All that Glitters...

Matt Darwon, of the Majors Creek Catchment Guardians Inc, spoke to the meeting urging those present not to ignore the social impacts of the current proposed modification recently submitted by the Dargues Reef gold mine (Modification 3, open for public submissions until Aug 28). 

By raising the issue Mr Darwon touched on a topic that can be too easily ignored in the struggle between those who support and those who oppose such activities.  

In Majors Creek it seems that the level of anxiety, uncertainty and frustration around the amended proposal to use a  cyanide process for gold extraction may be higher than it was before the mine was approved in 2011.

The simmering tensions between supporters and opposers that were put aside after 2011 have resurfaced, seemingly polarising the community.

Some “long term friendships have been shattered” says one resident and some feel that the easy camaraderie of the “majors creek public bar” has been lost. “People who have known each other for years no longer speak to one another,” stated another resident.  “Some residents who are pro-mine, it appears, are being courted by the mine, while other residents, with equally valid views are being ignored”. 

These views and experiences are not unexpected. A mining proposal in a small tight knit community such as Majors Creek can have seriously debilitating effects on those who live and farm there. However, such proposals when successful can also energize and strengthen those communities if the mining companies get it right. 

There are studies designed partly to increase insight into the “anticipated economic, social and health impacts of minerals development.”  

Researchers such as Dr Jennifer Moffitt (UQ), point out that the social impact of mining (which mostly occurs in rural or remote areas) exists from the moment a mine is proposed and lasts well beyond the moment when that last particle of ore has been extracted.

There is the stress on farmers in affected and adjacent communities of not knowing if they can keep on farming given the changes mining will bring.  Furthermore, there is also the stress of not knowing if local land values will decline because of the possible risk to groundwater availability, leading to possible negative changes in water quality or increases in toxicity of soil or air.

Even the potential loss of visual amenity and the impact of raised noise levels over longer periods of time throughout the day can be significant stressors on rural communities. Communities fear the potential for cumulative damage to the environment and they often have little faith in environmental regulation. They are unsure if governments and corporations are able to make good judgements about minerals development and the environment, especially over the long term.

The Mount Pully tailings dam failure in 2014 in a remote region of Canada was (allegedly) was anticipated in a report to the British Columbian Ministry of the environment a few years before the event. This is a case in point  -  the report was ignored. 

What can also be overlooked is the fact that rural communities can receive a range of benefits from mining. Improved infrastructure, employment and services, and the potential benefits for businesses that often come from a population increase are highly valued in rural and remote towns and villages. The creation of job opportunities are an important issue.

Mr Andrew McIlwain, Managing Director & CEO Unity Mining Limited was keen to stress the positive economic benefits to Braidwood and Majors Creek that would arise from recruiting local people to work for the company. He also noted  that the mine would be “the only commercially operating mine in Australia that will be open to visitors and tourists.”

Responding to discussion about the stresses experienced by the local community he suggested that the unavoidable extra time taken in decision making about the mine amendments may be creating more anxiety. In the meantime community consultation was continuing in an effort to keep residents informed about the mine operations and how the environmental risks under the amended proposal were to be managed. 

So what can be done to balance the impact of mining on small communities such as Majors Creek and take into account the different views of mining that cause stress and create division in our communities?

Perhaps lessons can be drawn from the results of the Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association Inc v Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and Warkworth Mining Limited case in the NSW Land and Environment Court in 2013.

While the case dealt with a very different situation than that of the Dargues Reef mine, the win for the Progress Association in the case suggests that mining proposals must thoroughly justify and balance the impact of development.

Proposals should clearly give preference to operations that avoid risk from the onset or at least take reasonable steps to mitigate high levels of risk. Mining companies should not rely on offsetting the risks to the environment and to rural communities, particularly relating to health and well being, against possible perceived benefits or financial compensation.

Such strategies may ultimately fail. It can be argued that the original mine owners put forward a proposal that avoided the environmental risk of cyanide processing on site by not including it. The Cortona proposed mine was approved with a reasonable degree of community support despite risks such as the risk to road safety and community health from truck movements.

Regardless of the outcome it is worth noting that those who face the most challenges from mine activity in their immediate locality do not necessarily receive the most benefit from it. Financial benefits are mostly felt at state and national level, rarely returning to the affected community.

Members of small rural communities like Majors Creek, often do not have access to unlimited resources to seek out the information they need to argue for their fair share of financial benefits nor can they explain their very real concerns or create the necessary influential relationships with mining corporations or governments that would see their issues acknowledged or addressed.

This is what makes conflict over mining approvals in our rural communities so difficult to resolve, as we are experiencing now, first hand in Majors Creek.