Peru Court: River has Rights

www.msn.com... dgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=b851054e69404e96a93bf3d85dd56d3a&ei=135

A river in Peru now officially has legal rights to "exist, flow, and be free from pollution," as Inside Climate News reported.

The Nauta provincial court in Peru's Loreto region ruled that the Marañón River, which flows from the Andes Mountains to the Amazon River, possesses its own inherent rights. This is the first time the nation has recognized an ecosystem's legal rights. It also includes a provision describing Indigenous organizations as responsible for serving as the river's guardians and defenders.

I'm all for clean rivers but giving a geological feature legal rights sounds like the first step in the wrong direction.

who gets to advocate for? who gets to determine what's in the best interest of a river or mountain or woods?

I'm guessing some of this goes back to animist religions that attribute personalities to features.

any thoughts???

a reply to: Coelacanth55

Leftist insanity.

As usual...

originally posted by: Tolkien
a reply to: Coelacanth55

Leftist insanity.

As usual...

Peru is considered one of the most conservative countries in South America.

Think it happened in Aotearoa first.
www.parliament.nz...

Hoping this link is right and it works.

I assume the indigenous organisations mentioned in your quoted text?

It’s legal rights are very basic and succinct.

Watch the definition of pollution get twisted through the wringer

a reply to: Coelacanth55

a reply to: Coelacanth55

who gets to advocate for? who gets to determine what's in the best interest of a river or mountain or woods?

The answer is in your op...

a reply to: Coelacanth55

If corporations can have rights so can rivers.

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: Tolkien
a reply to: Coelacanth55

Leftist insanity.

As usual...

Peru is considered one of the most conservative countries in South America.

So your infection is spreading even there? Like a rotten apple poisoning the whole barrel, don't act so surprised.

originally posted by: Coelacanth55
any thoughts???

I think that the Maranon should do several hundred other rivers a solid and introduce them to it's lawyer. Just look at the state of Alaska's once pristine water ways, and many people are, not least of all because from space it is making Earth look a lot like Willie Wonka's chemical plant of a candy-land.

www.smithsonianmag.com...

A wise man once observed 'animals don't have rights, but people have responsibilities'.

substitute rivers for animals.

I'm all for businesses being competitive but dumping trash and chemicals in the watershed is just unacceptable.

(I hate to think how they treat rivers in China and Russia)

a reply to: Coelacanth55

I think your OP is on the right track.

Yes, the watersheds should be strictly protected, but giving a river "rights" is just absurd virtue signaling.

More effective would be to publicly execute the chiefs of companies that pollute rivers and streams. And I'm not kidding. Corporate creatures are so corrupt that nothing less will make a real impression on them.

Cheers

So, what does the river say about this:

As of July 2020, Peru had approved two hydroelectric dams on the Marañón River, its main tributary to the Amazon, and had plans for 20 more. The dams are intended to provide 12,430 MW of additional energy for the national grid, power mining projects, and export electricity to Brazil. However, critics say the dams could damage the river system and surrounding area, and some say Peru doesn't need the dams because it already has an energy surplus.

No additional dams?
Get rid of all dams?
Just a few more are acceptable?

I hope the Marañón has a large megaphone because humans overall can be pretty deaf.

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: Tolkien
a reply to: Coelacanth55

Leftist insanity.

As usual...

Peru is considered one of the most conservative countries in South America.

Clearly the judges are not.
Plain insane