Contaminación ambiental en la Guayana Esequiba

GGMC sent a team to investigate mining pollution at Arau which has reported
Tomado de:
http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/letters/04/18/ggmc-sent-a-team-to-investigate-mining-pollution-at-arau-which-has-reported/

By Stabroek staff April 18, 2009 in Letters
Dear Editor,
In response to the front page article in the Stabroek News March 23, 2009 edition (‘Mining pollution continues at Arau’), a team consisting of the Mines Manager and two officers visited the Arau area from March 25 to April 15, 2009, and this letter serves to communicate the findings of the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) based on their report. It should be noted from the outset that Arau Village is presently situated outside and south southwest of Arau titled area on the outer boundary of the 1-km wide buffer area. Mining is prohibited by law in the buffer area.
The team inspected mining operations at Arau bottom below Arau Village where the majority of the operations were located and operations at Arau top well above Arau Village. There were twelve dredges, seven at Arau bottom and five at Arau top. Five out of the seven dredges at Arau bottom were operating within the titled area with verbal permission of the village, and they were all unregistered and unlicensed. Three of these were acknowledged as being owned by villagers, including the Toshao.
One of the dredges operating in the titled area and acknowledged as being owned by a villager was responsible for the most severe turbid discharge, measured as 800NTU, discharging directly into Arau River (at Arau bottom below the village).

The five dredges at Arau top, all registered and licensed, were located in state land well above Arau Village, and outside of Arau titled area and the surrounding I-km wide buffer area. At Arau top, discharges from the two working dredge operations into Arau River measured 250 and 241NTU respectively.
One of the seven dredges at Arau bottom and three of the five dredges at Arau top were working at the time of the inspection. Cease Work Orders were issued on all four of these operations, two for discharging turbid water directly into Arau River and two for diverting Arau River without permission.

These are offences under the Mining Act and Regulations, and in particular, it is an offence to discharge tailings with turbidity greater than 50NTU into the environment. In addition, citations (official warnings) were issued on the two dredges at Arau bottom outside of Arau titled area, which although not working at the time of the inspection, were positioned to discharge tailings directly into Arau River.
Water samples were tested for turbidity at Arau top and bottom, in Warishi Creek which is used by Arau villagers for domestic purposes, around the confluences of Arau and Wenamu River and Eteringbang on the Cuyuni River. Following standard procedure, water samples were taken above and below mining operations to assess the turbidity impact of mining and its dilution downstream.
Turbidity values recorded from upstream to downstream were: 136NTU above and 241NTU below the three working operations at Arau top; 7NTU in the undisturbed ‘black’ water of Warishi Creek which is used by Arau villagers for domestic purposes; 80NTU in Arau River below Arau Village and above dredging operations at Arau bottom; 800NTU where a villager’s dredge was discharging into Arau River; 281NTU at Arau River confluence with Wenamu River; 21NTU in Wenamu River below Arau River confluence at Mango Landing; 10NTU at Muruwawe River below Arau River; 41NTU above the Wenamu confluence with Cuyuni River; 24NTU at the Wenamu confluence; and 37NTU at Eteringbang below Wenamu confluence on the Cuyuni River.
The team met with Arau Village Toshao, three Councillors, several residents of Arau Village and miners on March 27. The Toshao and villagers reported that the expense of travelling to Georgetown was a deterrent to regularizing their mining operations.
In addition to acknowledging that miners were given verbal permission by Arau Village to mine within the titled area, it was disclosed that while Arau villagers themselves plan to further invest in mining and to mine in accordance with the Mining Act and Regulations, they did not want GGMC to issue permits and claims for mining in the vacant state land around Arau titled area nor around Arau Village, which, as noted earlier, is presently situated outside and south southwest of Arau titled area on the outer boundary of the l-km wide buffer area.
GGMC is currently a respondent in Application by Arau Village v Attorney General’s Chambers and GGMC, and in D’Abreo v GGMC.
The GGMC team advised the villagers that permission to mine within the Arau titled area must be given in writing by the Village Council, and that the Mining Regulations require that permission to mine must be sought and obtained from GGMC before mining commences. The GGMC team stressed that all mining operations, within and outside Amerindian titled areas are required to comply with the Mining Act and Regulations, and they assured the villagers that consistent with its traditional and extant policy and practice for mining in Amerindian titled areas (formerly ‘reservations’) based on the law, GGMC has never hitherto issued lands for mining within the Arau titled area, nor within its 1-km wide buffer area. In fact, (except for those operations in the Arau titled area) the current operations are located in mining claims outside of the Arau titled area and its surrounding buffer zone, and further, most of the lands were issued before the Arau area became titled.
Another area of concern voiced by the villagers was the operation of illegal business premises (about 10 to 15 shops) at Mango Landing below Arau Village, with associated alcohol consumption and transmission of STDs (through prostitution).
The GGMC team committed to deploying officers from the Cuyuni Mining Station to deal with general matters at Mango Landing and to train an Arau resident selected by the villagers to be a Community Mines Ranger employed by GGMC. The name of the resident is to be provided within one month.
In addition to enforcing the law, GGMC is committed to working with all small and medium scale miners to improve their tailings management practices in order to be compliant with the law with respect to tailings discharge and environmental management in general.
Attached, please find copies of our most recent Education and Awareness video, booklet and posters, aimed at promoting improved knowledge, practices and legal compliance by small and medium scale miners, in the context of responsible mining.
Yours faithfully,William WoolfordCommissionerGuyana Geology andMines Commission




Related articles
GGMC team to check Arau pollution complaints The Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) has...
Arau council ‘intimately’ involved in mining - GGMC The Village Council of Arau is “intimately” involved...
Conflicting reports on mining at Arau Top Minister says it has ended, APA differs By...
Mining pollution continues at Arau -residents pleading for relief Environmentally unsound mining practices...
Complaints by Amerindians at Arau have been investigated Dear Editor, Permit me to respond to the...


Nota del Editor del blog: Al referenciarse a la República Cooperativa de Guyana se deben de tener en cuenta los 159.500 Km2, de territorios ubicados al oeste del río Esequibo conocidos con el nombre de Guayana Esequiba o Zona en Reclamación sujetos al Acuerdo de Ginebra del 17 de febrero de 1966.