Press Center
Brazil must respond to human rights violations caused by the Belo Monte Dam
In representation of communities affected by the Belo Monte Dam, we have submitted final arguments in the case against Brazil before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The report presents scientific evidence of the forced displacement of indigenous and traditional communities, the mass die-off of fish, differentiated harms to men and women, and threats to the survival of local communities in the Brazilian Amazon. Washington, DC, United States and Altamira, Brazil. Furthering the formal complaint against the State of Brazil for human rights violations caused by the construction of the Belo Monte Dam, organizations representing affected communities presented their final arguments before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. They demonstrate the damages Belo Monte has caused to indigenous and traditional communities, and residents of Altamira, the city closest to the dam. “Human rights violations are a daily occurence for those affected by the dam, so it’s urgent that our petition before the Commission advance to sanction the government and guarantee our rights,” proclaimed Antônia Melo, coordinator of the Movimiento Xingu Vivo para Siempre, a citizens’ collective formed in the face of the dam’s implementation. The report presented before the Commission shows that the damages resulted from a severe lack of foresight and inadequate evaluation, as well as from failure to comply with the conditions for operation established by the government. The many risks denounced prior to the dam’s construction have since become long-term damages—many of which have affected men and women, and youth and the elderly, in different ways. “This report is a vital step forward for the people of the Xingu River basin, who are now closer than ever to achieving justice, forcing Brazil to respond to the violations committed, and ensuring that what happened on the Xingu never happens again,” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-director of the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Together with the Paraense Society for Human Rights (SDDH) and Justiça Global, AIDA represents the affected communities before the Commission. The report also documents the displacement of indigenous and traditional communities forced to leave their territories without adequate alternatives, placing their cultural survival at risk. Among the affected populations are communities dedicated to fishing, who have not yet been compensated for the loss of livelihood. The dam has caused mass die-offs of fish and, although authorities have imposed millions in fines, the report demonstrates that the underlying problem has not been resolved. Local communities now have limited use of the Xingu River as a source of food, sustenance, transportation and entertainment. The report also documents—among other serious harms—the disappearance of traditional trades, such as brickmakers and cart drivers, and of traditional cultural practices. Women, for example, have stopped giving birth in their homes and must now go to a hospital, a reality that has drastically worsened due to the oversaturation of health and education services in Altamira caused by the recent population surge. The complaint against Brazil was presented before the Commission in 2011, the year the international organism granted protective measures to indigenous people affected by the dam’s construction. The case against Brazil officially opened in December 2015. Then, last October, in a rare move designed to speed up the processing of the case, the Commission decided to unite two stages that, as a rule, are normally processed separately. Under this framework, the organizations and the State are required to present their final arguments, after which the Commission will make a decision. “We hope the Commission refers the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights as soon as possible, and that it recommends Brazil adopt the measures necessary to protect the life, integrity, and right to property of the indigenous and traditional communities affected by the dam,” said Raphaela Lopes, attorney at Justiça Global. “After being subject to all forms of rights violations, starting from the very beginning of this project, these communities need integral reparation; their right to free, prior and informed consent was not honored.” The Commission must now prepare a report to conclude whether or not human rights violations occurred as a result of the Belo Monte Dam, in which it may issue recommendations for remediation. If those recommendations are unfulfilled, the case may be referred to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights, which has the power to issue a ruling condemning Brazil. Belo Monte has been in operation since early 2015, though a series of judicial suspensions resulting from non-compliance with its permits means that construction has yet to be completed. Although Belo Monte has caused great harm to the people of the Xingu, Brazil now has an opportunity to avoid inflicting more damage and begin making efforts to better their quality of life. For that to happen, a prompt decision by the Commission is vital. Find more information about the case here. Press s: Víctor Quintanilla (México), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107 Raphaela Lopes (Brasil), Justiça Global, [email protected], + 55 21 99592-7017
Read more
ing Mexico’s indigenous communities in their fight against Las Cruces Dam
AIDA filed an amicus brief demonstrating the international environmental and human rights obligations the Mexican government violated by authorizing the controversial hydroelectric project. It was written in of a lawsuit filed by the Wixárika people of Nayarit, Mexico, whose land and sacred sites would be affected by the dam. Nayarit, Mexico. The Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) presented an amicus brief before the First District Court of Nayarit, demonstrating the international environmental and human rights obligations the Mexican government violated by authorizing the Las Cruces hydroelectric project. The brief s the writ of amparo filed against the project by of the Wixárika indigenous community. "When analyzing the project, Mexican authorities failed to adequately consult affected communities and obtain their free, prior, and informed consent. Above all, they failed to respect their rights to self-determination, autonomy, territory and cultural identity, and to a healthy environment," explained AIDA attorney Camilo Thompson. "In addition, authorities overlooked the risks of damage to the San Pedro Mezquital river basin and the ecosystem it feeds: the mangrove forests of Marismas Nacionales, an internationally protected site." The hydroelectric plant, promoted by the Federal Electricity Commission, threatens ceremonial sites on which the spiritual life of the Wixárika, Náyeris-Cora, Tepehuano and Mexicanero people depend. of the Wixárika tribe presented the demand for protection (amparo) in mid-2017 against the authorities that endorsed the project—the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources and the National Water Commission. AIDA’s ing brief, presented in March, details the international obligations Mexico breached by approving the dam—those contained in the American Convention on Human Rights, the Protocol of San Salvador, Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization on indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. After the request for protection was filed, the court ordered the suspension of project permits until the legal process has concluded and a decision has been made as to whether those permits are valid. Government authorities have argued that the project must continue because it is in the public interest, and that indigenous peoples can "re-organize their spiritual life in a context modified by the project’s construction." This position ignores the rights of communities, due process, and the environmental threats affecting the public interest. In order to safeguard the rights of affected communities, the court must now continue the legal process, confirm the project’s suspension, and issue the cancellation of all related permits. “The government must maintain the balance between the protection of human rights and the environment, thereby canceling the permits granted to the Las Cruces project and protecting the rights of the affected communities," Thompson said. "In this instance, Mexico has the opportunity to strengthen the global trend towards truly sustainable energy, moving away from large dam projects that emit greenhouse gases and aggravate climate change." Learn more about the case here. Press : Camilo Thompson, AIDA attorney, +521 9671302346, [email protected]
Read more
Inter-American Court establishes historic precedent for the protection of human rights in the Americas
In response to a consultation made by Colombia, the Court recognized the right to a healthy environment as fundamental to human existence. They also recognized the impact of climate change on human rights. At AIDA we celebrate this decision, which strengthens the obligations of States to protect the natural environment and those who depend on it. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights established a historic precedent for the protection of the people of the Americas in its response (Advisory Opinion) to Colombia’s consultation on the scope of States’ obligations to protect human rights from damages to the marine environment in the Greater Caribbean region. “We celebrate this decision, which will undoubtedly serve as a global example and a fundamental legal tool for those of us who work for environmental and climate justice,” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-executive director of AIDA. “It will also serve as an impetus for the States of the region to protect key ecosystems, such as the Guarani Aquifer, the Andes, the Amazon, the Pacific and the Greater Caribbean region.” The Court concluded that a healthy environment is an autonomous right, “fundamental to the existence of humanity,” in the first time they have developed the subject. It also recognized the impact of climate change on the effective enjoyment of human rights, particularly for the most vulnerable populations, such as indigenous peoples, children, and those living in extreme poverty. With this decision, taken in November and made public yesterday, the Court welcomed and enhanced similar recognition by organisms of the United Nations and regional courts. The Court established that the obligation of States to respect the rights to life and personal integrity, in relation to environmental protection, implies that they must: Avoid causing “significant” environmental damage in and outside their territory, for which they must regulate, supervise and monitor activities that could cause harm. Assure, among other things, the realization of effective and independent environmental impact studies, as well as mitigation and contingency plans for potential damages. Cooperate with other States and provide them with information regarding risks to their natural environment. Apply the precautionary principle to protect the rights to life and personal integrity due to serious and irrevocable environmental degradation, even when scientific uncertainty exists. Guarantee the rights to public participation, access to information related to potential environmental harms, and access to justice in decision-making that could affect the environment. In January of 2017, AIDA presented observations on Colombia’s consultation and, in March of that year, participated in a hearing before the Inter-American Court. We argued that the implementation of large infrastructure projects in the Greater Caribbean and other areas could affect the environment to such a point that they could put at risk the life and personal integrity, among other human rights, of the people living there. “The Court has taken an important step towards the protection of the oceans and other key ecosystems by incorporating international commitments to environmental protection as part of the obligation of States to protect human rights,” said Gladys Martínez, senior attorney of AIDA’s Marine Program. Consult and a summary of the Court decision here. Press : Victor Quintanilla,+521 5570522107, [email protected]
Read more
Organizations alert authorities of threats to Puerto Morelos Reef
Mexico’s Puerto Morelos Reef National Park, a national protected area and Wetland of International Importance, is at risk due to massive and unsustainable tourism activities. Civil society organizations solicited a visit of international experts from the Ramsar Convention to evaluate the risks facing the site. A coalition of local, national and international organizations presented an urgent alert before the Ramsar Convention, an intergovernmental treaty on wetlands, warning of the threats facing Mexico’s Puerto Morelos Reef National Park due to massive and unsustainable tourism. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)—with the of the Mexican Center for Environmental Law (CEMDA), Voces Unidas for Puerto Morelos, the Puerto Morelos House of Culture, Flora and Fauna of Mexico, and the Center for Innovation and Investigation for Sustainable Development— solicited a visit of international experts to evaluate the risks. "Because some of the area’s tourism projects were not subjected to a rigorous environmental impact assessment, they have transformed the coastal territory, degrading and contaminating ecosystems, particularly coral reefs and mangroves," explained Sandra Moguel, regional director of CEMDA’s Southeast office. The National Park was created as a natural protected area in 1998 and was ed in 2004 as a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention. It is a unique site due to its high biodiversity—its coral reefs provide habitat for fish, sharks, pink snails and sea turtles, while its mangroves harbor crocodiles and herons. In addition, like other wetlands, it helps prevent coastal erosion and provides breeding and feeding grounds for the area’s fish. "The site’s ecological and scenic beauty attracts tourism projects which, because they’re not properly evaluated, promote the irrational use of natural resources," said Camilo Thompson, AIDA marine attorney. "A Ramsar mission is urgently needed to evaluate the damages, propose compensation, issue recommendations on the growth of tourism and real estate, and identify alternatives to ensure the rational use of the park’s ecosystems." The Puerto Morelos Reef forms part of the Mesoamerican Reef System, considered the second largest barrier reef in the world. "Any activity carried out in the reef requires a strategic environmental assessment that considers the cumulative and synergistic impacts on the coastal wetlands, sea grasses and reefs of Puerto Morelos," Thompson added. "The Mexican State must apply the precautionary principal and ecosystem approach to confront the threats to the biodiversity of this unique site." the alert presented before the Ramsar Convention (in Spanish). Press s: Camilo Thompson, AIDA Attorney, +521 9671302346, [email protected] Ricardo Ruiz, CEMDA, + 55 5211 2457, [email protected]
Read more
Authorization of port expansion violates Mexico's international commitments
Mexico’s approval of the Port of Veracruz expansion project violates the nation’s international environmental and human rights commitments. To highlight this conflict, AIDA filed an amicus brief ing residents of Veracruz in their attempt to protect the Veracruz Reef System, currently threatened by the port’s expansion. Veracruz, Mexico. In of an amparo filed by local residents against the expansion of the Port of Veracruz, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) filed an amicus brief before Mexico’s Fifth Circuit Court with detailed information on international standards and treaties to which Mexico is party, and which the government violated upon authorizing the project. “By putting at risk the Veracruz Reef System—the largest in the Gulf of Mexico, whose protection is a matter of public interest—the government also threatens the right to a healthy environment of the people who depend on it,” explained Camilo Thompson, AIDA attorney. “The expansion project was authorized without an adequate evaluation of the impacts it would have.” Mexico granted the project’s environmental permit on November 21, 2013. Just a year earlier, it had reduced the area of the reef system, changing its boundaries to make the project viable. At the time of authorization, adequate scientific information was not available to understand how to avoid damaging the reefs and protect the services they provide to the people of Veracruz. Among their many benefits, the reefs provide income to coastal residents through fishing and tourism, and they act as a natural barrier against storms and hurricanes. Upholding these ecosystem services, local residents, advised by the Mexican Center for Environmental Law, filed an amparo against the project’s authorization, which was itted by the court in March 2017. In their ing brief, AIDA argues that, in authorizing the project, the government breached international obligations to protect its natural environment and the people that depend on it. Many of those obligations are outlined in treaties to which Mexico is party, including the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, the Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the American Convention on Human Rights. The Veracruz Reef System is a Natural Protected Area nationally, and is listed as a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention. It serves as a refuge for many marine animals, among them endangered species of sea turtles. “The reefs of Veracruz contain a rich natural wealth that must be protected,” Thompson said. “The expansion project would destroy part of that habitat and lead to the loss of a great amount of biological diversity. It also could lead to stranded vessels, contaminating spills, and the loss of fishing resources that sustain the local economy.” Press : Camilo Thompson, AIDA attorney, +521 9671302346, [email protected]
Read more
Salmon farms in Chilean Patagonia approved without adequate environmental evaluation
A study commissioned by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense found that more than half of the salmon farms currently operating in the Magallanes region of Southern Patagonia have generated a partial or total lack of oxygen in the water. Nine of those are located in naturally protected areas. Santiago, Chile. A recent study, commissioned by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), concluded that salmon farms located in the Magallanes region of southern Patagonia were authorized without the scientific assessments needed to ensure they would do no harm to marine life. “After twenty years of development in other regions, the salmon industry now seeks to expand to the country’s last virgin coasts, without the necessary precautions,” explained Gladys Martínez, senior attorney of AIDA’s Marine Program. “This study demonstrates that neither the companies nor that State have done enough to avoid in Magallanes the severe environmental damage already perpetuated in other regions of the country.” Chilean biologist Héctor Kol produced the report for AIDA, with the of the Waitt Foundation, analyzing 261 salmon farm projects. Of them, a little less than half have already been authorized and the rest could receive their permits in the short- and medium-term. Of the 126 authorized projects, only 35 are currently in operation. The information produced on each project includes location maps and estimations of the amount of waste being discharged into the waters. The research shows that there are large differences in the quantity of waste that the government authorized for different subsectors of the same geographic areas, without any available explanation as to why. “This demonstrates a clear lack of scientific evaluation, necessary to guarantee the aquatic environment will be able to receive and process the authorized quantity of waste,” said Florencia Ortúzar, AIDA attorney. “More than half of the projects that are currently in operation have already generated a total or partial lack of oxygen in the waters, which seriously impacts marine life. In addition, at least nine of these oxygen-depriving projects are located in natural protected areas.” On May 22, 2017, AIDA filed a complaint before the Superintendency of the Environment requesting the investigation of damages caused by salmon farms in Magallanes, and the sanctioning of the companies responsible. Consult the report here. Interactive Map of Salmon Farms here. More information on salmon farms in Patagonia is available here. Press : Florencia Ortúzar, AIDA attorney, +56973353135, [email protected]
Read more
Important progress made towards ocean treaty
States meeting at the United Nations in New York took an important step towards launching negotiations for a new treaty to protect the biodiversity of the high seas (areas beyond the national jurisdiction). Making up two thirds of the global ocean, marine life in the high seas is not effectively protected. A new treaty will rectify this, putting in place measures to protect the rich and globally significant biodiversity and ecosystem services of the high seas and to govern activities undertaken there sustainably. Although the wording of the recommendation did not reflect the very strong for rapid UN action towards a treaty, it will enable the General Assembly to convene an Intergovernmental Conference. The 35 member organisations of the High Seas Alliance which have campaigned for this treaty were pleased with the recommendation to move forwards. Peggy Kalas of the High Seas Alliance said: “This is a significant step for the high seas and humanity since we are all dependent on the ocean for a healthy planet. A new treaty will bring law and governance to this most neglected and besieged part of our world and we are closer to that goal now. We are profoundly thankful to the many, many states who have worked so hard to achieve this; their determination to protect the global commons for all humankind has been inspiring.” The decision of the Preparatory Committee will now go the UN General Assembly. The overwhelming majority of states are pushing for the next step to be an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) convened in 2018. An IGC would mean formal negotiations on the text of a new treaty would commence. "Today marks a significant step forward for the world’s ocean," said Lisa Speer, Director of international Oceans at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Sylvia Earle said: “The nations of the world took important steps towards a treaty today. The high seas are half of the world and need the rule of law. To those who have worked so hard at the UN and in of this moment, we extend an ocean of gratitude and carry forward optimism for a high seas treaty.” Veronica Frank of Greenpeace said: “Although we hoped to see a starting date included for the negotiating conference, it was good to see such overwhelming for moving the process forward and so many people around the world speaking up for ocean protection. It is now for the UN General Assembly to make that step forward for the ocean and for all the people that depend on it. Anything less would fall short of what is our blue planet needs to recover." Gladys Martínez, an attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, said: “We applaud the commitment of so many delegates to protect nearly half of our planet. We are both proud and grateful for the work of Latin American nations in this regard.” Maria Damanaki of the Nature Conservancy said: “This is a demonstration of global collaboration, and a step towards protecting half of our planet, which today is an unregulated no man's land. We our partners in the High Seas Alliance in commending the states and organisations that have worked effortlessly to make this happen." “This represents a major step in a long journey driven by a large number of committed states. We need to continue this momentum through to the General Assembly to deliver a resolution for an Intergovernmental Conference” added Tim Packeiser of WWF. In June all States signed on to a global call to action for the ocean, of which the high seas is a major part.
Read more
Ramsar Secretariat advises Colombia to add Ciénaga Grande to list of world’s most threatened wetlands
Experts at the Ramsar Convention, an international treaty for the protection of wetlands, identified “significant changes” due to human interference in the ecological characteristics of the area. They recommended, among other things, that Colombia enroll the wetlands in the Montreux Record, a of seriously threatened wetlands requiring immediate attention. Bogotá, Colombia—Following a visit to the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta wetlands in August of last year, a mission of international experts from the Ramsar Convention, an inter-governmental treaty for wetland protection, released a report recommending that the Colombian government include the area in the Montreux Record—a of gravely threatened wetlands requiring immediate attention. “Given the significant changes in the ecological characteristics of the Ciénaga Grande wetlands, we recommend including it in the Montreux Record,” said the report issued last week. These changes “require urgent action by the government of Colombia to maintain and restore the area’s ecological character, and to protect it in accordance with the objectives of the Convention,” the report said. Among changes mentioned in the report are overexploitation and contamination of the wetlands’ waters, diminished fresh water due to increased sedimentation and obstruction of waterways, “huge loss” of mangrove forests caused by road and infrastructure projects that block water flow, and declining fish populations. “Including Ciénaga Grande in the Montreux Record would allow the Ramsar Wetland Conservation Fund to provide economic assistance through grants. It would also allow Ramsar scientists to provide expert advice and recommendations on best practices for the recovery and conservation of the ecosystem,” explained Juan Pablo Sarmiento Erazo, a researcher from the Universidad del Norte. In addition, the Ramsar report recommends two other solutions to the wetlands’ rapidly degrading condition: performing effective dredging based on new plans for water management and strengthening coordination among institutions that manage the site. “The key is that the Colombian government should follow the Ramsar recommendations to the letter, implement improvements as soon as possible, and make necessary changes in the site’s management,” said Gladys Martínez, an attorney with AIDA. “The Montreux Record is far from being a blacklist. It’s an opportunity for governments to demonstrate responsible management of natural resources that demand urgent attention.” Ramsar experts visited the site from Aug. 22–26, 2016, following a 2014 petition filed with the Ramsar Secretariat by AIDA, el Universidad del Norte, and the University of Florida. Scientist Sandra Vilardy at Universidad del Magdalena also contributed. “We hope the government will make the report official,” Vilardy said. “The document mentions that it is imperative to re-establish aquatic balance in the wetlands, emphasizing the role that rivers play in feeding Ciénaga Grande.” More information on Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta is available here. Press s: Gladys Martínez, AIDA Attorney, +506 8321 4263, [email protected] Carlos Lozano Acosta, AIDA Attorney, +57 300 5640282, [email protected] Juan Pablo Sarmiento, Universidad del Norte, +57 300 5514583, [email protected]
Read more
As US withdraws from Paris Climate Agreement, Latin America must step up
Without US participation, other countries must urgently limit greenhouse gas emissions. Now that President Donald Trump has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, Latin American nations must act with new urgency to combat global climate change. In a blow to the Paris Agreement, Trump’s move sends a message that the U.S. federal government is no longer committed to curbing greenhouse gas emissions. The United States, Syria, and Nicaragua are now the only nations that refuse to the historic fight against global warming. The Paris Agreement, which directs countries to set targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, was hailed as the first truly global climate deal to curb climate change. “This has huge implications for the Global South in the fight against climate change,” said Astrid Puentes, Co-Executive Director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, or AIDA. “We can no longer rely on the U.S. government to set an example for climate progress. Now more than ever, it’s important that Latin American countries step up efforts to curb their greenhouse gas emissions.” Although the United States and China are the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, nine percent of total global emissions come from Latin America, according to the UN Economic Commission on Latin America and the Caribbean. “In a region with immense ecological diversity, Latin America has an opportunity to take a leadership role in protecting natural resources and communities by shaping a clean energy future without reliance on fossil fuels,” Puentes said. “Without the United States, Latin America now needs to lead the global fight against climate change, and AIDA will continue to be at the forefront of that fight.” AIDA has worked with Latin American governments to increase their capacity to secure international funding for climate projects, raised awareness that many dam reservoirs emit significant amounts of methane, built a regional effort to counter the spread of hydraulic fracturing projects, and helped to protect critical carbon sinks, among other projects. As a team of environmental and legal experts, AIDA also works to protect the human rights of people and their communities throughout Latin America. AIDA is the only regional organization in Latin America that provides free legal to communities and organizations dedicated to protecting human rights and the environment. Press : Astrid Puentes Riaño, Executive Co-Director, [email protected]
Read more
Calling on Chile to protect Patagonia from the risks of the salmon industry
More than half of the salmon farms in Chile’s Magallanes Region are depleting oxygen from sensitive marine waters, suffocating marine life. Civil society organizations filed an istrative complaint and a petition calling on the government to investigate and punish farm operators, and to enforce existing regulations. Santiago, Chile. Civil society organizations filed a complaint today asking the Superintendent of the Environment to investigate damages caused by salmon farms in the Magallanes Region of Southern Patagonia, and to sanction the companies responsible. According to government reports, salmon farms in the area are depleting the water of oxygen, causing a serious threat to marine life. The organizations also launched a citizen’s petition to the formal complaint. “Salmon farming concessions have been approved in Magallanes without a detailed assessment of the impacts the industry may have on the region,” said Florencia Ortúzar, an attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense. “The damages are already occurring: a report by the Comptroller General of the Republic found that, between 2013 and 2015, more than half of the salmon farms in Magallanes created anaerobic conditions, gravely threatening marine life.” Chile is the world’s second largest producer of salmon. The industry, which developed on coasts further north, has now entered the Magallanes region in the southermost tip of the country. The pristine waters there are highly vulnerable to human activity. Magallanes has the largest number of protected natural areas in the country; it shelters such protected species as the blue whale, the sperm whale, the Magellanic penguin, the elephant seal, the leatherback sea turtle, the southern dolphin, and the Chilean dolphin. “Salmon farms are cultivating more fish than the ecosystem can withstand. They are filling sensitive waters with chemicals and antibiotics,” said Francisco Campos-Lopez, director of #RealChile. “Those chemicals, combined with the feces of the animals, cause a dangerous lack of oxygen in the waters, endangering sea life.” NOTE: More information available at aida-americas.noticiasalagoanaida-americas.noticiasalagoanas.com/salmonfarms Press s: Florencia Ortúzar, AIDA Attorney, +56 9 7335 3135, [email protected]
Read more