Illegal mining of historical dumps

This week someone asked if I had a target audience for the mining and sustainability newsletter. We are nearing a thousand subscribers which is great as it means that some of the content at least does resonate with our readers. The answer I gave was that I write the newsletter as a form of personal reflection which includes sharing experiences, ideas and sometimes regrets such as is the case with this edition. The newsletter also allows me to gather my thoughts on some challenging topics. I also write the posts in the hope that a young manager somewhere may find some of the reflections useful. One of these areas where very little literature exists is mine closure, not the environmental effects of mine closure but rather the practical aspects of managing a mine closure process.

Mine closure is an area where hard choices need to be made every single day. It is this that makes the space intriguing for me. The confluence of environmental, social and governance issues all playing out in real time with real consequences for the environment and affected communities. The social responsibility to keep the economy of a ghost town going long after the mine has closed, the pressure to contain mine affected water and stop it from decanting and the challenge to keep mine dust under control and away from the community. ?The social aspects of the same process may entail keeping the community especially children away from voids, water bodies and burning dumps. If a community member’s cow falls into one of your holes then you have a serious problem. So in short, cow-child-dust-dumps-choices.

Closed mines and historical dumps go hand in hand, a phenomenon which presents a multiplicity of challenges. From one dump, the hard choice is whether to rehabilitate the dump, fence it off and pretend that no one can see a big man-made hill from a distance or reclaim it which has the added benefit of improving environmental conditions. One could also use the material to close off certain open voids. This option closes the void but it doesn’t necessarily improve environmental conditions, it only shifts the mess from one area to another. Most of these dumps have no economic value, but a few could potentially be reclaimed for some financial gain. Ownership of such dumps is a contentious issue as depending on the age of the dumps, it could belong to the mineral right holder or the owner of the land. Whether the material is movable, or immovable is also a factor that needs to be considered.

Regardless of the legal status of the dumps, or whether they are economic or not, they present partnership opportunities that could be beneficial to both the mining company and the community. For most operators, the go to option to manage historical mine dumps has been to protect them from those who want to access them without authorization. From a legal perspective, this makes complete sense of course.

In practical terms, fighting with groups that have organized themselves for the sole objective of reclaiming the dumps without authorization places a heavy burden on the mining company to have to call upon law enforcement to fend off interest from those who look at the dump and see a pile of sellable material.

Short of mining companies taking the law into their own hands which is never advisable, there are two options that the mineral right owner has to get law enforcement agencies to act. The first is to engage with the relevant regulators and hope that they come out to intervene, and the second is to lodge a complaint directly with the police. The police are usually reluctant to act for many reasons including simply taking the side of what they see as the community and at times some members acting in ways that suggest that they may be part of some paid scheme. To force the police to act, the company can apply for a mandamus which is a legal instrument that requires the police to act or simply obtain an interdict against the illegal miners preventing them from coming anywhere close to the said site. Both options require the police to ‘do their job’. This process takes up a lot of time and resources and at times places the lives of those acting on behalf of their employer (the mining company) in harm’s way.

Corporates spend considerable money trying to keep illegal miners away from their properties. The cost of erecting a fence around a dump, installing state of the art cameras, a control room and manned patrol vehicles cannot be reconciled against the benefit i.e., keeping a heap of waste material secure. I understand the environmental and regulatory challenges that the mining companies face but I do think that there is another way for all stakeholders to have their interests met. I am also aware that illegal mining varies in nature from the mining of chrome or coal dumps to mining gold from active operations through illegal means. This note is specifically addressing the issue of historical mine dumps. Illegally breaking into an active mining operation is a different conversation altogether.

The mines do not want the legal responsibility and liability that come with allowing people to reclaim their dumps, the illegal miners want access to what they see as lucrative ‘stockpiles’, community members are interested in job opportunities and the regulators want any mining to happen in a way that is aligned with the regulatory framework. So, there is the conflict infested approach of securing the dumps with expensive fences and continuing to call on law enforcement. By the way, a fence is viewed as a valuable commodity and will more often than not 'grow legs'.

At this point you won’t be surprised to know that the ‘third way’ to solve illegal mining of historical dumps involves talking to the illegal miners directly to see if common ground can be found. Our corporate instinct at this point kicks in as we naturally want to push back against the idea of speaking to illegal operators. After all, why should we stoop so low right? Stakeholder engagement, it turns out, can solve many of the problems faced by society including the issue of illegal mining of historical dumps. The desired outcome from such engagements should be a multi-stakeholder partnership model involving community members, the regulators, law enforcement and the mining companies involved.

By partnering with community groups, mining companies can channel some of their financial provisions towards rehabilitation projects that reduce environmental liabilities while at the same time uplifting communities in mutually beneficial ways. For the communities, this provides opportunities to generate economic activity by creating meaningful employment and uplifting the general welfare of members of the community. For the mining company concerned, this provides an opportunity to create true shared value. It is important to prepare robust business cases as part of this process. At this point, having a neutral party to help facilitate the process is advisable.

If you are responsible for protecting a mine dump and you do so by putting up a fence and patrolling the site 24/7, please lay down your weapons, take some of that security budget, organize some snacks and go talk to your community members. There is enough hostility in the world, this doesn’t need to be another friction point.?