‘War of the green and' gold’ is hotting up on the Coromandel

Press, 18 December 1986, Page 17

‘War of the green and' gold’ is hotting up on the Coromandel

Story and pictures

by

TESSA WARD

Coromandel is sitting on a gold mine — and some say, a time bomb as well.

Up to $lB billion worth of gold is estimated to be lying in “them thar hills” but getting it has proved the problem. A major difficulty has been the opposition from some Coromandel residents.

The recent spate of hostile incidents between mining companies and protesters on drilling sites has revealed the degree of exasperation felt by both groups and the rising tension between them. Unless the antagonism and disagreements are resolved soon, it seems likely that the conflict will spill over into more sabotage and violence.

On a more optimistic note, the opposing groups have got around the table together for three days to find some common ground between them, chaired by the Secretary for the Environment, Dr Roger Blakeley. Representatives of the Thames Valley United Council and the ThamesCoromandel District Council also attended.

As Dr Blakeley put'it, the aim of this kind of parley is to get the groups to sit down close enough to each other to talk rather than throw stones at each other from a distance. The formula has already produced two significant break-throughs, provided the various groups involved and the Government endorse them at the end of the day. Dr Blakeley says that protesters’ concern about the present mining legislation review soon emerged as a root cause of the on-going conflict. “The principal change to the mining legislation recommended at the end of the meeting was that the consent of the landowner or occupier should be required be-

fore a' prospecting or mining licence is granted. This would mean that the Crown could not override the land rights of the owner-occupier in granting the licence.”

In the mining legislation review there is no such recommendation. “Mining representatives at the meeting supported this move on the grounds that they believe they are responsible developers and would not want to go on to people’s property by

force,” Dr Blakeley adds. “It is also consistent with Government policy of less State intervention and a more market-oriented approach to the economy.” Placing mining activities under the authority of the Town and Country Planning Act as well as the Mining Act was the other area of general consensus that the meeting reached. Dr Blakeley says that the protester groups felt there was no particular reason why the mining industry should be treated differently from any other industry by being exempt from the Town and Country Planning Act. “The industry representatives were prepared to agree, to that on the basis that there would be an even-handed treatment of mining and other industries by the local authority and Government applying the Town and Country Planning Act,” he says. “Under this new proposal there would therefore be a partnership between the local authority and Ministry of Energy to ensure that the interests of the community are looked after through the Town and Country Planning Act procedures.” After the meeting, Dr Blakeley and the assistant secretary of Energy, Mr Phil Taylor, reported back to their respective Ministers, Messrs Goff and Tizard. "What we are recommending to the Ministers is that the meeting’s conclusions form a basis for development of Government policy on mining,” Dr Blakeley says. Out of the plethora of issues and concerns raised by the current and proposed mining activities in Coromandel is the unresolved matter of the toxic tailings. Some proposed mining and processing operations would produce huge quantities of waste

rock and tailings — a fine powdery material that contains toxic metals including, in some cases, mercury, lead, arsenic, zinc, cyanide, and cadmium. Both the mining interests and the protester groups are well aware of how difficult it is to rehabilitate and revegetate these tailings. Furthermore, the rehabilitation process has to continue long after the mine has closed down if the surrounding environment is to avoid toxic pollution. A spokesman for the Kuaotunu Anti-Mining Action Group (K.A.M.A.G.), Mr Evan Penny, says that the mining industry tends to take the line of “trust us and we’ll fix that problem as we come to it.”

“They seem to think by spending lots of money on the problem they will be able to fix it,” he adds. “Yet the mining industry has yet to show us any toxic tailings they have successfully rehabilitated. “An increase in the level of mercury alone in the Peninsula streams would be unacceptable. The background level of mercury in the sea is already high and snapper over a certain size, caught in the Firth of Thames, are rejected by the fishing authorities because of the mercury levels. “It may be possible to use a sedimentation process to take the heavy metals out of the tailings rather than trying to seal them in forever. The technology is available for this but it is an expensive process.” The president of the New Zealand Mining and Exploration Association, Mr Bob Adamson, concedes that no engineer can give a 100 per cent guarantee that anything will work.

“In the cases where the mining makes toxic metals available to the metabolic processes of flora and fauna it may be possible to counteract it with some other chemical process,” he says. “The mining industry has the view that the tailings are not generally as toxic as others think. “It is the leached water that comes from the tailings that is important. Provided it is adequately trapped and treated before discharge it can reach reasonable standards.

The Coromandel area is prone to flash flooding but Mr Adamson asserts that floods would be unlikely to destroy total tailing heaps and they would dilute the toxic material so much that the impact on the environment would be minimal. Mr Penny says the Government seems to lack the will to deal with the problem of toxic tailing disposal. Dr Blakeley says that the toxic tailing issue was not discussed at length during the round-the-table meeting. "It is really a matter that gets argued out at a water right hearing. There can be no other argument than that there must be good engineering design to ensure the protection of the environment.”

Mining and the protester

groups have also yet to see eye to eye on the economic benefits to be gained from mining activities on the Peninsula. “We have been asking for a Treasury report that assesses the national benefit from mining, so far without success,” Mr Penny says. "In fact, the national benefit could well be a cost when you take into account the loss of productive farmland, the loss of alternative investment opportunities, the cost associated with a boom and bust local economy, the environmental costs, and all the expenses involved with processing the mining applications.” Protester groups have also pointed out that mining is not a labour-intensive industry and the companies do not pay royalties on gold and silver mined in New Zealand. The large national and multi-national companies applying to mine are also not likely to pay much corporate tax either, the groups contend. Industry spokesmen say the development of the country’s mineral wealth could ease New Zealand’s trade deficit, provide jobs, and give manufacturing the impetus to boost the economy. They have predicted that the goldmining industry could be worth about $l5O million a year in exports by 1990. New Zealand is currently a net importer of gold, bringing in about $2O million worth a year to supply the electronics, computer, and jewellery industries.

Mr Adamson cites the “multiplier effect,” where one mining job is estimated to generate five others.

A number of environmental and cultural concerns have also surfaced. The flood-prone area has fuelled concerns that mining activities would destabilise the land and make it more susceptible to water erosion. .

Mining interests have also pointed out that farming and forestry uses for the area could damage the environment even more than controlled mining. Many protesters are wary of the assurances given by mining companies about the minimal environmental impact of exploration and prospecting. They point to the deep hole left in Waihi’s Martha Hill, which was one company’s idea of a “bulk sample.”

Those prospecting for minerals claim that the information-gath-ering phase of this operation ensures that there is insignificant environmental damage. The local Maori community is also concerned about the potential environmental hazards of mining activities. Every river and stream is a "sacred treasure” with its own mauri, or spiritual force, sustaining life according to Maori tradition. Contamination of a river would make it and the nearby seafood tapu or defiled. Some farmers are undisturbed by the prospecting activities of companies on their land. Others resent the doubt that a prospecting licence throws over the

future of their farms. They cannot be sure that the work they put into their farms will not eventually give way to mining on the land.

The mining association has pointed out that with the “eyes of the world” on them it is up to mining companies to show they can operate on the Peninsula without adverse environmental impact. About 60 mining groups are proposing to prospect about 30 per cent of the Peninsula for minerals.

Plans are under way to mine the old Martha Hill goldmine at Waihi, the old Monowai mine at Waiomu, the Waitekauri Valley between Paeroa and Waihi, and

the old Sylvia mine near Thames.

The recent conflicts between the opposing factions in the min-

ing controversy have been dubbed “the war of green against gold.” On November 26, 41 protesters were arrested at a drilling site in the Whangapoua State Forest after the police used long batons against some of them. This incident was preceded by three months of sporadic attempts to stop mining activity. The mining association has criticised the protesters’ use of “militant tactics,” claiming that the protesters have had numerous opportunities to object before the prospecting and mining licences could be issued. Evan Penny says that the protesting groups generally frown on illegal tactics to oppose

the mining, including sabotage of,' equipment. For one thing, these activities would quickly make the issue one of law and order and therefore play into the hands; of the mining companies and the Government, he adds. *; Dr Blakeley says that he has urged the mining and protester groups to “engage in a high-level communication to avoid future conflict.” “Communication is vital in this kind of situation where there are such strong feelings on both sides,” he adds. “It is only by: sitting down and talking about, the concerns and seeking solutions, that, this situation can be resolved.”

Protection of

environment

Farmers and

Maoris wary