Mining and the environment

Sep 19, 2024 Editorial

Kaieteur News – For most Guyanese who live on the coastlands (and that means almost ninety percent of the population), mining is outside their everyday radar.

However, the recent massive cocaine bust at Matthews Ridge and the countless other activities taking place in the hinterland have forced many to deal with the reality that life and “economic” activities go on continuously there, as the wealth under our soils are excavated in one manner or another.

Ever since the abolition of slavery, thousands of our citizens went into the interior to seek their fortunes, and in the process founded a new industry – gold mining. Diamonds were also discovered and became a subsidiary activity. Over a century ago, bauxite deposits were identified up the Demerara and Berbice Rivers, and Demba and Reynolds, Canadian and American multinationals respectively, hired or lured additional thousands and built townships near the mines.  Today, as we look at the sector, we notice that it is dominated by the production of gold and diamonds, and a lot of holes in the ground. At the same time the country continues to suffer because the companies large and small operating in the gold industry are not declaring the correct amount of gold produced and many of them have been damaging the environment. As at the end of June 2024, gold declarations stood at 188,160 ounces with the 35.3 percent increase in declarations from the lone large producer, undermined by lower declarations from small- and medium-scale producers, according to the Ministry of Finance Mid-Year Report.  “Declarations from the latter fell from 159,084 ounces in the first half last year, to 119,603 ounces at the end of June this year,” the Mid-Year Report stated.

To this end, within the first three months of 2024, the Bank of Guyana (BoG) reported that gold declaration fell to 89,845.8 troy ounces, when compared to the same period last year. It was stated that the dip in the gold declaration was mainly due to lower declarations from small- and medium-scale miners by 24.2 %.  It was explained that the lower declaration is as a result of prolonged dry weather which made access to water limited in many mining areas.

In a recent statement the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) quite rightly pointed out that despite the government’s boasts of the extensive perks, concessions and privileges extended to the gold-mining sector, including tax reductions, duty-free concessions, simplified licensing arrangements, expansion of available mining properties in conflicted areas such as Marudi Mountains, and removal of protective regulations, the country was not seeing the results from this largesse.

Another issue that confronts this nation and which is not adequately addressed is the environmental impacts of mining. The GHRA had also mentioned that this was often ignored when the administration speaks about its support to the sector. The authorities glibly talk about “sustainable mining,” but factually, this is an oxymoron, since all ores are finite and non-renewable. However, we acknowledge that our mineral resources must be extracted and utilised for our economic growth. The challenge, we posit, is how to conduct mining in an environmentally and socially beneficent manner for the long term.

Economic growth models that incorporate natural resource constraints in economic activity stipulate “sustainable development” as non-decreasing consumption over time, and derive the result that all income from non-renewable resources’ extraction must be invested in man-made capital so as to keep the total stock of capital constant.

We cannot just consume the (meagre) gains that are thrown our way. Since our natural capital, like wildlife and sanctuaries, and certain ecosystems offer incomparable values, they must be protected. But just as importantly, sustainable development requires that the prices of exhaustible resources should reflect their social costs, and that development must be inclusive in the sense that people displaced or having their lives disrupted because of mining should not be made worse off. Right now very few are listening to the complaints of our Indigenous peoples. Because of the broad negative externalities from mining and the social necessities identified, a more intrusive role for the state is required.

Consequently, our mining laws and rules need to be re-evaluated, chiefly with respect to the acquiring of land, determination and use of royalties, linking penalties for violations of pollution standards to the damages, and the introduction of strict liability for mine closures. A portion of the royalties must be identified for building physical and human capital to ensure sustainable livelihood for the displaced and other affected people – including people used for the present mining operations. The environmental impact must include the impact on people, too.

• Editorial, ENVIRONMENT, excavated, Mining, population