''Environmental impact of illegal mining much serious in Goa''PTI | 08:09 PM,Sep 26,2011

Panaji, Sept 26 (PTI) The Leader of Opposition in Goa, Manohar Parrikar today said that even

though the quantum of illegal mining in Goa is equal to that in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh

together, its environmental impact is much worse in the state. Addressing a press conference today,

Parrikar said that being a small state as compared to Karnataka, the impact of illegal mining is 15 to

20 times more in Goa. "The quantum of illegal mining in the state is almost equal to Karnataka and

Andhra Pradesh together. However, Karnataka is a bigger state and if there is a particular quantum

of illegal iron ore extracted, the impact is divided.But Goa, being a small state, the impact would be

more," he explained. He said that the quantum of royalty evasion has increased substantially due to

the China boom that hit the iron ore extraction business. "After the (China) boom, royalty leakage

has increased manifold," he said, adding that illegal mining has overshadowed legal mining owing to

it. The BJP leader said that there is a chance to say that political patronage is the main cause of

illegal mining. "Government has not been able to stop illegal mining until February 2011, when the

Public Accounts committee (PAC) started investigating," Parrikar, who heads the PAC, said. Alleging

lack of political will for stopping illegal mining, Parrikar said that the committee headed by Chief

Conservator of Forests (CCF) had identified 30 mines that are violating rules. "Only one mine was

stopped. That too, because locals protested," he said. Alleging that all the ministers in the ruling

government are responsible for illegal mining, Parrikar demanded a probe by CBI or independent

authority to inquire about their involvement in illegal mining.

Impact on Environment

Mining has also created a degraded environment and is also a matter of concern. Damage to the environment is mainly done by the reject dumps, pumping out of muddy waters from the working pits including those where the mining operations have gone below the water table, and slimes from the beneficiation plant. The damage is more evidenced during monsoon where the rain water carries the washed out material from the waste dumps to the adjoining low-lying agricultural fields and water streams. It is stated that the slimes and silts, which enter the agricultural field are of such character that they get hardened on drying. The washed out material from the dumps and the flow of slimes from the beneficial plants besides polluting the water causes Siltation of water- ways, especially during monsoon. Such silting of water ways over the years may trigger years even flooding of the adjacent fields and inhabitated areas, especially during monsoon.

Several major environmental problems caused due to mining operations are as under:

Deforestation

Land degradation

Groundwater pollution

Surface water pollution

Dust pollution

Damage to beaches

Illegal mining in Goa: Sesa Goa’s business likely to be impactedNovember 02, 2011 04:44 PM  | 

Analysts say that the Shah Commission report, to be released later this week, could have significant impact

on Sesa Goa 

The Shah Commission, probing illegal mining in Goa, is expected to release its report later this week. Considering the

mining ban in Karnataka, experts are cautious about the significance of the findings of the report that might impact

Sesa Goa, the largest and only listed iron ore firm from the state. PINC Research has said in a report, “Even though

Sesa Goa has indicated little involvement in the alleged illegal mining, any move of blanket ban on mining/exports

from Goa would impact the company adversely, as Goa currently accounts for approximately100% (barring a little

sale in Karnataka through e-auctions) of Sesa Goa’s iron-ore operations.”

Sesa Goa is the largest exporter of iron ore from Goa, with around 34% of market share. Goa accounts for 22% of

iron ore with output of 50mntpa (million tonnes per annum), almost all of which is exported for its low grade and lack

of sufficient beneficiation and pelletisation capacity. 

A research analyst from a Mumbai-based brokerage firm, preferring anonymity, told Moneylife, “Sesa Goa’s

operations in Orissa, where it was operating as a third party, were shut due to non-renewal of contracts. In

Karnataka, where the company had environmental clearance of 6MT (million tonnes), the operations are shut due to

complete export ban and the Supreme Court order. Sesa is selling from its inventory through e-auction.”

He added, “Sesa Goa mines around 15MT-16MT of iron ore annually from Goa, including that of Dempo which it

acquired two years back. If the report (of the Shah Committee) suggests export ban or even an interim ban, there

would be significant impact on Sesa Goa’s business operations as its entire iron ore is exported.” 

For Q2FY12, Sesa Goa’s consolidated net sales declined by 14%, on a year-on-year (y-o-y) basis, to Rs7.90 billion

mainly due to lower iron sales volume at 1.55MT (down 14.8% y-o-y) on account of the ban on iron ore mining in

Karnataka and closure of third-party mines in Orissa and lower pig iron sales volume at 64,611 tonnes (down 23.1%

y-o-y). 

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report on illegal mining in Goa, had found the mining scam to be around

Rs4,000 crore. Considering MB Shah's comments in the media, the PAC report, and the Supreme Court ruling in

Karnataka, the PINC Research report says, “If developments in Karnataka are anything to go by, in case of an

unfavourable report, the Supreme Court could recommend blanket ban on iron ore mining/ exports from Goa. Exports

have been cited as the main reason for illegal mining in Goa.”

It further adds, “Even if the recommendation is only for ban on exports, this could bring Goan iron ore mining to a halt,

as the entire output is exported and there is a lack of domestic demand for the low grade ore. Hence, unlike

Karnataka, the impact of a ban/reduction of Goa iron ore on the domestic steel industry is not expected to be high.”

Raising the dust on illegal mining in GoaOnly nine of the 90 active mining leases in Goa appear to be valid, preliminary investigations by the Justice MB Shah Commission reveal. The rest have been exploiting a legal loophole to extract upto 54 million metric tonnes of iron ore per year. Joseph Zuzarte reports on the dust that is, finally, being raised in the state about illegal mining

The arrival of the Justice MB Shah Commission, set up to inquire into illegal mining in the country, in Goa in September has opened up the proverbial can of worms. Interacting informally with the media on the sidelines of his meetings with Goa Chief Minister Digambar Kamat, and Chief Secretary Sanjiv Srivastava, members of the commission have revealed that preliminary investigations prima facie indicate that only nine mining leases out of a total of 336 in Goa, have valid licenses to operate. Considering that there are around 90 active mining leases in the state, this implies that around 90% of the mining leases in Goa are being operated illegally.

What’s more, of even these nine valid mining leases, some are said to be operating

without the mandatory clearance from the National Board of Wildlife (NBWL) required for carrying out mining within 10 km of a protected area.

Though this is preliminary information, the unearthing of the ambiguities under which most of the mines in Goa operate following the visit of Justice Shah and other members of his Commission to some of the largest mining areas in Goa last week – the visits are still going on – has the potential to deal a deathblow to mining operations in Goa. The findings of this same Shah Commission, which had also inquired into the illegal mining at Bellary in Karnataka, led to Karnataka Lok Ayukta’s damning report against the Yedyurappa government and the arrest of mining magnate and Tourism Minister Janardhana Reddy and his associates only recently.

According to information provided by the Goa Mineral Ore Exporters Association (GMOEA), 54.45 million metric tonnes of mineral ore were exported from Goa in 2010-11, the highest by any state in the country. In FY 2009-2010, 45.68 million metric tonnes were exported. Most of this is iron ore, with a small percentage of manganese and bauxite (less than 20%). Of the 54.45 million metric tonnes, 48.93 million metric tonnes were sent to China, followed by 3.4 million metric tonnes to Japan. The ore was also exported to South Korea, UAE, Qatar, Pakistan, Thailand, Netherlands, Romania and Italy.

Though most of this ore is of Goan origin, a small percentage comes from neighbouring Karnataka. In comparison, in 1995-96, 15.12 million metric tonnes were exported. The nearly four-fold growth in exports has been largely caused by the insatiable demand for ore from China.

Catering to this demand has led to an unprecedented boom in mining in Goa and consequently all legalities have been thrown to the winds in the rush to excavate the iron ore and export it. It’s been a win-win situation for many – the mining lease owners, owners of lands next to the mining leases, transporters of the ore and, most of all, the politicians and bureaucrats who have facilitated the large-scale mining by bending the rules and turning a blind eye to the flouting of all laws.

The history of the mining leases

To really understand what has happened, you need to go back in time a little, to the pre-1961 period when Goa – then known as Estado de India – was ruled by the Portuguese. At the invitation of the then colonial government, mineral prospectors from Japan surveyed the state and discovered huge reserves of iron ore, manganese and bauxite, mostly in the interior hilly areas of the tiny territory (Goa admeasures 3,720 sq km) in the foothills of the Western Ghats. The then colonial government consequently granted mining concessions in specified areas to explore and extract the mineral ore. In all, 336 mining leases were granted. Only a few were excavated over the years and many remained idle for want of demand because the iron ore was low-grade.

Though the Indian army invaded Goa in December 1961 and ‘liberated’ the territory from Portuguese rule, the status quo was maintained on these mining concessions and they were allowed to operate. It was only in May 1987 that the union government converted them into mining leases through an act of Parliament. In 1987, 336 lease holders applied for renewals of their leases and were renewed for 10 years at a time. But when these came up for renewal in 2007, only nine were renewed and notified by the union government under the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. The approval period, initially for 10 years, has now been increased to 20 years, so the mines renewed in 2007 are valid till 2027.

Although only nine mining leases have been renewed, in reality there are around 90

mining leases which are being openly operated and which have exported the nearly 54.45 million metric tonnes of ore. This happened because of a legal loophole: lease holders whose applications for renewal have been pending since 2007, took advantage of a clause that their leases are deemed valid till the government decides either way on their applications for renewal of licenses.

This ambiguity led Justice Shah to pointedly ask the state authorities during his meeting with them on September 17, why mining companies were allowed to carry out mining without securing the requisite renewals. He also observed that the authorities could have fixed a timeframe to decide about the applications for renewal.

Talking to the media after Justice Shah’s meeting with him, the Chief Secretary of Goa, the top bureaucrat, said, “We did have a meeting with the Shah Commission, in which a few queries were raised. We will take all necessary steps to stop illegal mining in the state.”

That, however, could only be the tip of the iceberg. There are indications that one of the first high-profile casualties of the Shah Commission’s visit to Goa could be the sprawling Dempo Mines in Bicholim taluka, now owned by Sesa Resources, which in turn is owned by Vedanta. The Shah Commission, in the meeting with Chief Secretary Sanjiv Srivastava, raised questions regarding the transfer and operation of mining leases operated by the Sesa Group which were bought out by the Vedanta-owned Sesa Group in June 2009 from VS Dempo and Company.

Justice Shah has asked if the leases formerly operated by VS Dempo and Co Pvt Ltd have been transferred to Sesa Resources under Rule 37 of the Mineral Concession Rules 1960 after necessary permissions from the central and state governments. This is one of the mines that Justice Shah personally inspected last week. During his visit he inspected all documents and discovered that the Goa government had allowed mining in these leases without seeking permission from the centre to transfer the lease to the new company. Article 37 A also states that the government’s consent on the transfer of lease has to take place within three months from the date of application. The Sesa buyout of Dempo happened on June 12, 2009, more than two years ago.

The Shah Commission members are currently inspecting all the mines operating in Goa and have formed a number of teams comprising members from the union government and state officials to fan out all over the territory and verify all the documents. A clearer picture will emerge when they submit their findings after 45 days.

But on the other hand, if all these mines operating without licenses are now stopped, it will be a deathblow for the mining industry in Goa and have far-reaching consequences. Justice Shah along with other members of his Commission held a public hearing on Saturday, September 17, at the Secretariat, seat of the Goa government. The large pro-mining lobby came to the public hearing in strength and occupied most of the available space in the conference hall, all but shutting out those against mining. Whenever the anti-mining lobby tried to make a point, the pro-mining lobby shouted them down. The pro-mining lobby had one simple demand – legalise all illegal mining because the livelihood of thousands depends on it. To which Justice Shah, in his cool and calm manner, simply observed that legalising illegal mining was not within his jurisdiction. The findings of his Commission will be presented in a report to the central and state governments who will then decide whether to take any action. He reiterated that his findings are not binding and are only recommendatory in nature.

However, in Bellary, the findings of the same Shah Commission were used

by the Lok Ayukta, which led to the closure of all mining activities there. A similar stoppage of all mining in Goa will have many ripple effects. For example, because of the boom in mining over the last few years, there are now around 22,000 trucks involved in the transportation of ore to the loading jetties, from where the ore is transported in barges to the ports; there are 357 barges operating at present – up from 136 barges in 1995-96. And that’s not counting the people actually working the mines and other ancillary services, all of whom now face an uncertain future.

Growing opposition

There was a time not too long ago when nobody in Goa would have dared raise their voice against mining activities. Anybody who did was simply smothered, isolated and turned into a social outcast for daring to stand up to the mighty. In fact the first chief minister of Goa after the state was ‘liberated’ from 450 years of Portugueserule in 1961, Dayanand Bandodkar, was himself a mining baron. He held absolute sway over Goa till his death in the mid-’70s, after which his daughter Shashikala Kakodkar became chief minister and stayed in office till the early-’80s.

The media too was partially owned by mining houses or those sympathetic to the mining lobby. Only the most sanitised, pro-mining reports ever appeared in the press, therefore, until more national dailies arrived in Goa a few years ago, along with a number of local, cable-based TV channels. Now hardly a week goes by without reports of people’s opposition to mining activities.

The real game-changer, though, was the arrival of mass tourism following the Commonwealth Heads of Government retreat in Goa in 1983, which put the state on the international tourism map. Over the years tourism has grown steadily and in 2008 emerged as the largest industry in Goa, knocking mining off the top spot it hadoccupied for decades, ever since the Portuguese awarded mining leases back in the 1950s. Nowadays people are no longer scared to raise their voice against mining.

In the course of mining over the last five-six decades, mineral-rich mountains have simply disappeared, leaving behind huge mining pits, entire villages and communities completely destroyed. What was worse is that very little of the money earned by the big mining firms like the Dempos, Salgaocars, Chowgules, Timblos, Bandekars etc waspumped back into the decimated villages. A benign mining policy ensured that the state too earned a negligible amount as royalty from the minerals extracted.

Resentment against this exploitative situation has been building up for years and, with the aid of a few committed activists like Claude Alvares of the Goa Foundation and the new media, this resentment has finally come to the surface.

A few months ago, for example, villagers in south Goa’s Quepem taluka halted all mining activities in a lease which involved the excavation of a huge mountain locally known as Dev Dongor (mountain of the gods) because it was sought to be operated without proper clearances.

Claude Alvares’ Goa Foundation has been at the legal forefront against illegal mines. In September the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court issued notices to three major mines which are operating in the buffer zone around wildlife

sanctuaries. In December 2004 the Supreme Court had mandated that no mines can be operated in a 10-km buffer zone around wildlife sanctuaries. But the Goa government – the current Chief Minister Digambar Kamat has family links with mining barons; Kamat has also been the mines minister  for the last 11 years– has sought a zero-km buffer zone around the wildlife sanctuaries of Goa as a special case, a proposal unlikely to be granted by the union environment ministry.

There are six wildlife protected areas in Goa, all in the Western Ghats and its foothills. The northernmost is the Mhadei Wildlife Sanctuary. A little to its south is the Bhagwan Mahaveer Wildlife Sanctuary, followed by the Mollem National Park, the Netravali Wildlife Sanctuary and the southernmost Cotigao Wildlife Sanctuary. The tiny Bondla Wildlife Sanctuary in central Goa is surrounded by huge mining pits. The Mhadei is named after the Mhadei river, often described as the lifeline of north Goa because it supplies most of the drinking water in the north; the river originates in the Ghats there. The Mhadei downstream becomes the Mandovi river which is also fed by a number of other smaller rivers like the Volvonti and Surla which also originate in the Ghats. The Khandepar river originates in the Mollem National Park and feeds the Opa water treatment plant which supplies water to most parts of central Goa including the capital Panjim. The Netravali Sanctuary is where the water for the Selaulim Dam originates. There are a large number of mines in the vicinity of the Selaulim Dam The Chapoli Dam which supplies water to the southern-most parts of Goa receives its supplies from rivers which also originate in the Netravali and Cotigao forests.

Because of the large number of mines in the vicinity of the Dudhsagar-Khandepar river system which feeds the Opa water works, there is a perennially high level of turbidity in the water arriving there.

Following a directive from the MoEF earlier this year, 41 mines which operate in the buffer zone of protected areas were issued notices to obtain fresh environmental and forest clearances. However, only seven reverted with the required documents and their licences were renewed. The fate of the remaining 34 mines now hangs in the balance.

Besides the notices from the forest department of the Goa government, the Goa legislative assembly’s Public Accounts Committee, headed by the (BJP) leader of the opposition Manohar Parikar (a former CM) also issued, earlier in September, notices to 46 mines asking them about non-fulfillment of conditions for environmental clearance, including the mandatory NOCs under the Forest Conservation Act, certificates from the Chief Wildlife Warden and under the Air and Water Pollution Act. This effectively covers half the mining leases currently in operation in Goa. Ironically, it was this same Manohar Parrikar who, during his tenure as CM about a decade ago, tried to denotify the Mhadei and Netravali sanctuaries to benefit the mine owners. His attempts failed.

Apart from the forest department and PAC, the Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB) has also issued notices to 30 mines and has suspended three mining leases. The Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) has also, this month, suspended two mines and issued notices to 21 others for gross violation of the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules (MCDR) 1988. The violations include exceeding production capacity, operations beyond lease boundaries, failing to plant saplings as directed for using forest land, exceeding size of pits, etc.

Church fears impact of excessive mining in Goa

Wednesday, June 8, 2011, 11:00

The Catholic Church in Goa has expressed concern over excessive mining in the area.

It warns that excessive mining is posing a grave threat to ecologically sensitive areas in the state, which is a popular tourist destination.

Marking World Environment Day on Sunday, the Council for Social Justice and Peace (CSJP), the social wing of the archdiocese, lamented that mining, deforestation and aggressive promotion of eco-tourism by the state government was eating into Goa's green cover.

The Council's executive director Fr Maverick Fernandes said in a statement that forests in Goa were under severe attack due to mining for iron and manganese ore.

The mining, he said, was of great threat as Goa lies in the centre of the Western Ghats and is home to the some of the best forests in India.

The Church has also expressed concern at the state's forest policy which it believes is in need of "serious overhaul". The Church is calling for the creation of forest buffer zones and a ban on the use of forest land for mining purposes.

"The problems of mining, deforestation, pollution, loss of water resources and wildlife trade constitute the crucial issues to be dealt with while discussing the need of sustainable use of forests," the statement said.

"Eco-tourism is completely against the interests of the forests of Goa in the present scenario,” said Fernandes.

He further noted that the monitoring and regulation of the transportation of forest produce through the forest gates were being overlooked.

On Sunday, various events were held across the country to mark the World Environment Day, carrying the theme, "Forests: Nature at Your Service". This year, the United Nations Environment Programme (Unep) selected India as the global host.

Churches in India spread awareness on environmental conservation with special prayers, sermons and intercessions.

Mining Expose: Environment Impact Assessment Reports TamperedFRIDAY, 23 SEPTEMBER 2011 11:39

GoaChronicle.com brings its readers yet another explosive expose on how Environment Impact Assessment

reports were altered and fabricated to allow for environmental clearances to some mines in Goa. The nexus

of illegal mining goes right up to the Centre… 

An Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) is an important process in the granting of environmental clearances to

mining companies to extract ore. It is on this report basis that the Union Ministry of Environment gives it

environmental clearances to operate mines. However, GoaChronicle.com has learnt through its study of the Centre of

Science and Environment (CSE) - Mining in Goa report that there cases in which the EIA report on mines are

fabricated. We have so far got details of five mines

Analysis of EIA report of Jolreacho Dongor iron ore mine, Quepem, South Goa

The Shantilal Kushaldas & Bros. Pvt. Limited owns the iron ore mine. It is a small mine with an area of 63.35 ha in the

village Maina in Quepem taluka of South Goa. 

Some of the critical features of this mine are as follows:

•    Impact on steel price: The project seeks to use opportunity to export iron ore to countries like China, S. Korea and

Japan as demand there has increased tremendously. As most of the iron ore is exported from Goa, this is having

serious implications for the country’s steel prices. 

•    Cumulative environmental impact: Several mines in all directions surround the Jolreacho Dongor Mine. Therefore,

the cumulative effect of the pollution load will be severe in the region. According to the report, the emission level in

the nearby villages is below the standard norms. But there should be a cumulative environmental impact assessment

of all the nearby mines in the region.  

•    Full of false statements: According to locals, the report is full of false statements. According to them the project

location map is incorrect.  One of the serious allegations by the localities is that although the mine has not got

clearance work has been going on since January 2008. This has serious legal implications, as work in the mine

cannot start till it gets the clearance from State Pollution Control Board. The report also states that the area is rocky

with scanty vegetation and bushes and there are no perennial water courses/river/water bodies within the lease hold

area. However these claims have been strongly opposed by the local people. According to them there is thick

vegetation in the core zone area and perennial watercourses within the lease hold area.  According to the report 46.8

per cent of total area in buffer zone is forest but the villagers state that this figure is incorrect. The area under forest in

the buffer zone is as high as 95 per cent. 

Further the report states that there are reptiles like Kraits, House lizards, garden lizards and fresh water snakes in the

core zone. But the report forgets to mention ‘King Cobra’ which could be seen in the core zone. The report states that

faunal species observed are wild boars, bisons, rabbits, deer, etc. However it forgoes the fact that leopard and tiger

can also be seen in the core zone area. 

The report gives conflicting data it report states that life of the mine is 28 years with planned production of 0.10 million

per annum; whereas another part of the report states that life of the mine is expected to be 20 years with production

of 0.10 million per annum. 

According to the locals the distance of the villages mentioned in the report from the mines is also not correct. They

are much closer to the mines, therefore will have significant environmental problems. 

•    High ore to waste ratio: EIA report states that very limited rejection will be generated from this mine. However, in

another part it shows that ore to waste ratio will be quite high (1:9.42 to 1:2.21) during the first three years. Therefore,

the company needs to have proper waste management programme to minimize disaster due to failure of waste

dump.

•    No resettlement: The EIA report states that there are no dwellings with-in the lease area. However, the localities

strongly protest this statement and inform that there are houses within the lease area. Therefore, there should be a

proper resettlement policy for people living in the lease area. 

•    Extent of mechanization: Though the report mentions that there will be no drilling and blasting operation and work

will be carried out using manual labour as far as possible, the locals fear that use of rock breakers of small capacity

mentioned in the EIA report will take away the jobs from them rather than providing them employment. 

•    Poor CSR policy: The EIA report makes big claims on the CSR policy. However they are subjective in nature and

cannot be crosschecked in future. The company needs to provide quantitative figures on how it is going to invest on

upliftment of villagers in the area through education, health services and other programmes.

Analysis of EIA report of Matheapan E Sataracarachem iron ore mine, Quepem Taluka, South Goa

The Shantilal Khushaldas & Bros. Pvt. Limited owns this mine. It is a small mine with an area of 23 ha in the village

Maina in Quepem taluka of South Goa. The EIA report is for mine lease renewal, which was due in November 2007.  

Some of the critical features of this mine are as follows:

•    Cumulative environmental impact: The Mathepan mines are coming up in an area, which is already surrounded by

several other iron ore mines. The Quepem taluka is one of the core areas producing iron ore to meet the growing

Chinese demand. Therefore, the cumulative impact of all these small iron ore mines will be quite high. Already

Quepem taluka of South Goa is facing several protests against iron ore mines. It is therefore advisable that a

cumulative environmental impact assessment of all nearby mines is conducted.  

•    At one point it is said that the mines were granted operational permission in 1953 by the Portuguese

Administration, which was later converted to mining lease and were operational till late 70s. But subsequently in

project description section the report says that the exploration was carried out in 80s. It also says that the leasee is

yet to commence the mining operation. It is not clear if this is a renewal of mining lease, which was operational or if

this is lease renewal of an area where no mining has been conducted earlier.

•    In project description, the report says that mostly rocks with scanty vegetation and bushes cover the area.

However, in the biological environment table, the report talks about a large number of trees (Mango, Gulmohar,

Coconut, Sisam, etc) and shrub grasses (Bor, Pitkuli, bomboo, etc) in the core and buffer zone. 

•    The mine is on hilly terrain and Goa receives heavy rainfall due to which sedimentation can be a big problem. The

EIA report does not provide any measures to control sedimentation. 

•    The Mine is located just 12 km from Netravali wildlife sanctuary and 11 km from Cotgao wildlife sanctuary. Since,

there are a large number of mines in such a small area, the cumulative environmental load is surely going to have

some impact on wildlife sanctuary. The EIA report needs to deal with this issue.  

•    The mines will be operated completely manually but it will employ only 135 people out of whom 116 will be semi-

skilled and 12 unskilled laborers. It means there will not be sufficient job opportunity for the local people.  

Analysis of EIA report of Careamol iron ore mine, Quepem Taluka, South Goa

The iron ore mine is owned by Shri Jaisinh Maganlal. It is a small mine with 98.76 ha in the village Pirla in Quepem

Taluka in South Goa. 

Some of the critical features of this mine are as follows:

•    EIA report states that the area is a series of low hills and rainfall averages around 3600 mm. Therefore, the area

is going face sedimentation problem. This will be severe because they are many mines nearby. But the EIA report

does not talk about sedimentation problem. 

•    According to the report, Cotigao sanctuary is 4.6 km from the lease area. Plus, there are other mines also nearby.

Thus, the cumulative impact of the mining on the sanctuary is a possibility but again the EIA reports does not talk

about any measures to protect the sanctuary. 

•    The EIA report says that backfilling of pit will be subsequently started, but the report as such does not have any

reclamation plan or mine closure plan. The company must provide in detail how the reclamation work will be carried

out in subsequent years.  

•    The mine is to generate 0.382 million tons of waste every year. However, the executive summary does not explain

in detail how the waste will be collected or where it will be dump. The report even does not have any map of project. It

only talks about some of the best practice for waste management. 

•    The executive summary does not make any statement on occupational health and safety hazards. Since lease is

in low hill areas and with heavy rainfall, there should be a proper occupational health and safety hazard policy. 

•    The executive summary just talks in few lines on CSR policy of the company without making any commitment.

The company needs to provide in detail what kinds of CSR policy it intends to take for upliftment of the nearby

villagers.

Analysis of EIA report of Devapan Dongor Iron and Manganese Ore Mine, Quepem Taluka, South Goa

Shaikh Salim owns the iron ore and manganese mine. The total reserve is around 5.99 million tones. The mine lease

area is 83 ha with an annual production rate of 3.11 lakh tones per annum. It is expected that the mine will produce

ore up to 22 years. The land use pattern of mine lease consists of private land and forestland.

The report not only contains factual mistakes but also is poor in terms of assessing the significant impacts of the

project on environment. In addition to this, the report gives contradictory statements and suggests mitigation

measures that seem very superficial. 

Some of the critical features of this mine are as follows:

•    EIA says that the acquired land for the mines lease is a combination of private and forestland. But no information

is available on the land use pattern of mine lease such as, areas under forest, irrigation land, wasteland etc. 

•    Under heading of existing land use pattern in core zone, instead of proving land use pattern, the EIA has

mentioned about the lands to be used for mining activities. Interestingly, land use pattern for buffer area is correct. It

clearly indicates that the EIA developer is trying to hide the land use pattern in the core zone.

•    The report mentions that the lease area has elevated topography and consists of small isolated hillock extending

in southwest to southeast direction. It also mentions that the land surrounding the mine lease is agricultural and

receives high rainfall (around 3800 mm). If this is the scenario, then impact on land is anticipated to be high. However

the EIA fails to quantify the impact on land such as erosion potential of catchments area, erosion potential of waste

dumps, and direction of runoff. Based on the topography, it can be anticipated that Cavorem village, which is located

at 0.29 km from the mine lease will be the worst affected by air pollution and mine runoff.

•    The EIA report makes contradictory statement on mining technology. On page no 6, it mentions about the drilling

and blasting operation, however  in another part of its report EIA states that no drilling and blasting will be carried out,

instead a riper will be used.

•    EIA report is also incomplete in terms of the number of existing mines and proposed mines in the area. EIA states

that the villages surrounding the mine lease are dependent on agricultural and mining activities. The huge number of

operational mines in the area clearly exhibits the plight of the region in terms of air and water pollution and once the

project becomes operational these effects will be enhanced. 

•    EIA is poor in portraying the impact of mining on groundwater and also provides misleading information on the

same.  On one page it states that GW is available at 15 to 25 meter and working depth of a mine is below the water

table. On another suddenly it says “No occurrence of ground water in the mine lease”. In addition to this, the report

also fails to provide information on final quarry depth, mine seepage, groundwater flow pattern and impact of draw

down. 

•    Mine reclamation is an important issue in mine management and has been poorly represented in the EIA report. It

mentions “management is committed to reclaim the entire broken area”. But the report fails to address the basic

information on mine reclamation such as type of reclamation, area to be reclaimed, timeframe and monetary

requirement for the same.

•    Overburden management is a crucial aspect of mine management, but the report fails to provide some basic

information on overburden management and most of the mitigation suggested seems very superficial. EIA report is

also silent on stripping ratio and storage area characteristic for waste such as - slope of land, length of the

overburden storage area, runoff direction and erosion potential from the waste dumps. These are some of the

significant parameters for the assessment of silt load and its impact on water bodies and on land. The assessment of

these parameters is crucial for this project because the mine is located on an elevated area receiving high rainfall and

surrounded by sensitive receptors such as human settlement, agricultural land and forest area.

•    EIA also fails to provide a clear picture on the forest cover in the core zone (i.e. mine lease) and forest area to be

diverted for non-forest use. The report also provides contradictory information on the fauna; animals listed are

different from those mentioned in another part of the report (presence of wild boars, bison, and deer etc). It appears

that biodiversity assessment has been poorly done. Moreover, the term of reference given by MOEF clearly states

that the biodiversity assessment should be authenticated but no letter of authentication for biodiversity assessment is

provided in the report. 

•    Point number ten of the term of reference (given by MOEF) mentions about fund for the maintenance of village

road through which transportation of ores is undertaken. The EIA is completely silent on this.

Analysis of EIA report of Chuninimola Iron Ore Mine, Sanguem Taluka, South Goa

The Shantilal Kushaldas & Brother Pvt Limited own the iron ore mine. The total mine reserve is around 2.46 million

tones. The lease area of mine is 42.91 ha with an annual production rate of 2.18 lakh tones per annum. It is

estimated that the mine will produce ore up to 15 years. The land use pattern of mine lease consists of private land

and forestland. This mine is very close to the Devapan Dongor mine.

Some of the critical features of this mine are as follows:

•    Chuninimola Iron ore mine is located in village Rivona in the South Goa district. However, the only difference

between the Devapan Dongor and Chuninimola mine is the difference of mine owner. The consultant who prepared

the EIA report is same (M/s Bhagavathi Ana labs Ltd, Hyderabad). Topography of both the mine is also almost same

except that Chuninimola Iron ore mine is close to Kushavathi River (almost 50 to 60 meter from the mine site),

therefore runoff impact is expected to be very high, which is not captured in the EIA. Further, the information on forest

cover is conflicting, on page no 31, the forest cover in the study area is given as 40 per cent, but on another page in

the report it is mentioned as 33.6 per cent. 

•    Kalka Nadi which passes close to the mine lease (this river is no where mentioned in the EIA report, drainage

network in the watershed) will be worst affected by siltation because slope of land is toward SW and river is also

flowing in the SW direction. The EIA report chooses to remain completely silent on this. The same consultant has

prepared both the EIA reports, and it comes across as a copy-paste job from the Devapan Dongor mine report. 

•    The biggest drawback of the EIA studies of Devapan Dongor and Chuninimola Iron ore mine is that each mine

talks about project specific impacts and shows that after mitigation the project will benefit the surrounding areas. Both

fail to address the runoff threat, which is very significant bearing in mind the topography of the region, intensity of

rainfall and presence of sensitive receptors. Hence siltation impact is critical and requires detailed investigation.

GoaChronicle.com has managed to get it hands on five EIA analysis done by CSE, the question however is how

many more EIA reports were tampered with.