Extracts and Comments | Discussions
Peter Kuria
Box 4785
Mbabane
Tel 268 40 48488
RE Comments over the Malolotja Mining EIA Report
The projected waste from the report stands at 40%, according to the document other statistics and my understanding, this is half as much.
What will happen to the waste?
Where will it be stored?
Why does the report have a misleading figure of 40%? Are there any other uses that the material will be put into that have not been mentioned in the report?
The report suggests that the aesthetic value of the land will not be dented, is the scarring of the land of no aesthetic value?
The report says that the noise will not be excessive, what levels of noise are we dealing with, is there a chance of the noise leading to stress to the creatures within the area, in turn leading to a change in biological patterns i.e. breeding?
What confirmation do we have on the lack of therein things pertained to be of archaeological importance?
There is an estimated 2.6 million in Royalties to the Swazi nation, adding up to 62.7 ,million at the completion of the project, how much of this money will be used directly at improving the management and the enhancement of value of the nature reserve? Are there any thoughts or ideas on how such a venture could be instituted? Who will be accountable for this?
Does the project have a reserve budget set aside with a trustee for the rehabilitation of the 150,000 cubic metres of open quarry?
What dangers will the open quarry pose to the animals?
How much of a depression will remain after the rehabilitation process? Going by the report figures of 40% waste, in translation it means, the project can only recover 40% of the open quarry leaving 60% unclaimed?
What sort of budget will be set aside for this purpose?
Who will be a trustee for such?
Who will be accountable for the whole process?
How long will it take for the rehabilitated land to be recolonised by plants and animals?
What other work has the company done on rehabilitation and what is their track record on rehabilitation?
The report states clearly that both the plant and animal survey was not complete (pg 51 and 54), this in effect means that the prediction of impacts and the CMP is obscure purely on the reasoning that, if you do not know the target, then you can not predict the impacts on the unknown target.
On soils and their fragile nature, the report states that the soils are fragile and of course very young, what are the implications of the mining to the stability of the soils in the vicinity and near vicinity during the lifespan of the quarry and after.
What implications will the open quarry have on the health and safety of the animals within the park and those that use the park as a migratory passage.
Thank you,
Peter Kuria