and fragmentation, chemical pollution, water quality degradation and alteration of the hydrological regime. Other effects, including noise and light disturbance and air quality degradation, may be more local and short-term.[iii]

Other threats include invasive species and water level regulation. The region's ecosystem is bending under the weight of the 186  species introduced into the River and Lakes. Some scientists worry that the ecosystem of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River may be close to collapse because of these species.[iv]

With a massive hydropower dam blocking the River in the Massena/Cornwall region, water levels on the Upper St. Lawrence River are manually regulated. The management plan that has been in place for the past 50 years has caused significant damage to tens of thousands of acres of wetlands in the region as it doesn’t reflect the latest scientific understanding of how fragile riparian ecosystems are.[v]

Figure 3 By Ubergirl [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], from Wikimedia Commons

St Lawrence Belugas

Numbers of belugas dropped significantly in the 1900s due to commercial and recreational hunting for their flesh, hide and oils. Despite protections that were finally granted in 1979, the population has not recovered. Eighty per cent of Quebec’s beluga population lives along the shores of the St Lawrence River where 2 billion gallons (8 billion litres) of wastewater and industrial contaminants have been dumped.

These contaminants are absorbed by marine life in the river and then eaten by belugas further downstream. Studies have shown that the St. Lawrence belugas are one of the world’s most contaminated marine mammals. For decades, autopsies of belugas showed that many were dying of cancer. As people grew concerned over the quality of the drinking water from the St. Lawrence, chemicals like PAHs and PCBs were regulated in the 1970s.[vi]

More about the CJIDN Initiative for St. Lawrence River Rights

CJIDN intends to use research to promote the recognition of Nature's rights, with a focus on environmental justice and water rights. Like Earth Law Center, CJIDN provides legal advice while also taking legal action on behalf of partners and members, defending Nature's rights in front of international and Canadian tribunals.

Yenny Vega Cardenas says, "As an specialist in Water Law when I have heard about the recognition of the Atrato River as a non-human person in Colombia I was really inspired". She also told us that "is in that moment when I invited Nathalia Parra Meza to help me to start a research in that specific topic in the frame of an International Global Justice research project that I was co-chairing".

Both as lawyers in Colombia and in Canada, Yenny and Nathalia started the research and went to Colombia to meet the people involved in that case. They then co-wrote a paper in Spanish and English about the Atrato River case.  “We then decided to co-found the CJIDN and also had the possibility to host a summer school in Costa Rica related to the Rights of Nature, in which undergraduate and graduate law students from Montreal and Latin-America participated,” recalls Yenny. Students inspired by this theory, asked to join CJID as volunteers. In collaboration with Professor Daniel Turp, CJID co-authored a paper published in an important journal of the Quebec Province, about the possibility of giving rights to Saint-Laurence River[2].

CJID then started a petition to ask main political parties in Quebec to support the initiative, 1 week before the provincial elections!. With 400 signatures collected from both individuals and organizations. "With the help of three students, Anthony Breton, Inès Benadda and Laurence Sicotte, we sent it to many candidates from different political partis, just 2 days before the elections," says Yenny.

One party supports the petition and is now discussing inside the party to gain consensus. Students drafted a prelaminar French version of a bill recognizing rights to the River, and CJID is currently completing the draft which will be translated  into English.

CJID plans to "present the draft in French and in English to a supporter of the project, in order to ask the Parliament of Quebec to discuss the draft bill in order to recognize the St. Lawrence River as a living person".

Yenny says she is "convinced that Movement of the recognition of Nature's Rights snowballing, and is inspiring young leaders to change the traditional paradigm. We have to be more respectful not only with present and future generations, but also with all the species that inhabited the planet."

To get involved today:

• Sign up for Earth Law Center’s email

• Volunteer with Earth Law Center

• Donate to Earth Law Center

More about International Legal Center for Nature’s Rights (CJID) https://www.cjidnature.org/

Yenny Vega Cardenas, Présidente

---

[1] http://www.mddelcc.gouv.qc.ca/eau/flrivlac/fleuve_en.htm

[2] https://www.ledevoir.com/opinion/idees/526919/faire-du-saint-laurent-un-sujet-de-droit

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Lawrence_River

[ii] http://watershedreports.wwf.ca/#ws-21/by/threat-overall/profile

[iii] https://baleinesendirect.org/en/drilling-near-the-st-lawrence-a-threat-to-marine-mammals/

[iv] http://www.savetheriver.org/index.cfm?page=app.riverissues

[v] http://www.savetheriver.org/index.cfm?page=app.riverissues

[vi] https://www.cbc.ca/natureofthings/m/features/threats-facing-the-st.-lawrence-belugas