As long as people continue to want gold rings, Mark Parent said in early 2008, there will be a place for mining.
The former provincial environment minister was referring to his department’s controversial approval of the Moose River gold mine in the Musquodoboit Valley district of HRM. This month, however, Haligonians are getting a closer look at the dark side of gold, both at home and abroad.
Canadian mining corporations cause “serious harm… to the environment and people,” and sully Canada’s international reputation, says Carlos Amador, an activist from the Siria Valley, Honduras. Amador will be in Halifax April 28 to talk about the negative effects of gold mining in his community.
The culprit is Entre Mares, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vancouver-based mining giant Goldcorp.
Amador’s list of grievances includes severe water contamination and shortages, health problems including outbreaks of skin disease, and the destruction of agriculture from environmental damage. Goldcorp faces similar accusations in Guatemala.
The company did not respond to requests for comment on Amador’s claims.
As well, Amador notes that one of Goldcorp’s top 10 investors is the Canada Pension Plan, meaning every working Canadian indirectly holds a stake in the company.
Barbara Markovits of Clam Harbour is well versed in the hazards of gold mining. Markovits is co-chair of the Eastern Shore Forest Watch Association, a group campaigning against the proposed Moose River gold mine project on the Eastern Shore.
The proposed mine, set to be developed by Australian firm Atlantic Gold, is near the site of the famous 1936 Moose River mine disaster, in which three men were trapped underground for 11 days.
The project received approval from the Department of Environment in February 2008, following an environmental assessment the ESFWA calls “inadequate” and lacking in “sufficient strength and sturdiness to actually protect the environment.” The process only considered potential environmental impact on the mine site itself, says Markovits; “the impact on areas downstream and downwind were not considered.”
Among other environmental impacts, Markovits is concerned the mine will affect the Ship Harbour Long Lake candidate wilderness area. Last week, the provincial government released the proposed boundaries for the area, for which she says “accommodations have been made to permit that mine to go ahead.” Atlantic Gold did not respond to inquiries as to the current status of the project.
Markovits will share the floor with Carlos Amador at Tuesday’s event. She feels their issues are clearly linked, especially where Canadian investment is involved. “What we in Nova Scotia want for our communities is clean air, clean water and community involvement,” she says. “We are ethically bound to have those same conditions met in communities that may not have a voice.”
Opponents of mines both in Moose River and in Honduras feel the economic benefits of the respective projects are overblown, and that long-term environmental harm far outweighs short-term job opportunities. As mining tapers off, jobs dry up and residents or governments are left to clean up.
In Nova Scotia, says Barbara Markovits, gold mining has a “toxic legacy,” citing continuing environmental harm from defunct mines in Yarmouth County and the Eastern Shore. While the Department of Natural Resources argues the current proposed project is a job creator, Markovits counters that tourism and recreation would be better economic options for the area, especially once Ship Harbour Long Lake is officially declared a protected wilderness area.
In the Siria Valley of Honduras, Carlos Amador says the few jobs created by Goldcorp’s mine are offset by the many farming livelihoods lost due to polluted water and degraded soil—-which contributes to migration to Canada and the U.S.
“It’s true we need investment,” he says. “But not this type of investment, which is destruction and death.”
Investing in Conflict: a discussion on gold mining will be co-hosted by Rights Action and the Breaking the Silence Network, Tuesday, April 28th, 6pm at the Mi’kmaq Native Friendship Centre.
This article appears in Apr 23-29, 2009.
The way I see it, Nova Scotia just needs to stay a retro, conservative province. Leave the advancements and investments for another province that knows how to handle it.
We’re way too hippie for something like this.
Since we’re so concerned with the environment, how about ticketing people who leave tim’s cups everywhere!
How about ticketing Tim Hortons, seriously…
How about ticketing people who spend more than 5 minutes in a shower ?
We need ‘The Nova Scotia Shower Police’ who will regularly visit every abode with children over the age of 10 and teach them how to install and maintain the soon to issued ‘5 minute’ shower device which automatically shuts off for 10 minutes after running for 5 minutes. HRM should amend the planning rules to require installation in all new homes and Jack Layton can urge Harper to fund a new stimulus plan to retrofit all homes. Save energy, save water, save the environment. Much more important than a few pieces of Tims litter.
We also need ‘ Shower Corps’, a group of environmentally aware school kids to show their peers the value of short showers.
Parents with teens would cheer on this new program as they would see a dramatic reduction in water and energy costs. And they woudn’t have to stand with legs crossed for 30 minutes outside the bathroom.
Go to http://www.notafrigginchancebecauseIlikelongshowe…
Really, are we this cynical? Maybe it’s fun to go overboard…but it seems to me this article is trying to expouse serious threats to our health, environment, and the sustainability of local livelihoods. I would think we could all agree these are basic rights – to be able to grow your own food, raise your family, and live happily without imminent threat. Can we remember some common sense or does a mine need to crop up in our backyard in order for us to care? By choosing to make this kind of awareness raising look like an extreme stance we are defeating our own human rights ideals and condoning unethical investment while using the NIMBY excuse at the expense of abroad and nearby local communities. I hope some skeptics come out to hear people who are actually living with these hardships and inequalities instead of joking in such forums about other unrelated incomparable issues.
I see in the article there is no mention that there is a underground or above ground mining. Second: did Nova Scotia Government think about mercury poisoning in the air, ground or in the water table? To extract the gold from the rock, they have to powdering the rock, meaning crush the rock into smaller pieces. Then they use mercury to extract the gold from the powdered rock.
My question is this: What do they do with the use mercury? Do they recycle, do they store the mercury in large pools or do they do something else with use mercury? Last question: What is health concerns of the people who is extracting the gold from the rock, when they have to use mercury?
I see in the article there is no mention that there is a underground or above ground mining. Second: did Nova Scotia Government think about mercury poisoning in the air, ground or in the water table? To extract the gold from the rock, they have to powdering the rock, meaning crush the rock into smaller pieces. Then they use mercury to extract the gold from the powdered rock.
My question is this: What do they do with the use mercury? Do they recycle, do they store the mercury in large pools or do they do something else with use mercury? Last question: What is health concerns of the people who is extracting the gold from the rock, when they have to use mercury?
Unfortunately, your comment is quite inaccurate. Mercury extraction of gold is an archaic prospect. Atlantic Gold’s proposed flowsheet, as prepared by Gekko Systems Ltd, proposes gravity separation of gold from ore in a natural medium (typically water) to recover 70-75% of contained gold, followed by flash flotation of the gravity tailings and cyanidation in a contained system to raise recovery to ~90%. Some simple research negates that concern. (Source: Atlantic Gold 4/23/09 Press Release)
Hi Mike,
They will not be using mercury. Mercury hasn’t really been used to recover gold since the 30’s-40’s.
They will, however be using a cyanide process. Cyanide has its own risks. But, they plan to mitigate those risks by using a double liner in their sedimentation ponds, among other things. Cyanide naturally decomposes quite quickly, especially at neutral pH values (in minutes or hours).
An independent consultant did an excellent job at addressing the potential problems. Their report can be found here: http://www.gov.ns.ca/nse/ea/MooseRiver.asp. Anyone concerned with this issue should read the executive summary at the very least.
-Doug Roy, P.Eng.
Mining Engineer
It’s all about money. The NS Government could give a shit about the mercury or arsenic that comes with gold mining. As long as their wallets are padded.
The potential toxic clean up problem can easily be solved in a manner similar to the way the State of Maine handled the clean up of the Wiscasset nuclear reactor. The State Legislature passed a law requiring the reactor owners to set aside an escrow account to cover the cost of the reactor shut down and clean up. The account was in place for a couple decades to accumulate assets. The price of the escrow account was factored into the pricing of the energy produced. Such an escrow account should be standard practice for industries that present substantial threats to air, water and soil pollution. It avoids a large part of the conflicts over who is responsible for subsequent harms, excuses of ‘bankruptcy’ or ‘merger’ by owners, and so on.
All these people who just don’t care will be the downfall of this contry