Rarely in Chile have cases related to the environment reached the Supreme Court. The case of Trillium Corporation's Rio Condor project not only did just that, but the Court annulled the project's governmental permission.  

Based from their headquarters in Bellingham, WA., USA, Trillium's Rio Condor project is financed by capital from Bayside Limited (60%) and Goldman Sachs (40%), both from the USA. The Rio Condor project, representing an investment of US$1.2 billion, intends to cut native forests and export wood products. Approximately 30-60% of the wood will be used for the production of wood chips and sawn wood principally for export to Europe. Trillium purchased 258,000 hectares (637,260 acres) in the island of Tierra del Fuego in the extreme South of Chile and plans to exploit the old growth Subantartic Cold Rainforest comprised of 85% Lenga (Nothofagus pumilio) and of 15% Coig￾e (Nothofagus betuliodes). Chilean scientists estimate that approximately half of Trillium's land has not been intervened by man in the past.  

Trillium Corporation has received enormous support from the Chilean government to concrete its investment. Firstly, it purchased the land at a price significantly lower than the market value (between US$ 1.70 and US$ 117 per hectare). Secondly, Trillium may utilize government subsidies in the form of tax rebates and exemptions according to the following laws: the Navarino Law which grants tax exemption for 50 years, Decree Law 15 which rebates investments made in the area, decree 889 which grants rebates for the contracting of man power in the region, and exportation tax rebates.  

Through these subsidies the company will receive from the government (that is, from all Chileans) 55 billion pesos over the next 20 years. If this money were delivered to the inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego, it would amount to 13,700,000 pesos for each of the 4000 residents of the city of Porvenir, including children. This money could also be used to implement a Tourism Development plan in Tierra del Fuego, utilizing the rivers, forests and the existing scenic beauty which would generate economic growth and sustainable employment for the region of Porvenir.  

On April 3, 1996, the environmental campaign against the project faced a dramatic setback when The Regional Environmental Commission, COREMA Region XII, approved Trillium's project. This decision contradicted important studies that recommended that the project not be undertaken for technical reasons.   

The main factor that motivated environmentalists to continue the campaign incorporating legal actions against the government was that it had approved the project despite recommendations to the contrary by the COREMA Region XII Technical Committee, which verified the unsustainability of the project in its document of March 27, 1996. The Technical Committee is comprised of 14 government professionals representing different agencies and differing areas of expertise. The 26 page report was written by the Technical Committee together with the local appointees from the National Environmental Commission, CONAMA. While the report contained six and a half pages related to "positive environmental aspects" of a very general nature, it also contained 18 pages of criticism concerning technical shortcomings of the project over a variety of subjects related to planned lenga (Nothofagus pumilio) exploitation. It stated that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) provided by Trillium included an insufficient inventory of the existing trees "which is the basis for an environmental evaluation of a project."   

The report also found serious problems with the EIS' harvest simulation model, demonstrating among many points; that it does not specify how the original forest biodiversity will be conserved, and that the data on tree growth within regeneration cycles is lacking because it is based on limited trials only and thus lacks relevance to an extensive forestry project such as Rio Condor. It continues, stating that "data concerning inventory, classifying the forest resource and a definition of forestry practices are necessary to issue a clear statement about the ecological feasibility of the harvest model."  

At the same time, criticism of the exploitation model also focused on volumetric extraction data. "There is more of an emphasis on the supply needs of the industrial compound than on guaranteeing the sustainability of the forestry resource and on controlling the environmental impacts." The report adds that "the EIS does not establish a system to weigh the extraction impacts nor does it allow for impact mitigation." "It is outstandingly relevant to have such information, because oversizing the industrial complex could lead to an overexploitation of the resource."  

The Technical Committee's conclusions on the project reaffirmed these points, stating, "restoration, mitigation and monitoring measures are not sufficient, or cannot be clearly defined, in that the company does not take charge of the adverse impacts on the quantity and quality of natural resources that may result." The report concludes that there do not exist " sufficient elements to approve the viability of the R¡o Condor project." The Technical Committee's report outlining the projects deficiencies was diffused by the newspaper, La Nación, and proved to be a key document for those opposing the approval by COREMA XII Region of the Environmental Impact Statement for Chile's largest proposed forestry operation.   

On May, 8, 1996, The National Ecology Action Network, RENACE, and three member organizations: Defensores del Bosque Chileno, Instituto de Ecología Política and Copirque, together with the Deputies Girardi(PPD) and Navarro(PPD) filed legal suit, called, a "Resource Protection" to stop the project. On May, 9, the Court accepted the petition, thus paralyzing the project pending judgment, however, the court did so not accepting the Resource Protection. This motivated the senators Horvath (RN) and Díaz (DC) together with the deputies Girardi and Navarro to present another Resource Protection, this time against CONAMA. This suit was also rejected by the court.  

This situation obligated environmentalists to appeal to the Supreme Court, which delivered its verdict on March 19, 1997. The verdict stated the following:  
A) The project approval by COREMA and CONAMA is illegal because legislation covering Environmental Impact Statements is not applicable due to a lack of regulations.   

B) The approval was not only arbitrary, and reached without fundamentals, but contradicted all the technical recommendations of the government's own specialists who pointed out that "the information presented in the EIS was insufficient to make a decision on the sustainability of the project, as the continued existence of the forestry resource and its fundamental characteristics are not affirmed."  

This negative report joins the following list of studies pointing out the extremely pessimistic conservation reality of Chile's native forests: The National Account Program report of the Central Bank which predicts the disappearance of Chile's native forests in 20 years if current forestry practices continue, the report by Argentine forestry expert, Morales, solicited by CONAMA, the Environmental Audit of Lenga Tree exploitation report by the Office of French Forests, solicited by CORFO, CORMA Regional, and Pro-Chile.  

While the supreme court verdict is a triumph for the environmental movement in Chile, it also points out the lack of protection for the country's forest patrimony, and demonstrates how the government is illegally approving projects to facilitate investments. Chilean citizens and their organizations do not accept the argument that if they do not accept the exploitation of Tierra del Fuego's forests now, another initiative with even more destructive forestry management techniques will take its place. We know that in the XII region it is necessary to research and elaborate projects with high standards of protection, especially in fragile and pristine ecosystems such as those in the South of Tierra del Fuego. We would like to direct the attention of the international community to this case, because Trillium desires to obtain a green seal (of sustainability) for its operations.  

In conclusion, the environmental movement considers that Trillium Corporation should carry out a study of economic feasibility, without incorporating the enormous subsidies granted from the state. We believe that responsible ecotourism is an emerging viable activity in the region, and one that offers more guarantees for the sustainable development and preservation Tierra del Fuego's natural capital.