Jump to content



Message to Guests.

Welcome to Safaritalk where we have been talking Safaris and wildlife conservation since 2006. As a guest you're welcome to read through certain areas of the forum, but to access all the facilities and to contribute your experience, ask questions and get involved, you'll need to be a member - so register here: it's quick, free and easy and I look forward to having you as a Safaritalker soon. Matt.

Photo

Ian Manning - Copper mining in the Lower Zambezi National Park.


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Game Warden

Game Warden

    Administrator

  • Root Admin
  • 14,278 posts
  • Local time: 06:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sat by the PC
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 26 July 2011 - 05:02 AM

Posted Image

Ian Manning.

Dr Ian Manning is a chartered environmental and wildlife biologist, and former member of the Zambian Game Department. He has worked in Zambia on and off since Northern Rhodesia days as a tobacco farm-assistant, senior cropping ranger, command warden/biologist, professional safari hunter, conservation project director (black rhino), and private conservation investor. For the last nine years he has been implementing his Landsafe socio-ecological development model for customary areas and associated protected land in two adjoining chiefdoms of the lower Luangwa Valley. As a certified investor, he wrote numerous blogs revealing the illegal alienation of customary and protected land, and the criminal bushmeat and ivory trade. In 2008 he and his family were deported from Zambia; Ian being arrested, imprisoned and then transported by road under guard to the South Africa border. He is the author of With a Gun in Good Country, and the forthcoming, Out of Zambia: a conservation history.

The issue: the proposed mining of the mid-Zambezi Valley in Zambia: uranium mining on customary land and the Game Management Area around Kariba - and immediately downstream; and copper mining in the Lower Zambezi National Park. For more background on the copper mining proposal in the LZNP, read the following Safaritalk article, Say NO to copper mining in the Lower Zambezi National Park.

Posted Image

Can you give us a brief description of the area and the problem.

Well, since you alerted me a few months ago to the proposed mining of the Lower Zambezi National Park (LZNP), I have struggled to discover what is happening. As you know the mid-Zambezi area, which takes in both Zambia and Zimbabwe, is one of the last great fragments of primary nature left on earth. I am horrified that a 25-year Large Scale Mining License for four copper mines - two of them open-pit, has been issued in the middle of the park to Mwembeshi Resources, a subsidiary of the Australian mining company, Zambezi Resources.

What is the latest state of play?

Since receiving their license in February 2011, Mwembeshi have been preparing their Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Once that is complete it will be sent to the statutory body within the Ministry of Tourism and Environment responsible for the environment, the Zambia Environmental Management Agency (ZEMA) - which recently subsumed the Zambia Environmental Council (ECZ), and then should be made available to civil society for appraisal.

What is Mwembeshi likely to do if they get the go-ahead?

In the region of the old Chakwenga gold mine (closed in 1948 before the area received National Park status) they will establish a mining operation covering a minimum of 50 sq. km on the escarpment portion of the National Park. This will involve an ore processing factory, a dump and tailings dam, two conventional mines and two open-pit mines – and of course mine quarters, workshops and many roads.

Given the obvious destruction of the National Park, how were they issued a mining license in the first place?

As part of their initial application they supposedly complied with the legislation by providing an environmental brief that is supposed to describe the current environmental status quo and give a rough projection of negative impacts and amelioration and mitigation measures that could be implemented.

Have you seen this brief?

No. I wrote to ZEMA in mid-May 2011 but received no reply, then I wrote to one of the officers with whom I had dealt over the Mosi-oa-Tunya National Park tourism scheme (involving the illegal alienation of 220 ha of the park to Legacy Holdings). He put me on to an officer at HQ, Joseph Sakala. On 9 June 2011, I asked him to make available a copy of the environmental brief report and progress on the EIS by Mwembeshi’s consultants, GeoQuest, asking when the public would be able to comment. Of course, under the new Zambia Environmental Management Act of 2011, the Ministry of Mines and ZEMA are supposed to release these reports - but the Ministry of Mines is dragging its feet on the matter.

So you had been in touch with the Ministry of Mines?

I wrote to Dr Godwin Beene, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Mines on 28 May 2011, asking for a copy of the environmental brief. He replied immediately and then copied me in on an instruction to some of his underlings for them to provide the brief for him in short order.

And did you get it?

No. I sent more emails, but silence.

And what about ZEMA and the Zambia Wildlife Authority, who presumably had to approve the brief in the first place? I mean, is mining allowed in National Parks in Zambia?

Under the Wildlife Act of 1998, under section 24, mining companies may enter a National Park and exercise mining rights. But in order to protect a National Park from destruction, it requires, under section 25 (1) the Minister to issue regulations in the form of a statutory instrument (SI) for that purpose.

Which he can do or not as the Minister chooses?

Yes. And even if there are massive objections to the findings of an EIS and ZEMA turns down the mining application in that National Park, the Minister has powers to allow the mining. In fact President Banda recently allowed the Chinese to begin mining at Ichimpe, completely circumventing the EIS and ZEMA process.

That’s depressing.

But back to your question about ZEMA and ZAWA – fellow statutory sisters - Sakala gave me the name and email of the current Director-General of ZEMA, Paul Banda. On 9 June 2011, I wrote to him asking him for a sight of the brief and also mentioning to him that: ‘I would also like to draw your attention to the ECZ website which currently does not allow access to EIS reports on issues of importance to the Zambezi ecosystem eg: Chiawa Bridge on the Kafue River and the mining development around Siavonga’. The email bounced and further emails received no reply. ZAWA, I did not connect with, as they consider me persona non grata. But they must have given their assent to the issue of the license.

But what about the operators in the area, the safari operators and lodge owners? Have they not done something? After all, their business would be affected. No one wants to visit a park massively affected by mining.

Well yes. I had worked with some of the operators (who form the Lower Zambezi Conservation Trust and the Chiawa Leaseholders Association) in 2010 when we had defeated proposals by Protea Hotels to build a large hotel on the Zambezi. I wrote some of them in May 2011, warning them of the development. They knew nothing of the proposed development but promised to report back. Since then I have heard nothing, even though I have copied them in on some of the correspondence.

So, they are afraid for their businesses?

I suppose so. They might end up like me being Presidentially stiffed.

And what about the uranium mining around Chirundu and Kariba?

A seminal report on the upcoming uranium mining there by the Council of Churches of Zambia, (link here) reveals that one of the companies involved received a mining license without producing a sociological and environmental brief. And there are many villagers in the area as it is customary land.

Another bad story.

I’m afraid so. Uranium is the most deadly metal on earth. You never rid the soil of the radiation, or the water of terrible contamination. And the people…well, you buy them off with a few jobs and payments to local officials and headmen. They are moved, and sickened and impoverished. Welcome to the Plundercene.

So what is the way forward?

Given that ZEMA and ZAWA are largely dysfunctional – mere puppets, along with all other institutions of government, of the entrenched ‘Big Man’ system, one has to rely on one or two donors prepared to stick their neck out; on NGOs – though they have a poor record in advocacy generally - take the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) who lifted not a finger over Mosi-oa-Tunya, and who don’t even mention the mining area on their website, even though they are the punters of the Mana-Lower Zambezi Transfrontier Area. The local operators and their associations are loth to get too involved – criticism being leveled at Conservation Lower Zambezi for having accepted a large donation from Zambezi Resources. Then there is UNESCO, who is currently considering moving LZNP to WHS status. This of course would help, but the memory of what happened at the WHS Mosi-oa-Tunya springs to mind. WHS status is easily circumvented when greed is involved.

But this is all pretty nebulous as opposition to such developments?

It is a worry. There are so many areas of concern now. Activists and the public feel overwhelmed. I now turn towards the increasing activism of faith-based organizations, in Zambia, the Christian churches. The Council of Churches (CCZ) laid out the whole biblical rendition for the stewardship of the earth in their uranium report, an ethical Christian framework for stewardship. This is very exciting. When to this you add that the next government may be the PF who have Christianity and its ethical system of stewardship as its central pillar, we may be advancing into the heart of darkness with some PF lights flickering.

But have the CCZ followed up their report? You told me they had recommended the formation of an independent watch-dog group composed of representatives from the Private Sector, Civil Society, NGOs, Scientists and Medical Experts to champion the interests of the people affected by uranium mining operations.

I have asked them this question, and asked for their specific help on LZNP. But they don’t reply. They may be at a conference - the main obstacle to development; they may have been got at; they may...

So, where are we - and what is happening on the Zimbabwe side?

Well, Mana Pools is of course a World Heritage Site already, and now the area up to and including the lake has been designated a Biosphere Reserve. The Zimbabwe Government are muttering about creating some large lodge concessions on the river, doubtless in suitable industrial-military style with accompanying all weather airstrips. The death of course of what we hold dear. But you cannot deny that so far they are streets ahead of Zambia in conserving the mid- Zambezi Valley.

So, what now?

A new government is required. Zambians need to take this up. But our Oz mates may already be climbing into the Moet…

What will a change in governance mean to conservation policy in Zambia? And what would a new govt mean to the proposed mining of the LZNP and future such mining proposals?

With a new government, one based on a manifesto avowing an ethical structure based on the christian stewardship of nature, we have a chance for an African country to grasp the moment. The PF party coming in , many of whose senior people have been grappling with conservation and development issues for a decade or more, will have to tackle the area of community empowerment and the controlled access and use of natural resources. They will have to deal with neoliberalism, free trade and the pervasive influence of the World Bank and the IMF. They will have to free themselves and the poor from these shackles. Michael Sata promised me he would do away with the Zambia Wildlife Authority - a corrupt and horribly dysfunctional parastatal, and re-instate our old Game Department. And a new government has to empower local communities and protect them from the plunderer invaders who bring with them the Dutch curse of having an excess of non-renewable natural resources. Time here for an alternative way, one based on something they had before the musungu (the white man) came: the guardians of nature, a strong sense of community...


The views expressed therein are solely those of the interviewee and do not necessarily reflect those of Safaritalk.


"Return to old watering holes for more than water; friends and dreams are there to meet you." - African proverb.

 

How to create your gallery album and upload images.

 

How to post images in the text.

Want to tag another member in a post? Use @ before their display name, eg @game warden


#2 twaffle

twaffle

    Order of the Pith

  • Moderators
  • 7,922 posts
  • Local time: 04:53 PM
  • Gender:Female
  • Category 1:Wildlife Photographer/Artist
  • Category 2:Resident in Africa/Former resident

Posted 26 July 2011 - 06:18 AM

Interesting interview, thank you Matt and Ian. Has anyone approached Zambezi Resources for comment? There was some very strong action against an Australian mining company in Bougainville regarding their environmental desecration of the land and the effects on the people. I can't remember the details without doing research, but I know that the mining was stopped and compensation was paid. This was for a mine started some time ago. Perhaps there is some precedence or it may have been driven by local inhabitants only.

Anyway, what sort of effect would it have on Zambezi Resources to have a world wide campaign against this project? I've been doing some digging on the company and its stocks but I would have to say that conservationists will have NO chance if they are only working on the Zambian government, not with the profits being proposed. The economic reality (there's those words I've decided that I hate so much) is that the value to Zambia in $$s now and in the future is many times more than the value that people put on the wilderness area and its tourism. And again, I say it is because we are so intent on only valuing wildlife and wilderness for its economic $ value and this is the big mistake we (not me B) ) are making.

Following are some quotes from online stock forums from back in 2007-11.

ZRL - Zambezi Resources
hey guys just a quick thread starter,

Found this AIM/ASX listed African Nickel/Copper/Uranium play

What caught my attention was the ann today where RIO have farmed into one of their projects to explore for Uranium,

I had a quick look and bought at 50c

More Info to follow soon

Cheers

Any thoughts on this one currently?

From what I hear, the Zambian copper belt could be loaded with copper and uranium. EQN has prooved one success story.

The price of ZRL has been plummeting, anybody know why?

Exploration is always a HUGE risk.


article about zrl here relating to the granting of a 15 year mining license for their copper project. at initial glance, it looks very promising, $150M / year gross, still investigating UX prospects and now investigating Mpande limestone production to supply to copper smelters in the region. A few irons in the fire, but the main thing is the copper, and without costs, it is unclear how feasible this project is, but so far the resource is coming along....


ASX Announcement
17 May 2011
Zambezi commences second round of Diamond Drilling at Kangaluwi Copper Project, Zambia
 A $3.5 million diamond drilling programme commenced at
Kalulu and Chisawa with four diamond drill rigs.
 Excellent progress with four diamond holes finished to-
date, each encountering significant mineralized
intersections (assays pending).

This is good news, further significant drilling. Very good release, clear and detailed. Volume increased today, some interest has been shown. it will be interesting to see if some momentum builds.

Holder.


The following article from May 11 can be read here

To assist the company through this transition phase, the board has appointed Frank Vanspeybroeck, effective immediately, as the new chief executive officer, and Marinko Vidovich as the executive project manager.
Zambezi said the management team will be further strengthened by the appointment of further senior technical personnel, with some to be site based in Zambia.



The following pdf has more information on the fund raising activities and the actual 'on the ground' facility.

The funds raised by the Facility and the Rights Issue will be applied by Zambezi towards working capital and exploration and development costs associated predominantly with its Kangaluwi Copper Project. These facilities will provide the Company with valuable funding for the following:
 Additional step out and infill drilling for resource expansion and
definition at Chisawa, Kangaluwi and Kalulu deposits (Kangaluwi
Project);
 Deeper drilling of the structures for stratigraphic control as well
as to determine the down dip extent of the mineralisation;
 Testing additional oxide potential above the mineralised sulphide
material with as shallow drilling program;
 Finalising the feasibility study for the development of the
Kangaluwi Project
Zambezi anticipates that the funding will be sufficient to finalise the above activities over the ensuing 12-18 months.


You can read that here

Under the Facility, the Company commits to raise at least A$4 million under the Rights Issue by 31 December 2011 . Failure to do so will constitute an event of default, entitling LRF to demand the repayment of all amounts outstanding.

What this means I'm not sure but perhaps some action needs to go into play sooner.

I don't even know what laws Australian companies are bound by under Australian law as regards degrading a foreign country's natural environment, perhaps none given that we do a good job stuffing up our own.

Go to the source.

… clarity in thought comes after challenge …


#3 ElaineAust

ElaineAust

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Local time: 04:23 PM
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Whitsundays Australia
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:Tourist (regular visitor)

Posted 26 July 2011 - 07:47 AM

Do not know how much we can do but check out the major shareholders of Zambezi Resoures
Maybe if any of us have shares in these companies we can send a littel note of disgust

Elaine (an ashamed Aussie)





RBC Dexia Investor Services Australia Nominees

252,969,400

20.1 %



Lando Pty Ltd

45,055,555

3.6 %



JP Morgan Nominees Australia Ltd

38,579,602

3.1 %



Glencore Investments BV

29,162,062

2.3 %



Astron Limited

29,000,000

2.3 %



Citycorp Nominees Pty Limited

28,361,751

2.3 %



JP Morgan Nominees Australia Ltd

25,360,900

2.0 %



Mid Continent Drilling Company

22,663,469

1.8 %



Oldtudor Holdings Pty Ltd

20,000,000

1.6 %



Voyagers Rentals Limited

17,881,801

1.4 %



Southo Investments Limited

17,841,935

1.4 %



Camarri Nominees Pty Ltd

17,222,222

1.4 %



Woodcross Holdings Pty Ltd

16,500,000

1.3 %



HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited

16,450,686

1.3 %



Fitel Nominees Limited

16,023,545

1.3 %



Comsec Nominees Pty Limited

15,904,668

1.3 %



Surfboard Pty Ltd

14,000,000

1.1 %



Ms Melanie Bome

10,500,000

0.8 %



Zero Nominees Pty Ltd

10,000,000

0.8 %



Allua Holdings Pty Ltd

10,000,000

0.8 %



Other

604,979,308

48.1 %



Total

1,258,456,904

100.0%


Last updated: Friday, 25 February 2011
ww.proactiveinvestors.com.au/companies/sponsors_landing/664/zambezi-resources-0664.html

#4 I. P. A. Manning

I. P. A. Manning

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dar es Salaam
  • Category 1:Ecologist
  • Category 2:---

Posted 26 July 2011 - 10:57 AM

You are right.A campaign needs to be waged against the mining companies back home; and the new PF Government brought on board fully. We won the battle for the Mosi-oa-Tunya National Park because British travel agents threatened a boycott. There appears to be no resolute opposition in Zambia to the plunder.

#5 I. P. A. Manning

I. P. A. Manning

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dar es Salaam
  • Category 1:Ecologist
  • Category 2:---

Posted 26 July 2011 - 11:00 AM

Elaine, can you get the addresses of the shareholders and send them our comments?

#6 Bugs

Bugs

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 3,124 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Category 1:Resident in Africa/Former resident
  • Category 2:---

Posted 26 July 2011 - 11:03 AM

I don't even know what laws Australian companies are bound by under Australian law as regards degrading a foreign country's natural environment, perhaps none given that we do a good job stuffing up our own.

Go to the source.



I asked the question before - why don't they mine Australia's beaches?? and the answer is because the Australians wont let them. So its easier to make use of the corrupt African countries. Of course, promises of jobs, infrastructure etc.. its not just the Aussies, everyone does it. Its is just far too dandy to have so many corrupt African governments. Just feed them some corn and take advantage!!

I agree - if you aim at the source its a good idea.

There's none so blind as those who will not see.


#7 Atravelynn

Atravelynn

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 7,358 posts
  • Local time: 12:23 AM
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 27 July 2011 - 01:34 AM

Weren't we just discussing being overwhelmed? Oh my!

Thank you for the interview.

Edited by Atravelynn, 27 July 2011 - 01:35 AM.

When you think of a rhino, think of a tree (African proverb)

#8 lothar

lothar

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Local time: 06:23 AM
  • Category 1:Lodge Owner/Manager
  • Category 2:Researcher

Posted 28 July 2011 - 03:06 PM

Why is it that the Australians have become the biggest rapists and plunderers in Africa in their thirst. Everyone talks about the Chinese although they take their pound of flesh they at least they at least put something back by way of ifrastructural developments.

Now that I am on the subject of economic colonists of Africa I must throw in the Germans and French who are destroying the African rainforests .

I have said my piece and feel happy now.

#9 twaffle

twaffle

    Order of the Pith

  • Moderators
  • 7,922 posts
  • Local time: 04:53 PM
  • Gender:Female
  • Category 1:Wildlife Photographer/Artist
  • Category 2:Resident in Africa/Former resident

Posted 29 July 2011 - 05:04 AM

As an Australian, I would like to say first that I don't even pretend to understand the machinations of the big companies and take no personal responsibility for the Murdoch's company's behaviour in Britain or for any of the big mining companies in Africa. :unsure:

On a more serious note:

I think what is going on with Zambezi Resources is just indicative of how the big mining companies will use whatever means in their disposal to conduct their business. What happens in Africa would happen in Australia if they could get away with it. And in fact it has. The mining dollar for any company will carry more political weight than any environmental concern, apparently, until such time as the people stand up and start demanding some protection for their country and the inhabitants (human and non-human).

That's the reality.

Accountability. The more powerful you become the further away from the facts of accountability you appear to think you are.

… clarity in thought comes after challenge …


#10 I. P. A. Manning

I. P. A. Manning

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dar es Salaam
  • Category 1:Ecologist
  • Category 2:---

Posted 01 August 2011 - 02:25 AM

I recently wrote to the Council of Churches head, the Rev Mutale regarding the excellent report they produced on uranium miningin the mid-Zambezi Valley. Funded by Norwegian Church Aid, the report recommended the following:
In order to address the issues observed above, there is need for:
1. the Government of the Republic of Zambia to develop a policy on uranium, on which basis;
¬ Current Regulations can be revised
¬ Community concerns can adequately be addressed
¬ Educational and awareness programmes for communities can be
formulated ahead of any uranium exploration, mining and processing
operations.
2. CCZ to champion the formation of an independent watch-dog group composed of representatives from the Private Sector, Civil Society, NGOs, Scientists and Medical Experts to champion the interests of the people affected by uranium mining operations.
3. Government to immediately embark on a vigorous training programmes for public officers in the three regulatory institutions that are involved in regulating uranium mining operations.

I have written to the rev. and their advocacy officer, alcinomoyana@gmail.com, asking about progress on the watchdog organization but despite phoning and emailing have had no reply. So much for the CCZ's ability to mobilize against the plunder.

I see that Matt. has asked questions of the Lower Conservation Zambezi organization whose newsletters make no mention of the mining about to assault the mid-Zambezi. A question has also been posed to Jeremy Pope, the country rep. for the Nature Conservancy, who recently paid a visit with his boss for Africa to the LCZ HQ. I look forward to hearing what he has to say on the matter.


Last night the BBC aired a discussion on mining in Zambia. Present was Clare Short, the former Labour Minister and now head of the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EIT), the Minister of Mines for Zambia, the CEO of Mopani Mines (the Glencore crowd), Peter Sinkamba the anti-mining activist on the Copperbelt and numerous rather well padded gentlemen, including an incoherent environmental advisor for the mining giant, Vale. The interviewer was good, but apart from some good shots from Short, it was the usual bumbling by an MMD Minister out of his depth. We must await a new government in eight weeks.

#11 twaffle

twaffle

    Order of the Pith

  • Moderators
  • 7,922 posts
  • Local time: 04:53 PM
  • Gender:Female
  • Category 1:Wildlife Photographer/Artist
  • Category 2:Resident in Africa/Former resident

Posted 01 August 2011 - 05:27 AM

I think Ian, that getting the people together and making some noise about this backed by really iron clad facts is a start. We have just had a decision here in South Australia which has prohibited mining in a very beautiful and fragile wilderness area. The mining companies are now making a huge fuss and of course there are politicians saying that development and prosperity are going to be ruined.

Some of the articles can be read abc report here and The Australian here

May not help much, but it may also give you and your fellow Zambians some hope that wilderness areas of great National importance can be preserved. However, I guess we have to be realistic with the chances in developing countries when getting foreign income and investment are so vital for the health and wealth of the people.

Needless to say, Australia has a large mining sector and we have many rich resources to exploit so whilst one area may be preserved, many others will have to be exploited so that we can all have our 'lifestyle' necessities.

… clarity in thought comes after challenge …


#12 I. P. A. Manning

I. P. A. Manning

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dar es Salaam
  • Category 1:Ecologist
  • Category 2:---

Posted 01 September 2011 - 04:28 AM

Comment on ‘Economic perspectives on Zambia’ by Elizabeth Mulenga (Zambian Economist)

The threats to our protected areas from mining and industrial-type tourism are indeed massive – apart from their plunder for bushmeat and ivory. And the reaction of Zambians, local expatriates, NGOs, CBOs, journalists and church groups generally to what is happening, is redolent of a submerged hippo escaping the attentions of a hunter.

Recently the Chinese owned Ichimpe mine was launched by President Banda, despite there being no approved environmental impact brief, nor the more considered environmental impact statement (EIS), mandatory under the Zambia Environmental Management Act No. 12 of 2011. Since the MMD Government has had the key to the till, $6.8 billion in illicit financial flows have been illegally exported from Zambia, with a massive discrepancy between money supposedly paid to the MMD by the mines and that to the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA). From the time the derisory royalty rates were set, it was clear that “Big Man’ payoffs were part of the deal. And firms like Glencore – surely the very definition and essence of the unacceptable face of capitalism - they of Mopani fame, simply paid nothing to Zambia, exporting every cent, and with it our human and environmental health. And they developed their empire with money from Credit Default Swaps – the toxic ‘derivative’ instruments’ that in 2008 brought our financial system to its knees. And they are still with us, they and the others who circumvent the law, operating with impunity and without regard for Zambia.

What Mulenga sees as evidence of economic growth is in reality a cardboard cake with pretty, though noxious icing; rather like GDP itself And the poor have got poorer – in line with Engel’s Law (the poorer a family, the larger the share of its income that is spent on food). As with the Mopani Mines debacle, not only are massive sums of money being illegally exported, but the land is being poisoned, the people impoverished – though the waPajero continue to lay down another neck-role of fat. All the evidence and research reveals the resource curse that the mines have been for Zambia. And it is simply not true that government institutions have improved in their regulation and best practices –even if it is a former Minister of Mines who says so. How can one even quote an MMD Minister after a Zambian’s average longevity at birth has dropped about one year for every year of the last 21-years of the MMD’s rapacious and dysfunctional rule.

Mulenga quotes Dr Beene, the PS of Mines, on the issue of mining in national parks saying, ‘that there were currently no licenses issued …on any mine in a Zambian national park’. Beene is lying. Mwembeshi Resources were issued with a Large Scale Mining License in February. And similar licenses have been issued to Denison et al who are about to mine uranium in the mid-Zambezi on customary and Game Management Areas. Beene’s promise to send me the environmental brief that was submitted by Zambezi/Mwembeshi Resources for the Kangaluwi Copper Project in the Lower Zambezi National Park remains an MMD politicians’ promise. And inquiries made to Beene and to the Zambian Environmental Management Agency about progress on the submission of the Environmental Impact Statement by Mwembeshi have not been answered. And for a mining license to be issued, it should have had the permission of the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA). In any case their DG at the time, Saiwana, stated in November 2008 that they do not want mining in national parks or GMAs. For ZAWA now to use the excuse of the shortage of manpower for their failure to prohibit or stop legal or illegal mining in protected areas is frankly pathetic. The reason they don’t stand in the way of mining is because they are told what to do by the “Big Man”, Banda.

Mulenga asks whether mining should be allowed in national parks. I am taken aback at something that should be so obvious to Zambians who have their own rich pre-musungu history of conservation in the baChiwinda and other guilds, and who also have inherited our British conservation model first issued under Magna Carta in 1215.

National Parks are category II protected areas managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation, defined by the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas as a ’Natural area of land and/or sea, designated to (1) protect the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for present and future generations, (2) exclude exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area and (3) provide a foundation for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities, all of which must be environmentally and culturally compatible.’

Any mining or large scale hotel development is therefore exploitation and occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area.

For there to be any change for the better in Zambia it will require a government to be voted in on 20 September that has adopted the principles and ethics of the Christian stewardship of nature. The Patriotic Front manifesto is avowedly Christian – though tolerant of all religions. We expect much of them. I expect very much more from Zambians.

#13 Bugs

Bugs

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 3,124 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Category 1:Resident in Africa/Former resident
  • Category 2:---

Posted 01 September 2011 - 04:41 AM

Short sighted massive greed. I hope the Zambians make the right choice during the elections.

There's none so blind as those who will not see.


#14 Sangeeta

Sangeeta

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 2,338 posts
  • Local time: 01:23 AM
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Washington DC metro area
  • Category 1:Tour Operator
  • Category 2:Tourist (regular visitor)

Posted 01 September 2011 - 07:56 PM

Very interesting to hear that you're pinning your Zambian hopes on the concept of a religious stewardship of nature. Although I'm a secularist who believes that religion is a private matter, I have to agree with you that this is perhaps the only way to reach all the people with a clear message about saving/preserving their environmental heritage. The public domain is inundated with talk about money and economic viability and shareholders and assets - very few people speak about right & wrong & morality any more.

Here in the US too, we are seeing unusual alliances between religious and environmental groups. Wish you much luck and please keep us posted. All the best with the elections.

Zindagi na milegi dobara... Chalo Africa
You only live once...Go To Africa

www.chaloafrica.com


#15 I. P. A. Manning

I. P. A. Manning

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dar es Salaam
  • Category 1:Ecologist
  • Category 2:---

Posted 25 October 2011 - 04:30 AM

On 22 September 2011, came the news that the Patriotic Front Party under its leader, Michael Sata, its Vice-President, Dr Guy Scott, its Secretary-General Wynter Kabimba had won the election against the MMD government of Rupiah Banda. No shrinking violet, Sata immediately took action, firing a number of heads of parastatals, diplomats, police and army chiefs, and setting up Commissions of Inquiry into a number of organizations. He also fired all the politically appointed District Commissioners and Permanent Secretaries. The one I waited for was the closing of the Zambia Wildlife Authority, an action Sata had assured me some four years back would be a priority. It finally came with his announcement on 20 October that he had dissolved the ZAWA Board, pending an investigation. Then I received a copy of a UNESCO report on the Lower Zambezi from John Berry of Zambezi.com. Wonderful news.

Final Decision Documents
WHC.11 /35.COM /20
Decisions Adopted by the Word Heritage Committee at its 35th Session (UNESCO, 2011)

http://whc.unesco.or.../sessions/35COM

Decision: 35 COM 7B.8
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-11/35.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 34 COM 7B.7, adopted at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010),
3. Welcomes the decision of the State Party of Zambia not to approve the proposed mining operations in Chiawa Game Management Area and Lower Zambezi National Park nor the original proposal for a tourist and conference facility in the Chiawa Game Management Area across the river from the property, which could have impacted the property’s Outstanding Universal Value;
4. Notes that mining exploration is on-going in other parts of the Lower Zambezi Catchment, and considers that mining exploration and exploitation in the catchment could adversely affect the property if not strictly regulated;
5. Encourages the State Party of Zambia to consider nominating the adjacent Lower Zambezi National Park in order to eventually constitute a joint trans-boundary inscription on the World Heritage List, in line with the World Heritage Committee’s recommendation at the time of inscription;
6. Requests the State Party of Zambia to :
a) Ensure that any redesigned tourist and conference facility in the Chiawa Game Management Area across the river from the property be subject to a new Environmental Impact Assessment which should include an assessment of the impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention,
B) Submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2013, a report on progress in implementing the mission recommendations concerning mineral exploration and mining and tourism development and on the status of the mining activities and tourism developments which could affect the property;
7. Also requests the State Party of Zimbabwe to :
a) Conduct a new survey of key wildlife species to assert that the populations have not been impacted since the 2007 economic crisis, to re-instate regular wildlife monitoring and to conduct a feasibility study for a possible reintroduction programme of black rhinoceros, which disappeared from the property due to commercial poaching in the 1980’s,
B) Submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2013, a report on the state of conservation of the property, including progress in implementing the mission recommendations;
8. Further requests both States Parties of Zambia and Zimbabwe to :
a) Inform the World Heritage Centre of any planned developments in, or adjacent to, the property, in accordance with paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, to conduct environmental impact assessments for any such planned developments and submit the results to the World Heritage Centre,
B) Implement the recommendations of the joint reactive monitoring mission, with particular attention to the recommendations concerning mineral exploration and mining and tourism development.

The likely motivation by Zambia to override the MMD government decisions, ‘the State Party of Zambia’, is likely to be the fact that the Chiawa GMA is mostly now classified as the Chiawa Community Partnership Park, which, along with the Lower Zambezi National Park are protected from mining by proposed amendments to the Wildlife Act of 1998 – should they become law. However, the Patriotic Front Manifesto (2011-2016) states that it will ‘Repeal both the Zambia Wildlife Act of 1998 and the Tourism Act and introduce a regulatory regime which fosters the development of the industry.’ Whatever happened over the last month it is a tremendous victory for conservation.
A few days ago came other tremendous news. On Independence Day, 24 October, Zambia’s 47th, Sata announced he had released 670 people sitting in jails on charges of poaching, many of them villagers and their wives found with some meat in their pots, the criminal poaching gangs with their network of political clients still at work. I now look forward to a Commission of Inquiry into the killing of villagers by ZAWA scouts and of their part in the plunder of bushmeat and ivory, and of their failure to protect villagers from wildlife depredations.
I wonder if the PF will now pursue their idea of a Zambia Cultural Advocacy Foundation in order to revive and protect the Zambian cultural heritage in areas of land, participatory community development and sustained natural resource management. I would certainly like to see us follow the example of the state of Alaska by establishing the Zambia Permanent Fund, with legislation affirming that a share of all mining royalties be paid to government as a replacement for taxes, and 25 percent of it be paid to the Zambia Permanent Fund. Annually, dividends to be paid in grants to those in need, in particular as payment to protect natural resources.
Clearly one of the principal tasks is now to provide the necessary policy and legislative framework making customary common property rights unassailable. In this, common property rights would be fully assigned over land and renewable natural resources to responsible guardians on behalf of all Zambians. They, through their Trusts, then control market environmentalism, the chiefdoms having had the property rights to them fully assigned. They therefore internalize the negative externalities (costs) of pollution or over-harvesting, charging the necessary fees to concessionaires through an auction system. Government must therefore recognise public goods and ecosystem services as things of considerable value. Such services cannot under any circumstances be privatized, but are to be held under common property on behalf of the people.

#16 I. P. A. Manning

I. P. A. Manning

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dar es Salaam
  • Category 1:Ecologist
  • Category 2:---

Posted 25 October 2011 - 04:37 AM

Very interesting to hear that you're pinning your Zambian hopes on the concept of a religious stewardship of nature. Although I'm a secularist who believes that religion is a private matter, I have to agree with you that this is perhaps the only way to reach all the people with a clear message about saving/preserving their environmental heritage. The public domain is inundated with talk about money and economic viability and shareholders and assets - very few people speak about right & wrong & morality any more.

Here in the US too, we are seeing unusual alliances between religious and environmental groups. Wish you much luck and please keep us posted. All the best with the elections.


I have come to believe that purely secular conservation will not work. And it is too late to summon up the ancient guardians of nature on which African culture and survival was based. So, an ethical and moral basis for the stewardship of nature appears to be the way forward. It is certainly needed in order to counteract the massive resurgence of sorcery in the lives of villagers.

#17 Bugs

Bugs

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 3,124 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Category 1:Resident in Africa/Former resident
  • Category 2:---

Posted 25 October 2011 - 04:57 AM

Great news Ian. So - Are you going to go back?

There's none so blind as those who will not see.


#18 I. P. A. Manning

I. P. A. Manning

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Local time: 08:23 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dar es Salaam
  • Category 1:Ecologist
  • Category 2:---

Posted 01 November 2011 - 09:14 AM

Great news Ian. So - Are you going to go back?


We are still prohibited immigrants kicked out for being a 'threat to national security'! I hope the PF government will put things right. We shall see. In the meantime I still do what I can for the chiefdoms from afar. And a new donor scourge has arisen in the Kafue National Park. Truly the Plundercene epoch.

#19 wilddog

wilddog

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,440 posts
  • Local time: 06:23 AM
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:East Midlands, UK
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:53 AM

I have just received an email from @I. P. A. Manning  (via Change.org) stating that on 17th January the appeal by the Australian Mining company, against the Zambia Environmental Management Agency, had been UPHELD thus permitting the proposed mining to go ahead.

 

I hope Ian will see this post and perhaps make comment here.







© 2006 - 2014 www.safaritalk.net - Talking Safaris and African Wildlife Conservation since 2006. Passionate about Africa.
Welcome guest to Safaritalk.
Please Register or Login to use the full facilities.