DOI: 10.3303/CET25117087  

 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

Paper Received: 8 January 2025; Revised: 10 March 2025; Accepted: 23 May 2025 
Please cite this article as: Camacho Ardila Y., Vega Perez L.A., Useche Villamizar D.S., 2025, Environmental Impact Generated by 
Anthropogenic Activities in the Pisba Páramo (tasco-boyacá), Chemical Engineering Transactions, 117, 517-522  DOI:10.3303/CET25117087 

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS 

VOL. 117, 2025

A publication of 

The Italian Association 
of Chemical Engineering 
Online at www.cetjournal.it 

Guest Editors: Fabrizio Bezzo, Flavio Manenti, Gabriele Pannocchia, Almerinda di Benedetto 

Copyright © 2025, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l.
ISBN 979-12-81206-17-5; ISSN 2283-9216

Environmental Impact Generated by Anthropogenic Activities 

in the Pisba Paramo (Tasco-Boyacá) 

Yurany Camacho Ardila*a, Leonel Antonio Vega Perezb, Dalia Soraya Useche 

Villamizara 

aSchool of Environmental Engineering, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, 150003 Tunja, Boyacá,

Colombia 
bSchool of Law and Social Sciences, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, Tunja, Boyacá, Colombia

yurany.camacho01@uptc.edu.co 

The Pisba paramo is a strategic ecosystem and critical water recharge area for the departments of Boyacá and

Casanare in Colombia. However, in the jurisdiction of the municipality of Tasco, different mining and agricultural 

projects have been conducted that have deteriorated the quality of the ecosystem. Therefore, this work presents 

an evaluation of the environmental impact generated by anthropogenic activities in the Pisba paramo, 

specifically within the jurisdiction of the municipality of Tasco. Based on the methodology of Conesa (1997), the 

environmental impact evaluation was carried out where the effects of anthropogenic activities in the Pisba

paramo on the quality of life of the population, the vegetation and fauna, the soil, the water, air, and ecosystems 

present in the area were assessed. The matrices were determined, and water samples were taken from the

collection points of the aqueducts and at points that presented mining activity, as well as soil samples; in total, 

six water samples and three soil samples were taken. Two severe positive impacts were found related to the

increase in vegetation cover due to mining activities, and four severe negative impacts related to the water 

component according to agricultural activities. The presence of heavy metals in the water was evident in high

levels of iron, nickel, cadmium, lead, and arsenic. The water samples analyzed showed concentrations 0.123-

0.131 mg/L of cadmium, 0.485-0.54 mg/L of lead, and 45.39-576.3 µg/L of arsenic, which represents a clear 

indication of the pollution generated by mining activities.  

1. Introduction

Colombia is considered one of the countries with the greatest biodiversity on the planet. Among Colombian 

ecosystems, the paramo is a natural water reservoir and has been affected by significant changes in land cover

class. The Pisba paramo, located between the departments of Boyacá and Casanare, is a water recharge 

ecosystem that is home to different species endemic to the region, which is why it is classified as an area of 

great environmental and ecological importance for Colombia. The environmental impacts that have occurred in 

the Pisba paramo have generated significant environmental deterioration and impact on local populations since 

it has affected the quality of the water sources that supply this resource to the community of the municipality of 

Tasco. Tasco is known for its extensive dedication to livestock and agriculture; however, in recent years, 

underground coal mining has been on the rise, which affects the ecosystem and water resources. Estupiñan

(2020) evaluated the water quality in the Pisba paramo through the physicochemical and bacteriological 

characterization of the water of the main rivers. The results showed that the water quality is good, however, high

concentrations of fecal coliforms were found in some sampling points, indicating the presence of contamination

from anthropogenic activities. Perez et al. (2018) analyzed the environmental impacts in this paramo related to

the environmental problems caused by mining exploitation, finding that mining has caused a great 

transformation in the habitats of the paramo, which has negatively affected biodiversity and ecosystem services. 

Research of this type on the Pisba paramo allows us to address various dimensions of its ecological and socio-

environmental importance, as well as the challenges it faces for its protection and conservation.  

517

mailto:yurany.camacho01@uptc.edu.co


For this reason, in this work, the evaluation of environmental impacts generated by anthropogenic activities is 

carried out. In the Pisba paramo in the jurisdiction of the municipality of Tasco, the goal is to determine the 

significant different effects. 

2. Methodology  

2.1 Identification of environmental impact 

In this work, the methodology of Vicente Conesa Fernandez-Vitora (1997) was used to carry out the 

environmental impact assessment. With this methodology, the effects of anthropogenic activities in the Pisba 

paramo on the quality of life of the population, the vegetation and fauna, the soil, water, air, and the function of 

the ecosystems present in the area are understood and estimated. When developing this methodology, it seeks 

to identify and evaluate environmental impacts and propose different measures that minimize their harmful 

effects. According to Conesa, to carry out any environmental impact assessment, the sign, the degree of 

qualitative manifestation, and its magnitude must be understood. To evaluate the impact, items such as 

intensity, persistence, extension, moment, reversibility, synergy, accumulation, periodicity, effect, and 

recoverability with which the quantification of environmental impacts is carried out, where the rating ranges are 

assigned according to the meaning, scope, and incidence. According to Conesa (1997), to achieve a rating that 

allows determining the rank of importance (I) of the impacts analysed, Eq. (1). Likewise, each component is 

classified as presented in Table 1. 

)MCPREFACSIRVPEMOEXi(I +++++++++= 23  (1) 

Table 1: Evaluation criteria of the matrix Conesa (1997) 

Sign Intensity (i) Effect (EF) Accumulation (AC) Synergy (SI) Persistence (PE) 

Beneficial + Low 1 Indirect 1 Simple 1 No synergy 1 Fleeting 1 

Harmful - Total 12 Direct 4 Cumulative 4 Synergistic 2 Temporary 2 

        Very synergistic 4 Permanent 4 

Extension (EX) Moment (MO) Recoverability (MC) Periodicity (PR) Reversibility (RV)   

Punctual 1 Long term 1 Immediate recovery 1 Irregular 1 Short term 1   

Partially 2 Medium term 2 Recoverable 2 Periodicity 2 Medium term 2   

Extensive 4 Immediate 4 Mitigable 4 Continuous 4 Irreversible 4   

Total 8 Critical 8 Irrecoverable 8       

Critical 12           

 

Table 2 presents the values that the importance and description of this qualification can take according to the 

Conesa matrix. For this, the matrix of environmental impacts of mining activities in the study site was carried 

out, taking as reference a mining project called PM1, which relates the exploitation of the coal deposit in addition 

to the analysis of agricultural activities. For these two activities, the geomorphic environmental components, 

landscape, soil, water, atmosphere, flora, fauna, and socio-cultural are addressed. 

Table 2: Description of the Conesa matrix qualification 

Value I 

(13-100) 
Qualification Meaning of impact 

I<25 Low (L) It is irrelevant compared to the aims and objectives of the project in question. 

25<I<50 Moderate (M) Not require intensive corrective or protective practices. 

50≤I<75 Severe(S) Requires the recovery of environmental conditions through corrective or protective 

measures. The recovery time required is a long period. 

I ≥75 Critical(C) Its impact is higher than the acceptable threshold. There is a permanent loss of quality 

in environmental conditions. There is no possibility of recovery. 

2.2 Water sampling 

The stratified sampling plan for water used during a field visit to the Pisba paramo included the selection of six 

sampling points representative of different water sources. Stratified sampling was used to collect samples from 

each stratum of interest. First, an unimpacted paramo water sample was selected as a reference. Then, two 

strata of interest related to mining are identified, and two samples are taken from each one: leachate mining 

downstream of the passive that dissolves with runoff from the wasteland. Finally, a water sample was collected 

518



before entering the village aqueduct treatment plant. The simple random sampling technique was used to select 

the sampling points within each stratum. The samples were subsequently analyzed in the laboratories of the 

Pedagogical and Technological University of Colombia. The identification of each water sample from the Pisba 

paramo was carried out as follows: name of the sample (sample point; coordinates): M1 (Dam El Oro; N1137627 

/ E 1152009), M2 (first mine exit; N1137693 / E 1150868), M3 (10m below the mine; N1137677 / E 1150869), 

M4 (Main road drain pipe; N1140353/E 1149425), M5 (Mine 2 Water intakes, N1140391 /E 1149486); M6 (River 

main road - aqueduct entrance; N1140404 / E 1148286). To evaluate the water quality index corresponding to 

the 6 samples, the methodology of the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) of the United States of America 

was used through the online system developed by Oram called the Water Research Center Calculator. 

2.3 Soil sampling 

Stratified sampling was used as a useful tool to obtain a representative sample of the different types of soils 

present in the area. The stratified soil sampling plan for three representative samples of the Pisba paramo and 

describing the environmental impact in the area was carried out as follows: the area was divided into three 

strata: a soil sample affected by mining (M7), a sample of soil affected by agriculture (M8; N 1137901/E 

1151318) and a sample of standard soil without environmental impact (M9; N 1138014 / E 1151335).  

2.4 Water characterization 

In the different water samples, the following characterizations were determined: by the potentiometric method 

pH, conductivity, and total dissolved solids; by the titration method, total acidity, total alkalinity, apparent color, 

total hardness, calcium hardness, magnesium hardness, calcium, magnesium, sulphates; by the argentometric 

chloride method; turbidity (nephelometric method) in addition to measurement of nitrites, nitrates, phosphates, 

total phosphorus, dissolved oxygen (direct measurement, ASTM 888-09) and apparent color (colorimetry). In 

addition to the above, the atomic absorption spectrometry technique was used to determine zinc, iron, copper, 

molybdenum, and nickel. Using the electrothermal atomic absorption technique by EPA Digestion Metals, the 

content of cadmium, lead, and arsenic was determined. As part of the microbiological analysis, the content of 

total coliforms and E. Coli was determined using the Membrane Filter Method technique.   

2.5 Soil characterization 

The soil samples were analysed according to the techniques of pH (saturated paste method), humidity 

(gravimetric method), temperature, organic matter (dry combustion method), and conductivity (potentiometric 

method). In addition, the content of zinc, iron, molybdenum, copper, and nickel was determined by atomic 

absorption spectroscopy, and the concentration of lead and cadmium was determined by electrothermal atomic 

absorption by EPA Digestion Metals. 

3. Results and Discussions 

Table 3 and Table 4 present the structure of the matrix of impacts of mining activities on the physical environment 

and for the biotic and sociocultural environments, respectively. With this same structure, the environmental 

impacts of agricultural activities were also developed. According to the matrix of environmental impacts of mining 

activity (Table 3 and Table 4), it is observed that this mining project generates severe negative impacts regarding 

the physicochemical contamination of water due to the alteration of the hydrological cycle, the decrease in 

vegetation and the loss of biodiversity due to modification of the structure of the vegetation cover and the 

modification and loss of habitat due to the displacement and distribution of the species present in the area due 

to the removal of plant material. Two severe positive impacts were found regarding the increase in vegetation 

and three severe negative impacts related to the decrease in vegetation and loss of biodiversity (Figure 1). 

Compared to impacts evaluated with a low rating, some were found related to soil erosion, the reduction of water 

availability, transportation, and the installation of signage in risk areas, the first two being considered negative 

impacts and the latter two as positive impacts. All other impacts were rated as moderate impacts. In the case of 

the impact matrix generated for agricultural activities for the components (and their impacted factor) landscape 

(visibility), soil (erosion, soil quality); water (flows, atmosphere), flora (vegetative cover and diversity), fauna 

(habitat; population), community and economy (Population, employment and social well-being) and culture (use 

and management of the environment) were all moderate. It is highlighted that it was severe for the cases of the 

water component (surface and groundwater: physical-chemical quality, water quality) and low in terms of flows 

related to its availability. Table 5 and Table 6 present the results of the characterization of the water and soil 

samples from the Pisba paramo area.  

 

 

 

519



Table 3: Matrix environmental impacts, physical, mining activity 
C

O
M

 Impacted 

Factor Activity S
ig

n
 

I E
X

 

M
O

 

P
E

 

R
V

 

S
I 

A
C

 

E
F

 

P
R

 

M
C

 

II
 

 V
a
lu

e
 

G
e
o
fo

rm
s
 

A
A

 

Excavation  - 4 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 4 1 34 M 

S
ta

b
ili

ty
 

Adaptation of collection center  - 4 2 4 2 2 2 1 4 4 2 37 M 

Drilling (iron and coal mining) and/or blasting  - 4 2 4 2 2 2 1 4 4 2 37 M 

Reconfiguration of exploitation tunnels  + 1 1 2 2 4 2 1 4 4 2 26 M 

Redefinition and stabilization of collection centers  + 1 1 2 4 4 2 1 4 4 2 28 M 

L
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
 

V
is

ib
ili

ty
 

Adaptation of the collection center and camp  - 5 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 49 M 

Redefinition and stabilization of collection centers + 4 1 2 2 2 2 1 4 4 1 32 M 

Closure and dismantling of roads  + 4 1 2 2 2 2 1 4 4 1 32 M 

Revegetation + 7 1 2 2 2 2 1 4 4 1 41 M 

S
o
il 

U
s
e
 

Removal of plant material - 4 1 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 1 30 M 

Adaptation of the collection center and camp - 4 1 2 2 1 2 1 4 4 1 31 M 

Redefinition and stabilization of collection centers + 5 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 4 2 38 M 

Closure and dismantling of roads + 5 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 4 2 38 M 

Revegetation + 5 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 4 1 37 M 

S
o
il 

q
u
a
lit

y
 a

n
d
 

lo
s
s
 

Removal of plant material - 4 4 4 2 4 1 1 4 2 2 40 M 

Excavation - 5 4 4 2 2 1 1 4 2 4 43 M 

Adaptation of the collection center and camp - 5 1 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 43 M 

Track maintenance - 6 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 39 M 

Camp - 1 1 4 2 2 1 1 4 2 2 23 L 

Revegetation + 3 1 4 2 1 2 1 4 2 1 28 M 

A
F

 

Removal of plant material - 4 1 4 2 1 2 1 4 2 2 32 M 

W
a
te

r 

F
lo

w
 

ra
te

s
 Removal of plant material - 7 4 2 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 46 M 

Camp - 1 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 24 L 

Revegetation + 3 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 30 M 

S
u
rf

a
c
e
 w

a
te

rs
 

Removal of plant material - 7 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 2 2 51 S 

Excavation - 5 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 2 4 47 M 

Adaptation of the collection center and camp - 5 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 2 2 45 M 

Drilling  - 7 1 4 2 2 2 4 4 2 2 45 M 

Blasting - 7 1 4 2 4 2 4 4 2 4 49 M 

Camp - 4 1 4 2 2 2 1 4 2 1 32 M 

Transport - 2 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 2 2 36 M 

Revegetation + 4 1 4 2 1 2 4 4 2 1 34 M 

A
tm

o
s
p
h
e
re

 

A
ir
 q

u
a
lit

y
 

Removal of plant material - 7 2 4 2 1 2 4 4 2 1 45 M 

Excavation; - 4 1 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 38 M 

Adaptation of collection center - 5 2 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 43 M 

Camp - 2 1 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 34 M 

Ore loading - 5 2 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 45 M 

Closure and dismantling of roads + 4 1 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 1 37 M 

Revegetation + 4 1 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 1 37 M 

N
o
is

e
 

Removal of plant material - 4 2 4 2 1 1 1 4 1 1 31 M 

Excavation - 8 2 4 2 1 1 1 4 1 2 44 M 

Adaptation of collection center - 6 2 4 2 1 1 1 4 1 1 37 M 

Drilling/ Blasting - 8 2 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 42 M 

Ore loading and transportation - 6 2 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 36 M 

AA: Geomorphology; AF Fertility; II: importance of the impact; COM: Component 

 

Figure 1: Qualification of the environmental impacts, mining activity 

  

520



 Table 4: Matrix of environmental impacts, biotic and socio-cultural, mining activity 
C

O
M

 Impacted  

Factor 
Activity 

S
ig

n
 

I 
 

E
X

 

M
O

 

P
E

 

R
V

 

S
I 

A
C

 

E
F
 

P
R

 

M
C

 

II
 

 V
a
lu

e
 

F
lo

ra
 

P
la

n
t 
c
o
v
e
rs

 

a
n
d
 p

la
n
t 

d
iv

e
rs

it
y
 Removal of plant material - 8 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 4 2 56 S 

Excavation - 8 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 4 2 56 S 
Adaptation of the collection center and camp - 5 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 4 5 50 S 
Closure and Dismantling of Roads + 7 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 4 2 53 S 
Revegetation + 6 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 2 54 S 

F
a

u
n
a

 

H
a
b
it
a
t 

Removal of plant material - 8 4 4 2 2 2 1 4 4 2 53 S 

Adaptation of Collection Center + 4 2 4 1 1 2 1 4 4 1 34 M 

Camp - 4 2 4 2 2 2 1 4 1 1 33 M 

Redefinition and stabilization of collection 

centers 
- 4 2 4 2 2 2 1 4 2 1 34 M 

F
a

u
n
a
 D

iv
e
rs

it
y
 

a
n
d
 P

o
p
u
la

ti
o

n
  

Removal of plant material - 5 2 2 2 2 2 1 4 1 1 34 M 

Ore loading and transportation - 4 2 4 2 2 2 1 4 1 1 33 M 

Redefinition and stabilization of collection 

centers 
+ 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 30 M 

Closure and dismantling of roads + 3 1 2 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 28 M 

Revegetation + 5 1 2 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 34 M 

S
o
c
io

-C
u
lt
u
ra

l 

P
o
p
u
la

ti
o

n
, 

e
m

p
lo

y
m

e
n
t,
 

a
n
d
 s

o
c
ia

l 

w
e
ll-

b
e
in

g
 Labor Hiring 

Track maintenance 

Transport; 

Installation of signage for risk areas  

Revegetation 

+ 5 2 4 2 2 1 4 4 2 1 39 M 

+ 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 4 2 2 35 M 

+ 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 4 2 2 23 L 

+ 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 4 4 1 23 L 

+ 4 1 2 2 2 2 1 4 4 2 33 M 
 

Table 5: Results of the characterization of water samples 

Parameter Unit 
Water sample results 

Parameter Unit 
Water sample results 

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 

Turbidity NTU 0.9 2.5 2.5 900 320 16 Nitrites mg/L  0.009 0.013 0.006 0.008 0.008 0.01 

pH - 7.97 2.89 2.79 3.73 3.46 6.02 Nitrates mg/L  0.7 12 6.5 0.8 1.2 1.3 

Conductivity µs/Cm 18.5 2120 2120 1561 1587 29.9 Ca mg/Lb  4.8 208 224 256 144 8 

TDS mg/L 10 1091 1112 770 798 16 Mg mg/L 2.9 87.5 92.3 87.5 87.5 3.4 

DO mg/La  6.42 6.84 6.79 6.65 6.87 7.03 Zn mg/L 0.217 1.094 0.871 0.243 0.229 0.28 

Total acidity mg/Lb  14 374 324 34 84 24 Fe mg/L 0.528 37.6 30.42 77 36.64 3.8 

Total alkalinity mg/Lb 12 0 0 16 12 30 Cu mg/L 0.023 0.047 0.031 0.028 0.025 0.02 

Chlorides mg/L 16 980 940 480 660 10 Mo mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 

Apparent color Pt-Co 17 36 30 2564 1184 149 Ni mg/L 0.537 0.734 0.713 0.564 0.563 0.54 

Total hardness mg/Lb  24 880 920 1000 720 34 Cd mg/L 0.123 0.127 0.129 0.131 0.129 0.13 

CalciumC mg/Lb  12 520 540 640 360 20 Pb mg/L 0.524 0.533 0.511 0.514 0.485 0.54 

Phosphates mg/L  0.19 0.6 0.47 0.82 0.65 1.41 As µg/L 45.39 537.5 558.7 575.4 576.3 379.5 

MagnesiumC  mg/Lb  12 360 380 360 360 14 TC 
UFC/ 
100ml 

36      

TP mg/L 0.06 0.2 0.15 0.27 0.21 0.46 
E. Coli 

1      

Sulfates mg/L  1 4800 4100 4300 4400 2       

a:O2 b: CaCO3  c: hardness  DO: Dissolved oxygen; TDS: Total dissolved solids; TP: Total phosphorus TC: Total coliforms 
 

According to the water quality (Table 5) index used, the following results were found for each of the samples 

analysed: M1 79%, M2 65 %, M3 66 %, M4 75 %, M5 74 %, and M6 80.5 %, which corresponds to a classification 

on its scale of good, average, average, good and good, respectively. The lowest values were found in water 

samples near the mines. Samples M2 and M3, when compared with Resolution 631 of 2015 of Colombia in 

which the parameters and maximum permissible limit values were established in specific discharges to surface 

water bodies, had a high content of chlorides, sulphates, iron, nickel, lead, and arsenic.  A wide presence of 

arsenic is observed in all the water sources analysed. Arsenic is a highly toxic and carcinogenic element that 

represents a significant risk to human health and the environment. Lead toxicity can have serious consequences 

for local fauna and flora. Exposure to high concentrations of this heavy metal can affect the nervous system of 

some animals, causing damage to their behavior, reproduction, and survival. In addition, some plants may suffer 

damage to their growth and development due to the accumulation of lead in soil and water (Zaimee et al., 2021). 

Sample M1 was planned as a standard sample point to evaluate the water quality of the ecosystem before 

interventions and thus be able to compare the change due to mining activities. The results of samples M2, M3, 

and M5 demonstrate an alteration in the physicochemical parameters in the water quality seen in sample one. 

The samples analysed as a whole reveal clear evidence of mining activity and its negative impacts on the 

521



paramo ecosystem. The results obtained demonstrate a significant alteration in the physicochemical parameters 

and reveal high concentrations of heavy metals, which represent a threat to both flora and fauna and human 

health. For the three soil samples (Table 6), the pH found is less than 6, which may imply deficiencies of Ca, 

Mg, and K; however, for paramo soil, a value such as 5.21 may be normal. Regarding conductivity, in all cases, 

it meets a value of less than 2000 µs/Cm, which places it in the non-saline category, reflecting the characteristic 

that no crop is affected. For its part, the percentage of organic matter present in the three samples reflects a 

high percentage for samples M7 and M9 and a medium percentage for sample M8. Regarding heavy metals in 

all soil samples, it complies with the maximum permitted concentrations reported by Kabata and Pendias (2001).  

Table 6: Results of the characterization of soil samples 

Parameter  Unit Soil sample results Parameter  Unit Soil sample results 

M7 M8 M9 M7 M8 M9 

pH - 2.85 4.52 5.21 Fe mg/kg 15.556 101.94 3.385 

Humidity % 9.245 2.63 8.91 Cu mg/kg 0.020 0.027 0.040 

Temperature °C 17 19 18.2 Mo mg/kg <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 

Organic matter  % 21.49 65.944 7.73 Ni mg/kg 0.039 0.057 0.0895 

Conductivity µs/Cm 1218 53.7 150.9 Cd mg/kg 0.0029 0.010 0.0099 

Zn mg/kg 0.098 0.058 0.286 Pb mg/kg 0.048 0.057 0.0335 

4. Conclusions 

For the most part, there has been contamination of water sources, soil degradation, and alterations to the 

ecosystems present in the area, and, although the entities in charge established several requirements for the 

different mining owners, it is necessary to monitor compliance with said obligations, being they must commit to 

carrying out activities while maintaining adequate management of natural resources and preventing or mitigating 

any type of negative environmental impact that may occur in the area as a consequence of the execution of 

their work. In the case of agricultural activities, it is also necessary to implement environmental management 

measures that promote good agricultural practices in the inhabitants of the area, which mitigate the impacts 

related to excessive grazing, the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and excessive irrigation of crops. The presence 

of heavy metals in the water was evident in high levels of iron (0.528-37.6 mg/L), nickel (0.537-0.734 mg/L), 

cadmium (0.123-0.131 mg/L), lead (0.485-0.54 mg/L), and arsenic (45.39-576.3 µg/L), which represents a clear 

indication of the pollution generated by mining activities. These metals, known to be toxic, have harmful effects 

on aquatic organisms and the entire food chain. According to Castro and Molina (2019), phytoremediation can 

be a strategy to reduce the degree of contamination because it achieves the reduction and/or elimination of the 

concentration of various contaminants, such as heavy metals, from biochemical processes carried out by both 

terrestrial and aquatic plants. 

Acknowledgments 

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from UPTC in the project SGI 3537, VIE 02, 2023. 

References 

Castro Castillo L.T., Molina Acosta L.D.C., 2019, Determination of the Degree of Heavy Metals Accumulation in 

Macrophytes of Bogotá River, Colombia, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 74, 259–264. 

Conesa F.V, 1997, Methodological Guide for Environmental Impact Assessment (in Spanish), Ediciones Mundi-

Prensa. Madrid, España.  

Estupiñán M.C.R, 2020. Recognizing the territory: an approach to spatial transformations due to the geopolitics 

of coal. Pedagogical reflection at the Jairo Albarracín educational institution in the Cómeza Hoyada village. 

municipality of Socotá-Boyacá (in Spanish).  

Kabata-Pendias A., 2001. Trace elements in soils and plants, CRC press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, p 403 

Oram B. Water Quality Index Calculator for Surface Water. Water Research Center: Monitoring the Quality of 

Surfacewaters, [knowyourh2o.com/outdoor-3/ water-quality-index-calculator-for-surface-water].  

Pérez L.A.V., Ostos, M.C.A., Sánchez, R.D.G., 2018, The Pisba paramo and the mining concession: the 

environmental problems of Tasco (Boyacá) (in Spanish). Academia & Derecho, 15. 

Zaimee, M.Z.A., Sarjadi, M.S., Rahman, M.L, 2021, Heavy Metals Removal from Water by Efficient 

Adsorbents.Water,13, 2659. 

 

522


	422camachoardila.pdf
	Environmental Impact Generated by Anthropogenic Activities in the Pisba Paramo (Tasco-Boyacá)