Tibetan Villagers Halt Mining Project on Sacred Mountain

26th Jan 2012

26th Jan 2012

In Tibetan cul­ture, where peo­ple live in inti­mate rela­tion­ship with the nat­ur­al world around them, real­i­ty and mythol­o­gy have a way of blend­ing togeth­er. So it was per­haps no sur­prise to local vil­lagers when, after a Chi­nese min­ing com­pa­ny and local author­i­ties repeat­ed­ly repelled efforts stop a gold min­ing project on the slopes of holy Mount Kawage­bo, the moun­tain appeared to strike back.

Mount Kawage­bo, so sacred that climb­ing is banned, sits on the bor­der between Tibet and China’s Yun­nan Province; its east­ern side is part of the Three Par­al­lel Rivers of Yun­nan Pro­tect­ed Area UNESCO World Her­itage site. In Feb­ru­ary 2011, a small gold-min­ing oper­a­tion start­ed near the vil­lage of Abin, which is on the west­ern side of Kawage­bo, along the path of an 800-year-old pil­grim­age route that cir­cles the moun­tain, attract­ing tens of thou­sands of Tibetans annu­al­ly.

To the local peo­ple, who believe strong­ly in the sacred­ness of Mount Kawage­bo, direct destruc­tion of the moun­tain body, through activ­i­ties like min­ing, is unthink­able. Fur­ther, vil­lagers said the project was start­ed with­out per­mis­sion or pri­or con­sent. Thus began a com­mu­ni­ty effort to halt the project.

Vil­lagers said their attempts to deal direct­ly with the min­ing com­pa­ny result­ed in threats and vio­lence from agents hired by the com­pa­ny, and harass­ment and arrests by local police. On two occa­sions, men armed with wood­en sticks with nails attacked vil­lagers, injur­ing more than a dozen.

After efforts to nego­ti­ate with the local gov­ern­ment failed, vil­lagers pushed $300,000 worth of min­ing equip­ment into the Nu Riv­er. A leader of the group was arrest­ed, but lat­er released when 100 vil­lagers sur­round­ed the local police sta­tion where he was being held. A few months lat­er, how­ev­er, min­ing resumed and ten­sions grew. Harass­ment, death threats and attacks on vil­lagers increased, and some women and chil­dren fled to oth­er vil­lages to escape the vio­lence.

On Jan­u­ary 20, 2012, a vil­lage leader who had tried to con­front the min­ing com­pa­ny was ambushed by local police, tased and arrest­ed. Some 200 com­mu­ni­ty mem­bers sur­round­ed the police sta­tion, and an ensu­ing riot result­ed in vio­lence and injuries on both sides, with at least one vil­lager sent to the hos­pi­tal with seri­ous injuries. The leader was released, but protests con­tin­ued as vil­lagers demand­ed clo­sure of the mine, and hun­dreds more vil­lagers from the sur­round­ing area joined in.

This time, the local gov­ern­ment held nego­ti­a­tions with the com­mu­ni­ty, includ­ing the just-released leader, on behalf of the min­ing com­pa­ny, whose boss had report­ed­ly fled the area. Vil­lagers involved in nego­ti­a­tions said they were offered mon­ey in exchange for allow­ing the min­ing to con­tin­ue, but they refused. On Jan­u­ary 23, with ten­sions mount­ing, a vice-offi­cial from the pre­fec­ture gov­ern­ment ordered the mine closed and the equip­ment trucked out of the vil­lage.

While the per­sis­tence of the com­mu­ni­ty to pro­tect its holy moun­tain ulti­mate­ly paid off, some vil­lagers sug­gest­ed the moun­tain itself had a role to play. Dur­ing the nego­ti­a­tions, many report­ed hear­ing the sound of a trum­pet shell—used in Tibetan reli­gious rituals—coming from the moun­tain, while oth­ers report­ed unusu­al­ly windy weath­er, which stopped once the con­flict was resolved.

A Tibetan hired to pro­vide cater­ing to the mine work­ers described being struck by a phys­i­cal pres­sure that forced him to drop what he was car­ry­ing; only after he prayed did the sen­sa­tion dis­ap­pear. Sev­er­al months ear­li­er, accord­ing to anoth­er account, a vil­lage leader who had accept­ed bribes from the min­ing com­pa­ny died sud­den­ly, and a mem­ber of his fam­i­ly was seri­ous­ly injured in an acci­dent.

He Ran Gao, a researcher who works for the Chi­nese NGO Green Earth Vol­un­teers and has been close­ly involved with the com­mu­ni­ties of the area, described the con­text of these super­nat­ur­al accounts. “In a place like Tibet, peo­ple have an unusu­al sense of divin­i­ty in nature, based on a whole sys­tem of wor­ship and inter­ac­tion, which some­time seems super­sti­tious to mod­ern cit­i­zens,” she said. “But it is not nec­es­sar­i­ly irra­tional or unrea­son­able.”

This sense of nature wor­ship, Gao said, with its atten­dant con­ser­va­tion val­ues, is “bare­ly left due to past com­mu­nism and lat­er eco­nom­ic devel­op­ment.” But in the Himalayas and oth­er moun­tain areas, where non-Han eth­nic­i­ties reside and remain some­what pro­tect­ed, those tra­di­tion­al val­ues can still be found. She described Kawage­bo as a suc­cess sto­ry show­ing “how sacred nature can be” and how it can “still be respect­ed, pro­tect­ed and con­tin­ue to make an impact in people’s lives.”

Unfor­tu­nate­ly, Abin is but one of many vil­lages threat­ened by min­ing activities—in most oth­er cas­es, mar­ble quarrying—and a greater over­ar­ch­ing threat to the region: hydro­elec­tric dam devel­op­ment.

Along the Nu (Sal­ween) Riv­er, the longest free-flow­ing riv­er in main­land South­east Asia, a pro­posed 13-dam cascade—including sev­er­al dams in or very close to the World Her­itage site—would wipe out por­tions of the pil­grim­age route around Mount Kawage­bo and dis­place the com­mu­ni­ties of the riv­er val­ley, like­ly deal­ing a blow to their tra­di­tion­al cul­ture as well. Although the project was put on hold in 2004 in the wake of wide­spread protest, it is cer­tain­ly not dead.

Last year, the World Her­itage Com­mit­tee issued a state­ment express­ing con­cern over reports of unap­proved con­struc­tion under way at one dam site on the Nu Riv­er, and sur­vey­ing work—including road-build­ing and drilling—at three oth­ers. It warned that “the many pro­posed dams could cumu­la­tive­ly con­sti­tute a poten­tial dan­ger to the property’s Out­stand­ing Uni­ver­sal Val­ue.”

The com­mit­tee asked Chi­na to sub­mit by Feb­ru­ary 1 of this year a detailed list of all pro­posed dams, as well as mines, that could affect the World Her­itage prop­er­ty, along with the envi­ron­men­tal impact assess­ments of any pro­posed projects, pri­or to their approval. The com­mit­tee also request­ed, by the same dead­line, a report on the state of con­ser­va­tion of the prop­er­ty and on the progress made in com­plet­ing a strate­gic envi­ron­men­tal impact assess­ment on all of the pro­posed dams and relat­ed devel­op­ment that could impact the site’s World Her­itage val­ue.

Many thanks to He Ran Gao, who pro­vid­ed report­ing and oth­er source mate­r­i­al for this report. He Ran wish­es to thank vil­lagers who pro­vid­ed her with infor­ma­tion, but whose names have been with­eld.