Scattered old public (published, verifiable) confessions (in English- technical problems in translating Marathi, Konkani ) of a newly anointed mining agent (proudly Indian, not IDRC sponsored fifth columnist ) -Part A
I. "What we are drinking is actually poison water. There are no quality checks and the Government has not bothered to address the problem in spite of reminders and individual representations.' All concerned, including the Goa Pollution Control Board, have failed to address the most important issue of water quality check, while the Government continues to mislead the people on the issue, he charged. Coming to the rivers flowing through Goa, he said these were laden with heavy metals and it is time the Government sits back and takes note of the situation.” II. “What's the position of the first order and the second order streams which feed the run-off to our rivers? Wherever there is access from the road, hundreds of private mining trucks and goods carriers are taken directly to the bed of these streams for washing. All the heavy metal silt, oil, grease, paint from this activity then enters the water-bodies. The Goa State Pollution Control Board has resolved that monitoring such type of pollution is not their business.” III. “Under Section 28 no mining or construction can be done near such a monument without a permission. But the understaffed and resource-starved Archives and Archaeology Ddepartment had no information of this illegal activity till the agitated villagers alerted it. It appears that several truckloads of laterite stones and earth had been lifted from the site of excavation but the directorate of mines was unaware of the violation of Section 3 of the Goa Minor Minerals Concession Rrules, 1985. The directorate promised action only after the quarrying was completed.” IV. “The entire urban population on both the waterfronts of Mandovi is discharging the raw sewage and solid waste in the river. The barge and trawler traffic also contributes to pollution. The river is estimated to carry about 200 thousand metric tones of sediment from the north Goa mining belt EVERY YEAR. After monitoring the environmental health of the estuary in 1974-5 and 1984-5 the scientists of National Institute of Oceanography did not dare to repeat the sampling in 1994-5. “ V. “ A state which has not internalized massive negative environmental externalities:- Goa may have accumulated per capita the highest negative environmental externalities on account of open cast iron ore mining since 1946-7. One measure of this is the quantum of low grade ore dumped as overburden or ore reject. To mine a tone of Iron ore two metric tone of overburden needs to be removed. The cumulative ore reject piled up in more than 50 villages is already more than 5-600 million metric tones or per capita 30-40 metric tones. Another measure is annual rate of sediment flow in Mandovi and Zuari rivers. From the mining dumps the sediment reaches the rivers at the rate of 2-2.5 lakh MT per year in Mandovi and Zuari rivers. This makes Goa’s case special on environmental and ecorestoration grounds because the rising concentration of heavy metals in food chain is ecotoxic. Very soon there could be a situation similar to Arsenic poisoning in west Bengal. Ecotoxicity studies from Goa University and NIO had already warned about the dangers.” VI. “The present environmental discourse regarding mining shows that perceptions differ sharply between various stakeholders. Whereas villagers in Sattari and Sanguem are vehemently opposed to the opening of new mining leases, in areas declared as sanctuaries some people view mining as an economically beneficial activity. The mining labour unions have also adopted an ambivalent stance towards the problems faced by the agricultural proletariat. The big players in mining have improved their environmental record and have also obtained the ISO certification for environmentally sound mining practices. Generally the debate and the controversies have centered around issues like the deforestation and loss of wildlife, habitat fragmentation, air and noise pollution, the high levels of dust in the environment, the location of the reject ore dumps, the sediment flow polluting the waterbodies, the depletion of local groundwater table, the hazards created by ore transportation and the erosion of infrastructure like the roads. There seems to be an economic tradeoff to compensate for the environmental deterioration. People may not be worried about the long term effects of the pollution if they get generous financial support to build a religious structure or a community hall. The labour shift has also resulted in abandoning of the fields and the mining area has seen a boom in the service sector. People are caught on the horns of dilemma- they would lose the economic affluence, direct and indirect employment if environmental issues are fought aggressively and apolitically. And if they only focus on improving the environmental quality there is fear of division in their ranks and closure of the mines. The panchayati raj system under India’s 73 rd constitutional amendment has been empowered to tackle such issues through the medium of ‘Gramsabha”-the general council of the villagers. But the village panchayats in the mining belt have consistently failed to take up the issue of ‘environmentally friendly sustainable mining’ within their jurisdiction. The village panchayats are empowered to convene multistakeholder meetings to address all the issues related to environment and development. But seldom these powers have been invoked. Either there is political interference or implied threats from the state apparatus. Mining has been generating more than Rs. 1000 crores foreign exchange earnings on average per annum besides contributing a social capital RS. 250 crores per year. About 15000 people are directly employed. Another 30, 000 are employed in ancillary activities. Thus 45, 000 people in mining industry makes it one of the largest labour lobby in the state of Goa. The Government of India has done very little to help the state of Goa to restore the degraded mining areas where mining activity has stopped. Union government agencies like the Indian bureau of Mines show scant interest in enforcing their mandate for sustainable mining. The main importers of Goa’s Iron ore are Japan, People’s republic of China and South Korea. Even these countries have not demanded environmentally acceptable mining operations. Japan is a big donor for environmental projects. Most of the Japanese aid for ecorestoration projects in Asia and India, through bilateral or multilateral channels has been diverted to other areas. Despite Japan being the oldest importer country of Goa’s Iron ore , it has not shown any interest in helping Goa for ecorehabilitation projects in the mining areas. The Goan Iron ore exporters have set up their own foundation which carries the task of implementing some welfare projects in the mining areas” * * *VII. * *“The Shelvona dumping yard issue* High grade Iron ore brought from Karnataka for the beneficiation of the Goan Iron ore has created the problem of heavy dust pollution at Sanvordem dumping yard. The government looked for alternatives. A site at Shelvona on the banks of Zuari river is proposed to be acquired but the issue has raised dust as there are powerful political role players supporting and opposing the Shelvona project. This issue appears as another flashpoint indicating how the mining is impacting the grass roots level politics in Goa.” VIII. *“The main issues in discourse on mining and environment* There are diverse opinions and lobbies which debate these type of issues, here, the expression “ people” refer to the inhabitants of the mining area of Goa, in a belt spread over 600 square kilometers, from Advalpale to Neturlim, running parallel to the western ghats.. 1. Farmers are opposed to mining but would be satisfied with compensation 2. Farmers are not satisfied with compensation, but need their area to be free from mining or ecologically restored 3. Workers are opposed to the closure of mines or lay-offs and have no public stand on environmental hazards from mining 4. Truck operators are opposed to closure of mines and are insensitive to the dust pollution 5. People are opposed to open transport of the ore which causes massive dust pollution 6. Farmers oppose mining but often are contented to forego cultivation if a mining company offers a good compensation in lieu of the discontinuation of the farming operations or the damage caused. 7. People in the wild life sanctuaries are divided over mining. Those who have good plantations or farms are opposed to mining and those who are unemployed or landless are in favour. Those who hope to borrow loans from the banks to operate ore carrying goods trucks also see new mines as a windfall opportunity. There is a vertical divide between the ecological stakeholders and the economic stakeholders. 8. People expect the mine owners to be generous for their social, cultural, religious and educational needs and may ignore the environmental hazards if these needs are met 9. People view media owned by the mine owners as partial towards mining and less sensitive towards environmental concerns 10. People expect media owned by other non-mining interests to take up their grievances 11. The mine owners are concerned about the extortionists and opportunist elements and the troublemakers who may instigate the locals over environmental issues 12. The mine owners and the mining companies claim that they have made substantial investments in social capital formation, by way of charity and by contributing to the growth and development of the educational, cultural, sports sectors. 13. The labour unions view the mining v/s environment, mining v/s agriculture controversies with calculated indifference and have no clear defined policy to stand with the affected people. In very rare cases the interests of the mining workers and farmers have come together. 14. People in mining area expect judicial activism over environmental concerns of mining and are prepared to approach the judiciary for intervention 15. Environmental issues related to mining have no priority during any elections as compared to people’s needs of roads, bus stands, playgrounds, water, power supply, employment etc. “ More confessions later….. -- Dr. Nandkumar Kamat, GOA