Eight years after the intervention in the centennial Coihue of Villa La Angostura, we remember this emblem of ecosystem longevity and conservation of Patagonia, as the environmental challenges we face in our country.
The Andean-Patagonian forest lost one of its oldest trees when the Coihue of Villa La Angostura was intervened in 2017. With over 400 years of history, this tree had witnessed the passage of time, the landscape changes, and the evolution of human interaction with nature. The intervention, justified by safety reasons, left a physical, cultural, and symbolic void.
Nothofagus dombeyi
The coihue (Nothofagus dombeyi) is an evergreen tree up to 40 meters high and 2.5 meters in diameter, native to the forests of Chile and Argentina. Its bark is dark gray with vertical cracks and its leaves are lanceolate. It is distributed from the Libertador General Bernardo O’Higgins Region in Chile to the Argentine provinces of Neuquén, Río Negro, and Chubut. Its wood is particularly resistant to humidity, and its leaves have medicinal properties, such as febrifugal and anti-inflammatory activity.
A symbol of Patagonia
This centennial Coihue had become a reference for visitors and residents of the region. Its size, longevity, and imposing presence made it stand out in the forest, turning it into a tangible reminder of geological time and the importance of native ecosystems.
However, its value goes beyond the aesthetic or sentimental. Its role in the ecosystem is fundamental: these trees regulate the local climate, store large amounts of carbon, and provide habitat for countless species. The intervention in this Coihue, although based on a risk assessment, invites us to question how we define what is dangerous and what alternative measures exist for coexisting with nature without resorting to the elimination of such valuable organisms.
Safety or lack of environmental planning?
The official justification for the intervention was that the tree represented an imminent danger to the population’s safety. However, this argument raises a deeper issue: the lack of long-term environmental planning. Why was a specimen of this magnitude in a risky situation? Were there previous strategies to mitigate the danger without resorting to intervention?
In this case, the procedure with which the intervention was carried out also sparked controversy. The landowner was not consulted, and the local community expressed discontent over the loss of a natural emblem. These situations highlight a disconnect between governmental decisions and the social perception of environmental value.
Patagonia and the future of its centennial trees
The intervention in this Coihue underscores the urgent need to incorporate the conservation of Patagonia and ecosystems into urban development policies. In Patagonia, there are still centennial trees, but their future is conditioned by a change in perspective. If they continue to be seen as threats or obstacles, the loss of these trees will be inevitable. It is essential to take concrete measures to ensure the protection of those that still remain.
And today, what’s happening?
Currently, the focus on the environment in Argentina and Patagonia conservation seems to be losing ground to policies that prioritize other management areas. At the governmental level, decisions regarding the protection of native ecosystems, such as Patagonian forests, are not always aligned with sustainability and long-term conservation principles.
Today, environmental protection faces the contradiction of policies that, while acknowledging environmental damage, do not always implement the necessary strategies to effectively prevent it. This lack of long-term actions highlights the importance of rethinking how to integrate conservation into public policies to ensure the protection of trees and centennial forests that remain essential to our ecosystem.
Have you visited our YouTube channel yet? Subscribe now!
