The vast mountain range spanning the districts of Gimgim (Varto), Kanîreş (Karlıova), Tatos (Tekman) and Xinûs (Hınıs), located at the intersection of Mûş (Muş), Çewlîg (Bingöl) and Erzirom (Erzurum), is currently under pressure from geothermal energy projects and mining exploration activities. Although these districts are administratively connected to different provinces, they form a shared basin at the foothills of the Kox and Şerefdîn mountains, united by a centuries-old pastoral culture. Today, this region is being driven toward social and ecological destruction through projects carried out under the name of “geothermal drilling.”
The area is known as one of Turkey’s most important livestock centers. During the summer months, hundreds of thousands of small and large livestock from surrounding provinces, primarily Çewlîg, Xarpêt (Elazığ) and others, are brought to the high-altitude plateaus of the Kox and Şerefdîn mountains. Cold water streams fed by melting snow sustain not only these pastures but also all the villages in the basin. However, the geothermal project, which covers 16 villages in Gimgim and 6 villages in Kanîreş, poses a serious risk to this natural water cycle and the integrity of the grazing lands.
In addition to geothermal projects presented under the promise of “clean energy” along the Gimgim–Kanîreş line, ongoing mining exploration in the Tatos–Xinûs line and covert mineral mapping activities in mountainous areas are raising serious concerns. Experts and local residents believe that geothermal drilling is in fact a form of “infrastructure preparation” for more extensive mining operations. This situation directly threatens both the region’s seismic balance and its millennia-old pasture ecosystem.
Agricultural Engineer Abdulssamed Ucaman evaluated the situation as follows: “The geothermal energy project planned in Varto district of Mûş not only leads to dangerous consequences such as ecological destruction and the triggering of seismic activity but also poses a direct threat to the fundamental sources of life in rural areas. In Turkey, pastures are protected under Pasture Law No. 4342, and their use outside designated purposes is subject to strict regulations. The allocation of any pastureland for energy or mining projects is only possible through a ‘change of allocation purpose’ decision, which requires a public interest ruling, an assessment by the Provincial Pasture Commission and approval from the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry.
However, in the case of Varto, this process appears to be largely unclear. The pasture area subject to the project, covering approximately 453,000 square meters, consists of highly productive grazing land and supports around 150 cattle and 1,400 small livestock. In other words, the loss here should be measured not only by the size of the land, but also by the region’s livestock capacity.”
It would be a humanitarian disaster
Abdulssamed Ucaman also pointed to the lack of clarity regarding the scope of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report and whether pasture compensation payments have been made. Ucaman said:
“The incomplete or unclear implementation of these legally required steps leads to a de facto occupation, another form of exploitation, and deprives the population not only of their pastures but also of their right to access information and to participate in decision-making processes that shape their lives.
The case in Varto clearly demonstrates the impact of energy investments on rural areas and the social tensions that may arise from the incomplete application of legal procedures. This situation undermines not only the livelihoods of the local population but also public trust in the transparency and legality of energy projects in Turkey.
Energy production cannot, under any circumstances, bypass legal and environmental procedures under the guise of public interest. What is happening in Varto reveals a reality in which this principle is being ignored. Public authorities and investor companies must fulfill not only economic objectives but also their responsibility to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of the population. They must adopt an approach that also considers the living conditions and employment of the people in the region.
A de facto displacement is taking place. Many people are being forced to migrate to peripheral areas after losing their sources of livelihood. This, in turn, exposes them to a range of traumatic social and familial challenges, including economic hardship, social dislocation, health problems linked to poverty, and the inability to support their families.
Intervention in the habitats of endemic plant species and the damage to biodiversity will lead to destruction that cannot be reversed. In short, these processes, which affect human life, surrounding living beings, environmental integrity and potential seismic conditions, must be regarded as unacceptable.”
Leave a Reply