But in the last month, Zamokwakhe “Basheen” Qunya, the tourism officer of the Mbizana Municipality and a former representative of the mining company, has twice attempted to stop the new operators of Mtentu River Lodge from renovating the facility on behalf of the community-owned Accoda Trust.

Read More……

Source : www.iol.co.za

Read More….

Mining Minister Susan Shabangu has pulled the plug on the Wild Coast dune mining venture by an Australian-based company after strong opposition from local community, tourism and environmental groups.

It also emerged yesterday that John Barnes, general manager of the South African mining operations, had resigned.

However, Shabangu appears to have left the door open to the Australians and local empowerment partners to have a second bite at the cherry. Though she has revoked the mining licence with immediate effect, she has asked them to submit further documents and information within three months so that she can make a final decision.

Read Full Article…..

Read More……..

In a written reply to a parliamentary question, tabled on Monday, Shabangu declined to make public the findings of an earlier environmental impact assessment (EIA) into the plans of Transworld Energy Mineral Resources to mine the heavy mineral.

Read more …..

read more….

source : weekendpost.co.za

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Mineral Resources Minister Susan Shabangu has failed to make a decision on the appeal against the nining right granted to Australian junior mining company Mineral Resources Commodities mto mine the dunes at Xolobeni on the Wild Coast. She was due to speak on the controversial project on March 25, over two and a half years after the Amadiba Community threatened to take the Minister to Court to stop the mining project that has since 2003 become an ever more menacing threat to the unique biodiversity of the Wild Coast and traditional way of life of the amaMpondo.

Speaking on behalf of the Amadiba Crisis Commitee which appealed the decision to allow mining, Sinegugu Zakhulu said “We cannot imagine what is causing her indecision on the matter. The Human Rights Commission as far back in 2007 was critical of the mining proposal, and even a special task team of the Mineral Resources Board, which was chaired by Patakile Holomisa, found glaring shortcomings in the mining rights application, including evidence that the traditional leadership, which includes the Chief and the King of amaMpondo were never consulted. This is apart from all the problems the task team found, with the water permits that had not been applied for, and the overwhelmingly negative long term environmental and economic impacts.

This is totally unacceptable because it is not only the mining which is ‘on hold’ but the revival of eco-tourism that is on hold, with all its job
creation potential”.

This followed the Amadiba Crisis Committee’s (ACC’s) appeal of the granting of the licence, which was awarded for a portion of the proposed project, by the then Minister of Minerals and Energy, Buyelwa Sonjica, in 2008.

The Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) said that it no longer intended to facilitate a second round of hearings on the matter, which it scheduled for this month.

The Minister would be advised to adjudicate upon the appeal, based on the available documentation, including the interim report made by the Holomisa task team.

This came after the legal representatives of the ACC objected to a second round of hearings and another report being drawn up on the issue, which it deemed unnecessary because a report had already been compiled.

The local community near Xolobeni, the mining company Transworld Energy and Minerals (TEM), and subsequently property developers in the area have sought a resolution on this issue since early 2009.

The major concern highlighted in the Holomisa report was that that TEM had applied for the right to mine a number of “blocks” of titanium-mineral bearing sands, however it was only granted the right to mine one of these, the largest, called the Kwanyana block.

It was questioned whether or not the project was still feasible since only one block could be mined, and this would likely mean that the associated processing facility (which would have created many of the jobs on the operation), would no longer be built in the area.
Thus, the report questioned why a mining right could be awarded for one block, when no feasibility study had been conducted to see if this was viable.

It was also understood that a letter, with a list of requirements, was sent to TEM in July 2008, by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act regional manager, however it appeared that the right was granted in December 2008, without any, or all, of the issues raised in the letter having been attended to. This included a number of environmental impacts.

The Holomisa task team also noted that the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) was strongly opposed to mining in the area, and was “seriously concerned that the issues raised by the DEA were not addressed sufficiently or at all”.

by: Christy van der Merwe
source: http://www.miningweekly.com/

The mining right was awarded to Transworld Energy and Minerals (TEM) in 2008, for the Kwanyana block of mineral sands on the Wild Coast.

Although dated March 2010, the report was only released on January 31. The DMR said that the delay in taking a decision on the report was owing to “administrative processes and pressures within the department”.

The report outlined a number of areas of concern and made a final recommendation that an interdepartmental committee, including the departments of Environmental Affairs, Water Affairs, Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, and Rural Development and Land Reform, should weigh up matters and direct the way forward.

The report was drawn up by a committee formed to investigate the issue, headed by Phatekile Holomisa, which reviewed documentation received from affected parties.

The DMR has indicated that further hearings into the matter would take place at the DMR’s Durban regional office from February 16 to February 18.

The major concern highlighted in the Holomisa report was that that TEM had applied for the right to mine a number of “blocks” of titanium-mineral bearing sands, however it was only granted the right to mine one of these, the largest, called the Kwanyana block.

It was questioned whether or not the project was still feasible since only one block could be mined, and this would likely mean that the associated processing facility (which would have created many of the jobs on the operation), would no longer be built in the area.

Thus the report questioned why a mining right could be awarded for one block, when no feasibility study had been conducted to see if this was viable.

It was also understood that a letter, with a list of requirements, was sent to TEM in July 2008, by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act Regional Manager, however it appeared that the right was granted in December 2008, without any, or all, of the issues raised in the letter having been attended to. This included a number of environmental impacts.

The Holomisa task team also noted that the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) was strongly opposed to mining in the area, and was “seriously concerned that the issues raised by the DEA were not addressed sufficiently or at all”.

A comparative assessment of the identified land use alternatives, such as ecotourism in the area, should also have been included in the Record of Decision, but the Holomisa report said that no evidence of such evaluation was found.

The report also stated that while “TEM has submitted ‘prima facie’ proof of consultation as is required in regulation, the task team, is however, concerned that there is no conclusive evidence that the appropriate Traditional Authorities were the ones that were consulted”.

This lack of consultation was the grounds for the appeal of the mining licence, which was submitted by the Amadiba Crisis Committee in early 2009.

“The question is, on what basis was the mining right granted without an approved environmental impact assessment and an approved environmental management programme?” the Holomisa report asked.

By: Christy van der Merwe
11th February 2011

For some time, the state has withheld two pieces of information with significance for mining along the Wild Coast of the Eastern Cape. Under much pressure, the government has now released both.

Both documents are shocking, but taken together, they paint a cynical picture of a potentially concerted effort to engineer an economically viable dispensation for mining on the Wild Coast with scant regard for communities and environment.

The first document came in the form of the terms of reference issued by roads agency Sanral to an environmental consultancy for the proposed N2 toll highway, which hugs the coastal sites that prospective miners are eyeing. The terms of reference specifically instruct the consultant to provide “a strong motivation for excluding the R61 and current N2 as options”.

Imagine the outrage if the assessment for a fictional new highway between Durban and Johannesburg was not compared with the impact of upgrading the N3.

That we even have sight of these terms of reference is thanks to Cullinan & Associates, which applied under the Promotion of Access to Information Act. It acts for the Sigidi, Baleni and Mdatya communities, the Khimbili Property Association and residents in the amaDiba tribal authority.

The law firm first successfully opposed environmental authorisation for the proposed N2 highway in 2004, sending Sanral back to the drawing board.

Senior director Cormac Cullinan says: “It’s indisputable that if the new road doesn’t go ahead, it will have a major impact on the financial viability of mines… That’s a strong reason why they didn’t want to consider the existing route.”

The toll road appeal is now with the Department of Environmental Affairs. Cullinans alleges Sanral appears to have intended to mislead the minister because the agency initially denied its consultant had been specifically excluded from considering certain alternatives.

The second document to come to light is the nearly year-old report by Congress of Traditional Leaders of SA chief Patekile Holomisa, who led a task team assessing the award of a 2008 mining right to Transworld Energy and Mineral Resources to mine titanium on the Kwanyana block of Xolobeni on the Wild Coast.

The Department of Mineral Resources finally made Holomisa’s report public last week, and it is rather instructive. It points out that Transworld indicated a feasibility study would be carried out “as soon as the mining right is formally granted” – whereas the law requires proof that the mineral can be mined optimally. The report asks whether Transworld was allowed to dictate the processing of the application.

It also points out the mining right was granted without an environmental impact assessment, environmental management plan or further attention given to any of the department’s own stated requirements.

There was no study of the benefits of mining versus ecotourism and issues raised by the Department of Environmental Affairs were not addressed. The Department of Mineral Resources opted to reconvene the task team, which will hold hearings in Durban this month.

There is a third leg to the saga, a legal wrangle over the Commission for Traditional Leadership’s decision to dislodge amaPondo King Mpondombini Sigcau from the throne. Webber Wentzel says “a gross injustice to (our) clients appears to have been done, which cannot go unchallenged”.

Is it a coincidence that the deposed royals oppose both the Xolobeni mining and the N2 toll road?