The Bío Bío River, located in the Pehuenche territory, was one of the first major damming controversies that resulted from Chile’s post 1981 water management system, and as such, serves as a relevant example for more current project analyses. Beyond the ecological impacts that occurred through reservoir constructions, the Water Code presented various legal tactics that were used to gain project approval, despite opposition. Much of this opposition emulated from Mapuche[1] communities, who’s legal rights were surpassed by private power. The 1993 Indigenous Peoples Law generally depicts that the Pehuenche, part of the Mapuche people, control their lands. Due to the separation of water and land rights however, the Endesa developments were able to move forward. Although the project generated significant amounts of national and international attention, its approval moved through the legal system relatively quickly despite Pehuenche opposition, violating the previously determined approval hierarchy. “Public protests against the World Bank funding of the Pangue dam were widely covered in the Chilean and international media, and this coverage raised considerable concern among private investors who were brought in following the initial IFC/Endesa financing agreement” (Johnston 2004, 214). Despite these efforts, Endesa began construction as the government emphasized that the country’s need for energy superseded indigenous rights. In 1994 the Pangue dam was completed, followed by the Ralco dam in 2004. In addition to flora and fauna impacts, these reservoirs and subsequent river segmentation displaced many Pehuenche communities and flooded ancestral lands (Blaser 2004). When the Bío Bío River surfaces in conversation, heads often bow in reverence. Pinilla describes the damming as a tragedy not only for the displaced communities, but also for the loss of the areas’ large tourism potential.
While the strength of some Mapuche rights has been besmirched through project approvals like the Ralco and Pangue, the cultural connection to conservation remains a powerful tool. Alejandro Coñuequir,[2] an active Mapuche member, explains that the word itself means “people of the land” and “for us, the water is life” (translated by author). Furthermore, “[i]ndigenous communities and organizations in Chile continue appealing to courts, policymakers and government agencies, publicizing their struggles, attempting to preserve traditional systems of productive activity and strengthen community control over water, and protesting state actions that enable Chilean elites and transnational capital to usurp right to water or under indigenous lands” (Carruthers 2001, 303). Coñuequir further explains that in the Curarrehue region, there are around forty planned dams which will destroy surrounding ecosystems and dry the land. While most Mapuche members he knows oppose these projects, he estimates that approximately 30% do not. However, Coñuequir emphasizes that this percentage of people, that have accepted money from developers, are not actively participating in Mapuche culture.
Although the Ralco and Pangue approvals and construction processes are not explored in detail here,[3] these dams illuminate a relationship between political and private powers that sacrificed Chilean ecological and social prosperity in 1994, and continues to jeopardize it. Marisol Coñuequir[4] deciphers that although there are laws that protect the Mapuche culture, territories, and economies, because hydro developers come from private companies, the government is not required to intervene. Despite the despondent implication, this idea establishes resistance movements’ need for fortified legal strategies to combat hydro developments. The following cases will present the development of such strategies. Additionally, the rights that Mapuche communities do hold present roadblocks for hydro projects, making Mapuche presence or lack there of important to both developers and their opposition. Thus, not only Mapuche cultural connection to conservation, but also their legal rights, although permeable, are important layers in hydropower resistance. Finally, with the Bío Bío dams, whitewater rafting companies like Bío Bío Expeditions and others relocated. These companies carried a firsthand understanding of the implications of Chilean hydro development proposals.
[1] The Mapuche are an indigenous group situated in south-central Chile and Argentina.
[2] Alejandro Conuequir, an active Mapuche member, works at Ruke Trankurra, the family’s tourism community which emphasizes Mapuche culture in Curarrehue Chile.
[3] Please reference (Opaso 2007) (in Spanish) and (Johnston 2004) for more in-depth accounts and analyses of the Bío Bío damming and its relationship with Mapuchefragmentationofsplayingoasyan official plan and platform. or lack there of important to both projects and their oppostion.ean e rights.
[4] Marisol Conuequier, an active Mapuche member and daughter of Alejandro Conuequier, also works at Ruke Trankurra in Curarrehue Chile.