The role of hydrosocial heritages produced by hydrosocial territories in understanding environmental conflicts: The case of Sélune dam removals (France)

Building the dams: shaping a new valley

At the beginning of the 20^th century, an engineer proposed equipping the Sélune River with dams. Thus, in 1919, the company “Société des Forces Motrices de la Sélune” built the La-Roche-qui-Boit dam with funding from the Bank of Avranches and from local private investors. Two years later, this same company obtained a new concession for a larger dam upstream to meet the growing electricity demand. The construction of the Vezins dam, designed by Albert Caquot, a famous engineer at the time, began in 1929 and was completed in 1932.

The construction of the two dams symbolizes the domination of capital power in the management of the valley. A private company, supported by local bank investors, erected two large infrastructures with the goal of producing hydropower and generating an economic profit. As a result, the river became H₂O, a resource to be economically exploited. In other words, the river and the territory as a whole were understood entirely within the modern project underpinned by the core idea of exploiting nature for the purpose of economic growth and the development of well-being. Spatially, the focus was limited to the river channel and then the reservoirs, that is, where the water (and money) flowed. This commodification of the Sélune River was largely aided by the national political and economic context of the time: when small-scale hydropower for artisanal use largely collapsed at the turn of the 20^th century, the French State encouraged the production of hydraulic energy, which was considered to be in the general interest in the wake of the development of “green coal” (Barraud and Germaine, 2017), by generalizing the system of concessions to all rivers. With the help of capital and through the infrastructure of dams, private companies held power and control over the administration of the newly created hydrosocial territory.

This power was materialized by the transformations induced by the dams (Figure 3(a)). The Roche-qui-Boit dam generated a reservoir of 20 ha which developed over 4 km, while the reservoir upstream of the Vezins dam covered an area of 150 ha and extended over 19 km. The old weirs and fisheries located at the bottom of the valley disappeared under the reservoirs, as did the bridges, which were replaced by new ones built across the reservoirs at the same time as the dams. In addition, the company purchased the land within the flooded area, thus expropriating local farmers that exploited the valley bottom as pastureland, to produce hydropower. ³ The dams erased both symbolically and materially the former elements that had structured local communities to realign the territory with the political and economic objectives of producing power and money.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Historical evolution of the hydrosocial territory of the Sélune Valley.

A slow and collective appropriation of the lakes of the Sélune

While the river was managed solely according to electricity production needs until the Second World War, we can see the progressive appropriation of the lakes by local actors during the postwar period. The lakes became leisure areas frequented by the inhabitants of the surrounding villages (Figure 3(b)). Thus, small guinguettes (at Virey, at the Pont sur le Lair or near the Vezins dam) became meeting places for local people. Swimming and canoeing were common, especially on Vezins Lake. Jumping from the Pont des Biards was a popular activity for the youth. Inns and restaurants opened on the lakeshores, while a motorboat offered rides on Lake Vezins in the 1990s. A roofed picnic and barbecue area was created near the Vezins dam in the 1990s and became a gathering place for family and community events. Numerous cabins and lake pontoons were built on the lakeshores by either inhabitants of surrounding villages or from further towns as weekend or holiday resorts (Germaine et al., 2016). In the Sélune Valley, people came looking for a recreation and nature area where they could practice different kinds of activities and also benefit from a restful environment, on weekends or during holidays.

Local associations organized cultural events on and around the lakes to liven up the valley. From 1972 to 1992, a Sound and Light show, which ended with a fireworks display, was organized every year on the lake of La Roche-qui-Boit. The production of these shows two weekends a year was made possible by volunteers who for the most part came from nearby villages and contributed to local citizens’ appropriation of the lakes. These events attracted a considerable amount of onlookers, mainly from the immediate surroundings but also from places farther away, such as Fougères or Granville. During the 1993 mandatory draining, nautical shows, fireworks, guided visits of the dams were organized under the patronage of EDF. ⁴ These events attracted considerable attention, due to the media coverage and the publication of 100,000 brochures, with thousands of visitors and the establishment of a traffic plan to manage the car flows on the small roads (Germaine and Lespez, 2014). The association “les amis du barrage,” which played an important role in the conflict surrounding the removal, was created on this occasion.

The local authorities engaged in development programs alongside these initiatives. In particular, they improved access to the lakes by paving a few sections of farm roads leading down to the banks and developing parking lots to improve the conditions for using the lakeshores during the 1970s. These developments were part of a green tourism project promoted by several lakeside communities. In 1976, the municipality of Saint-Laurent-de-Terregatte created a resort village named Bel Orient just above the Lac de la Roche qui-Boit to welcome tourists. In 1989, the Isigny-le-Buat municipality developed the leisure center of La Mazure on the shores of Vezins lake to offer water and sports activities (pedal boats, rowboats) to young locals and then also to visitors. Since the end of the Second World War, EDF contributed significantly to the valley's development, either passively or actively, by agreeing to give access to its land to build private (pontoons, cabins) or public (leisure center) infrastructures. It also funded local development programs, events, and associations.

All of these dynamics underline the spatial enlargement of the Sélune hydrosocial territory with its expansion beyond the channel to the valley as a whole, as reflected in the organization of cultural events that attracted many people, locally and from farther afield. For instance, many shed owners came, either for weekends and vacations, the most comfortable of which served as a secondary home, from small cities located less than 100 km away, such as Avranches, Fougères or Rennes (Germaine et al., 2016). It also marked a shift in the infrastructure that organized the territory. The lakes of the Sélune replaced the dams to become the major infrastructure organizing the territory. The dams were still producing electricity, but the water in the lakes became more than just a resource to produce electricity; it also supported multiple uses that were not only monetary, but also sensorial, esthetic, and social. This empowered new non-economic stakeholders, such as local non-profits, municipalities, and users, to contribute to the social and political organization of the territory and its management.

The lakes taken over by fishermen

The 1993 draining constituted a real rupture in the valley's trajectory. First, it contributed to the awareness of a degradation of water quality due to changes in agricultural practices in the watershed (Germaine and Lespez, 2017). Second, it marked the beginning of the slow takeover by fishing communities (Figure 3(c)). The lakes have been prized fishing spots since their creation. Local fishermen have built their identity around largely angling on the lake of Vezins. Fish restocking operations as early as 1932, as well as the organization of fishing contests by the local fishing society of Saint-Hilaire-du-Harcouët, enhanced the lakes for the fishermen (Thomas and Germaine, 2018). Contrary to the downstream section of the Sélune, people could fish for white fish (carp) and predators (pike) on the lakes. During the 1990's, local authorities disengaged from the management of the valley. The Mazure leisure center specialized in welcoming school and sports groups in the 1990s, which prevented local inhabitants or excursionists from going there to enjoy the lake. The hiking trails opened in previous years were gradually abandoned and became impassable. Some elected officials refer to this period since the late 1990s depicted in this section as a “dead valley” (interview with a mayor, 2012), explaining that “[they] did not build enough facilities to make it visible” (interview with an inhabitant, 2017). However, the fishermen kept on practicing their activity on the lakes, as they had for several decades. They demanded the ban of nautical activities on the lakes in the 1990s, arguing that the motorboats disturbed the fish. Combined with the ban on swimming for public health reasons at the end of the 1990s, fishermen became the main users of the lakes, as the practice of paddling was not very developed at the time. They also slowly privatized the lakeshore by installing formal and informal trespassing signs (Germaine et al., 2016). As a result, the Sélune lakes did not draw people from neighboring towns, unlike before. Rather, they became a hidden gem, known only to fishermen and inhabitants of the immediately surrounding villages. Thanks to their collective organization and their historic presence, the fishing community took advantage of this situation and largely guided the management of the valley. Furthermore, the practice of fishing during this period contributed to build a strong relationship between anglers and the lakes where they practiced: “The dams are part of my childhood, where I learned to fish, especially for carp […] I’m deeply attached to this place because I’ve spent so many hours here […] Fishing in such natural, wide-open spots—those are magic moments” (interview with an angler, 2017). These relationships then played a critical role in the conflict.

At the same time, the dams kept producing electricity. Following a major flooding episode in 2000 upstream from the Vezins dam, a conflict arose between EDF and the affected municipalities. A prefectural decision was taken to lower the winter level of the Vezins reservoir to avoid flooding in the upstream part of the reservoir (Saint-Hilaire-du-Harcouët) while maintaining energy production. The level of the lake was thus lowered during the winter and raised for the summer period to ensure continuity of recreational activities and the water landscape. During the early 2000s, EDF prepared for the end of the concession and filed for a renewal of the license.

Similarly to the previous period, the lakes were still the guiding infrastructure of the territory. However, the social and political context that organized the valley was transformed by the empowerment of the fishermen. In contrast, the takeover by the fishing community led to the disempowerment of inhabitants and collectives that turned away from the territory's management. Spatially, this period was characterized by a contraction of the hydrosocial territory around the water and the shores.

Dam removal: a rediscovery of the valley through the conflict and its ambiguity

The decision to remove the dams in 2009 by the Minister of the Environment paradoxically contributed to a rediscovery of the relationships between the lakes and the valley (Figure 3(d)). Because this was a highly conflictual decision (Germaine and Lespez, 2017), opponents engaged in multiple initiatives to demonstrate the multiple values and assets of the valley with the lakes. The local non-profit “les Amis du barrage” was particularly active in this endeavor. It organized multiple events (barbecues, spectacles) near the Vezins dam after nearly two decades of scant social activity around the lakes. It coordinated citizen workcamps to reopen and mark the old hiking trails around the lakes that were abandoned in the 1990s. It also identified the different viewpoints onto the lakes. This was part of an effort to make the valley visible and attractive through the lakes.

In terms of infrastructure, the lakes were considered from multiple perspectives to emphasize the need to preserve them. Of course, they supported multiple uses (fishing, paddling) and contributed to the specificity of the landscape. They also served as a reservoir in case of fire. The conflict saw the two dams once again become major infrastructures in the management of the territory after their disappearance during the two previous periods. This was visible in the brochure edited by “les amis du barrage,” which traced the history of the dams. Their capacity to produce renewable energy was also put forward in the context of energy transition. However, the roles of the dams were reinterpreted by the stakeholders in relation to the downstream expansion of the hydrosocial territory. As such, the dams and the lakes were presented as tools to preserve territorial solidarity, which was one of the argument put forward by opponents to the removal during the official public inquiry. First, they were deemed to act as a protection against floods in the downstream section (the villages of Ducey and Poilley) because of their presumed capacity to hold back floodwaters. In addition, the hydroterritory expanded further into the bay when the infrastructures were framed as filters that prevented polluted sediment from silting into the Bay of Mont Saint Michel. At a larger scale, dam removal opponents framed the lakes within the nuclear context of the Manche département as a freshwater reservoir that could be used in case of a problem at the new power plant under construction in the north end of the département.

This spatial extension was materialized in the valley by the installation of signage underlining the connection between the lakes and the downstream section. Banners contesting the removal were installed close to the dams and lakes and also farther afield (Figure 4). For instance, signage was put up on the main roads or roundabouts around the valley. “Les amis du barrage” organized an public referendum in the town of Saint-Hilaire-du-Harcouet to enlarge the scale of the concerned territory. Contrary to other environmental conflicts in France (Notre-Dame des Landes, Sivens), the mobilization did not attract people from outside the territory to join the struggle against the State (Pailloux, 2015; Subra, 2016).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 4.

Banners around the lakes to oppose the removal and highlighting the relationships with the downstream area (villages and the Bay of Mont Saint-Michel).

Dam removal: an ecological project that reshaped the valley

Announced in 2009, the project to remove both dams symbolizes the return of the State as a key stakeholder in the management of the territory. The unilateral decision reflects the dispossession dynamic that was created by the State and its control of the Sélune waterscape through the implementation of an ecological project. This project has had profound material implications for the valley. The lakes disappeared, only to be replaced by a river channel flowing through the valley bottom. With the decrease in water level, cabins and pontoons were progressively abandoned by their owners. ⁵

Furthermore, the works entailed a significant amount of sediment management to prevent a plume downstream and to retain polluted sediments located in one of the tributaries due to industrial contamination. With this mindset, the former reservoir was primarily seen as an area to store sediments by the project managers. The installation of yellow pipes to transport the sediments and the large retention areas all along the valley rendered this visible. With the removal, the whole valley became, albeit temporary, a large and noisy deconstruction site in the name of river restoration (Figure 5). While the announcement underlined the exemplary nature of this unprecedented operation in Europe from both an ecological and a territorial standpoint, very few initiatives were taken to consider the territorial aspects of the project. As of today, the State has focused on the engineering aspects of the channel management and there exists no comprehensive project for the dewatered area, which remains as nothing more a storage area. Some limited initiatives exist (sowing of adequate agricultural plots, for instance) but they are complicated by the multiple restrictions on access to the valley in relation to the deconstruction site (Figure 3(e)). These bans, in effect since 2017, also prevented inhabitants from accessing the valley after their rediscovery of the area during this conflict. The access limitations became visible in the territory with the installation of barriers and the posting of prefectorial orders throughout the valley. This reinforced and materialized the State's grip and control over the hydrosocial territory.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 5.

Sediment management works in the Sélune River Valley.

This control relied on the management of a new infrastructure. Indeed, with the ecological project, the river replacing the dams and lakes becomes the (natural) infrastructure that organizes the territory. Though “natural,” this infrastructure is conceived as a technical tool to reconnect the downstream section to the upstream portion from an ecological standpoint and, thus, to allow sediment transit and fish migration. The focus on salmon is meaningful in this endeavor (Thomas and Germaine, 2018). Based on this, one could conclude to a spatial narrowing of the hydrosocial territory by dam removal advocates. The focus on salmon and river channel and the subsequent narrowing was interpreted by local inhabitants as the exclusion of humans, and human-built elements, in the consideration of the future of the valley as expressed by a participant of a public meeting in 2012: “for hours it is the speech to defend the salmon and we did not speak about the human.” This sentiment was reinforced as studies they carried out studies focused either on the ecological potential (Forget et al., 2018) or economic dimension (Salanié et al., 2004) of the return of the salmon in the valley without considering local context. In addition, local inhabitants did not have a relationship with salmon and considered that “if it’s just because of the salmon, it's not even worth doing” (interview with a shed owner, 2016).

However, as of today, there is no visibility in terms of what the future of the hydrosocial territory could be (Figure 3(f)). Three hypotheses can be laid out. First, in the absence of a project (either because of a context of austerity for public spending or a lack of political will or a combination of both), the dewatered reservoir would be rapidly covered with an alluvial forest, thus limiting the ability to access the river. This scenario is feared by most the inhabitants and local elected (Germaine et al., 2019). Another hypothesis would be a project targeted at local inhabitants with the maintenance of an access to the river and the creation of trail loops connecting the villages of the plateau to the valley. Finally, the dam removal could constitute the foundation of a more important and radical transformation of the territory through multiple and collective dynamics aiming at improving the environment at a broader scale (Figure 6).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 6.

Historical and spatial evolutions of the Sélune Valley since the construction of the dams.

Considering hydrosocial heritages

In the USA, dam removal is often presented as a tool to heal relationships between native tribes and rivers that had been affected by the modern conception of water, e.g. the building of dams that reduces water to an economic resource (Fox et al., 2017). In other cases, especially in urban environments, dam removal can be a tool to empower local communities, reconnect them with rivers, and provide a sense of pride (McClenachan et al., 2015), thus offering an opportunity to build a new management paradigm. In that sense, dam removal can be successful, both ecologically but also from a territorial point of view (Brewitt, 2019). An analysis of the Sélune dam removal project offers a case where, at least for now, it can also be a failure (Germaine and Lespez, 2017). To decipher this failure, studies have highlighted the top-down approach adopted by the State in managing the projects (Germaine and Lespez, 2017) as well as the attachment of local inhabitants to the landscapes created by the dam (Germaine et al., 2019). These studies focused on contemporary factors. This analysis complements them by incorporating a historical dimension combined with the hydrosocial territory framework to examine the conflict.

The paradigmatic management that presided over the removal in the Sélune case is similar to the one that guided the building of the dams in the early 20^th century. Indeed, supporters of the dams’ removal clearly framed the project using a modern water discourse that disentangled water from its hydrosocial context and subsequently from its history (Linton, 2010; Swyngedouw, 1999). While for the construction, it reduced water to an economic resource to power electricity and money for private capital, dam removal advocates reduced the Sélune River to its ecological potential for hosting salmon fishery and improving river habitat. As a result, the projects focused most of the attention to sediment management, water quality standards, fish migration potential, similarly to most river restoration projects (Dufour et al., 2017; Drouineau et al., 2018). Framing dam removal within a modern water discourse, e.g. restoring rivers to their natural state or functioning, is a strategic move by the State, inscribing dam removal in a discourse underpinned by ecological stakes that downplays the highly political dimensions associated with such a process. With this mindset, the social world becomes a constraint to the project's realization. Subsequently, the ecological project remains disentangled from the territory where it takes place.

A hydrosocial analysis helps detailing this disentanglement and its conflictual consequences. Hydrosocial territories are defined by imaginaries held and materialized by specific stakeholders in a specific space (Boelens et al., 2016). One space, such as a water basin, can be the stage for multiple imaginaries belonging to stakeholders with unbalanced power, resulting in a contestation over the territory's control (Hoogesteger et al., 2016). Framing the Sélune dam removal within the hydrosocial territory sheds a new light on the conflicts that pitted dam removal proponents (State, water agency, environmental NGOs) against the local inhabitants and users (Germaine and Lespez, 2017). In particular, we propose to develop the notion of “hydrosocial heritages” to discuss the challenges induced by the irruption or imposition of a new hydrosocial organization. Hydrosocial heritages can be defined as the historic assemblage of people, practices, representations, and material environments that infuse the contemporary territory. They are the result of the sedimentation of material and symbolic elements of past and sometimes concurrent hydrosocial territories. All heritages do not have the same fate, as some may disappear and be replaced by new organizational schemes, whereas others endure, depending on power relationships (Jackson and Head, 2020). The latter are thus forced to coexist with a new hydrosocial territoriality. Coexistence can run smoothly when inherited and current material and symbolic dimensions are aligned; however, it can also lead to conflict, either because of diverging values or because heritages are not properly considered in the territory's reorganization. This reasserts the contested nature of hydrosocial territories (Boelens et al., 2016; Hommes et al., 2016) by underlining the temporal dimension associated with it. It also underlines how overlapping territories can take shape through hydrosocial heritages. These heritages are not necessarily continuously visible and active in the territory over time. Some can enter in dormant phases and be revived by an event that profoundly reorganizes the territory. As such, they facilitate connections between the past and the present (Carter et al., 2021), and, thus, the mobilization of individuals.

In the following sections, we explore the opportunities offered by the notion of hydrosocial heritages to broaden the understanding of the conflicts surrounding the Selune dam removals.

Non-human actors in hydrosocial territories

The territorial shaping–and conflicts–emerges from the interaction between human and non-human actors (Rodríguez-de-Francisco and Boelens, 2016), e.g. from “interdependencies between people, rivers, fish, and artefacts” (Carter et al., 2021, 118). Whereas non-humans are often reduced to their symbolic role in conflicts, hydrosocial territories invites to pay attention to the multiple and various interactions that shape territoriality and can affect or contribute to conflictual contexts.

In the Sélune waterscape, the State and the environmental NGOs focused on the ecological dimension of the project by highlighting the figure of the salmon to advocate for the dams’ removal (Germaine and Lespez, 2017). This move was similar to other large dam removals, especially in the American Northwest (Elwha River, Snake River, Klamath River), that were achieved or planned specifically to restore a healthy salmon population (Gosnell and Kelly, 2010; Mauer, 2020; Wegner, 2003).

However, the hydrosocial history, and thus heritages, between the Sélune waterscape and these other examples differ greatly. In the cases of large dam removals in the USA, salmon constituted a point of leverage due to the hydrosocial heritages linking Native American tribes and this species. In other words, salmon on its own probably does not possess enough value to warrant a dam removal, but the long-lasting bond between salmon and some native tribes does. As a result, the cultural importance of the Elwha River and the salmon for the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe was critical in securing the removal of the Elwha dams (Brewitt, 2019; Busch, 2008; Mauer, 2020; Winter and Crain, 2008). Similarly, the Penobscot Indian Nation played a critical role in the restoration of the Penobscot River in Maine by emphasizing its historical and critical connection with the river (Day, 2006; Opperman et al., 2011). As a result, restoration efforts, through dam removal, can bring provide multiple benefits to the territory due to the historical and multidimensional bond between local communities, fish, and rivers (McClenachan et al., 2015; Fox et al., 2017; Carter et al., 2021). The territorial context along the Sélune River is vastly different. Local inhabitants did not have a relationship with salmon. While it constituted an important resource for local societies prior to the dams’ construction, salmon were slowly replaced by other fish species in the daily practices of inhabitants and local users, with the exception of the downstream section of the Sélune River (Thomas and Germaine, 2018). At the time of the announcement of the dams’ removal, very few people could remember the pre-dam period firsthand. On the contrary, the heritages of fish stocking and angling still irrigated the territory when it was announced. Despite this, advocates of the dams’ removal largely overlooked these hydrosocial heritages that infused the territory and did not seek to contextualize the figure of the salmon within the territory. Local inhabitants were more interested in warm water fish and perceived the emphasis on salmon as a lack of interest in (their) “ordinary” nature, which is critical to deciphering restoration conflicts (Fox et al., 2016; Linton, 2021). As a result, very few people in the local community around the lakes called for the removal of the dams to restore the Atlantic salmon population. There was a clear mismatch between the species targeted by dam removal advocates and the species with which the local communities historically had a relationship, similarly to other dam removal situations (Gottschalk Druschke et al., 2017), thus contributing to a conflictual situation.

2009: the revelation of dormant hydrosocial heritages and its lack of consideration

When the removal was announced in 2009, there was little activity in the valley. The State engaged with local elected officials (i.e. mayors) to discuss the valley's future after the removal, but these officials never seized this opportunity. One powerful and politically prominent local mayor ended up favoring the removal and engaged in a co-construction process at the beginning of the 2010s. His local political leverage helped him convince other mayors, despite their initial reluctance. Unfortunately, he passed away in a car accident in 2015, and no other local elected official has picked up the torch to construct a territorial project, either because they still refused to consider the removal as an option or because they did not have enough political weight to commit to a large-scale project. Despite this absence of local leadership, the State has never considered using options other than representative democracy. No participatory approach has been taken by the State agencies to question the inhabitants directly about the project. At the same time, a territorial reform led to a change in local interlocutors following an administrative reform: while the riparian communes (the smallest French administrative unit) were targeted by the State to ensure the valley's development at the beginning of the project, they were replaced by the communauté d’agglomération of Avranches Mont Saint-Michel (a federation of municipalities) which covers the whole of the South Manche and whose headquarters and president are located in Avranches, 20 kilometers north of the Sélune dams. In addition, when local elected officials were open to considering a future without the dams, their stances were mostly focused on tourism to attract people, and not necessarily on improving the quality of life of local inhabitants. The lakes of the Sélune were no longer a key element of the territory. Overall, the inhabitants of the Sélune Valley were largely excluded from the discussions, even though they played a major role in shaping the hydrosocial territory since the dams’ construction. Without considering the historical depth of the construction of the valley and looking only at the situation from the 2000s on, the State had imagined a project without any upheaval. In this context, it cannot be excluded that the State considered this as an opportunity to carry out this project of an unprecedented scale. However, the inhabitants reacted promptly to the announcement and organized an effective opposition. This rapid responsiveness illustrates the importance of hydrosocial heritages at several levels.

First, the opposition at the level of the local communities was largely led by the association “Friends of the Dam.” This association was not created for this purpose, since it was born at the time of the 1993 emptying of the dam with the aim of proposing activities during this period. Though less active for a period (cf. section “The lakes taken over by fisherman”), it constituted a basis for mobilization inherited from a former hydrosocial configuration. Its objectives have been reassessed in the light of the decision to decommission the dams and the ensuing struggle to be waged, as observed in other dam removal conflicts in France (Drapier et al., 2023). In contrast with other contexts where local people have legal rights to the river, e.g. native tribes in the USA (Brewitt, 2019; Fox et al., 2017), inhabitants from the Sélune Valley did not have any legal leverage; thus, they were not considered legitimate stakeholders in the process. Reactivating the association became a strategic move by local inhabitants and users to weigh in on the decision-making process shaped by power relationships (Linton, 2021).

Secondly, the collective mobilization of individuals, including people who were not using the lakes on a daily basis, illustrates the importance of material and non-material hydrosocial heritages. For instance, docks and sheds were integral part of family histories: they constituted material reminders of a past period where families gathered to spend weekends and holidays enjoying the lakes. For instance, a shed owner explains: “the shed belonged to my father-in-law’s parents […] it was a vacation house. They lived in Saint-Hilaire and they came on weekends and during the vacations. […] there are a lot of people in the family who have the keys and people come whenever they want.” They symbolized and materialized a strong attachment not only to the lakes and landscapes (Germaine et al., 2019), but also to another hydrosocial organization where local people were invested in the management of the valley. Indeed, most of the docks and sheds were built by the owners themselves: “I made this dock wide enough to put my boat under it […]We [he and his wife] built it by hand. We made the cement by hand: got sand from down below, got water from the lake […]we were in a hurry to finish so we could enjoy it. We built it 30 years ago” (shed owner, 2017). While some of them had fallen into disrepair by 2009, the announcement reactivated or revitalized practices and representations associated with these features. Conflict is not only the result of different meanings of the river; it also stems from different ways of experiencing the environment today and in the past. Yet, looking back at the construction of the current hydrosocial territory sheds light on the importance of the multiple dynamics happening around the riverbed. Inhabitants from the Sélune Valley largely contributed to the management of the territory for nearly two decades. This dimension and feeling of being a part of a community was still largely present in 2010, despite the fact that most local people had turned away from the lakes. Combined with the top-down approach adopted by the State (Germaine and Lespez, 2017), this ended up contributing to the collective mobilization of local inhabitants and fishermen.

In other terms, this situation corresponds to a visibilization of a community (in terms of individuals and relationships) that was already active during previous periods, rather than to a new dynamic within the territory. The conflict over the decision to remove dams on the Sélune River illustrates how the past can be connected to the present through material and immaterial relationships to the environment, such as the hydrosocial heritages that embed past connections between humans and non-humans.