Mining and conservation mutually co-exist in Zululand
14 July 2022, Johannesburg
Mining and conservation mutually co-exist in Zululand
The Daily Maverick refused to publish this rejoinder to an opinion piece written by Kirsten Youens
Kirsten Youens, the tireless anti-mining activist, delivered her latest anti-mining sermon (“Coal mining onslaught on Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Park is tantamount to ecocide”, 30 June 2022) to which we refer. Had she prioritized facts above her activism, this response wouldn’t be necessary. However, her open-minded readers deserve a balanced perspective.
Youens styles herself as a friend of the wild animals and the people who live near the Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Park. In her sectarian view, coal mining is bad, end of the story. Convinced by her own beliefs, she then concludes, “it seems utterly bizarre that coal mining would be given a place adjacent to ancient wild heritage and centuries-old Zulu culture — but that’s exactly what happened.”
The truth is, it is not at all utterly bizarre to grant mining licenses in Zululand or any part of the country in line with the law. But it would indeed be utterly bizarre for South African manufacturers to import anthracite from Russia and other countries while we can produce it locally.
It is not utterly bizarre that natural forces dictated that deposits of anthracite be concentrated near an area where wild animals can thrive. Nor is it utterly bizarre that South African regulatory instruments allow for careful balancing of environmental concerns and socio-economic imperatives.
The economic benefits of anthracite – used as a replacement for metallurgical coke – in manufacturing industries cannot be over-emphasised. The entire value chain, from mining to manufacturing, sustains livelihoods.
Youens presents a romantic picture “where animals and people live peacefully and, (gasp), even thrive”. But she conveniently sidesteps the fact that poverty and unemployment pose a serious threat to this peaceful co-existence.
Youens opens her anti-mining missive with a CNN story which explains the commendable efforts to protect the white rhino from extinction. Nowhere in the CNN article cited is it mentioned that mining is a threat to the white rhino.
In fact, we are happy to inform her readers that the neighbouring mining companies serve as a buffer zone between locals and the animals that must be preserved. This is more so in the Zululand region where the local management of Zululand Anthracite Colliery (ZAC) and the park management have developed a cordial working relationship to safeguard and reinforce the park’s fence.
This has helped alleviate the threat of poaching and the danger that predators pose to human life and livestock in nearby villages. For Youens, such information is not convenient to share with her audience because it would destroy her pre-determined anti-mining narrative.
But even the mitigation impact provided by mining companies to the park is not nearly enough, for poaching activities continue and unemployment remains high. You can only guess what would happen if all mining activities in the area were to cease, as per Youens’ unrealistic wish.
In her anti-mining claims, Youens traverses the unthinkable heights by dragging Zulu culture to advance her cause. But she doesn’t tell readers that mines operate under the express permission of traditional authorities who don’t need anti-mining activists as spokespersons.
With regard to ZAC, for example, King Goodwill Zwelithini (may his soul rest in peace) was very supportive of the mine. He did this in full appreciation of the mine’s contribution to job creation, local economic development in the form local procurement and implementation of social labour plans.
The distortion of Zulu culture as if it doesn’t allow economic development is condescending, to say the least. For some inexplicable reason, Youens doesn’t associate the Zulu culture with economic advancement, which requires economic diversification anchored on all the gifts provided by nature.
Youens refers to the importance of preserving water systems. No one will quarrel with the need to look after our environment and to ensure that people enjoy the right to live in an environment that is not harmful. To address this genuine concern, South Africa has sophisticated legislation, regulations and regulatory bodies responsible for ensuring that mining is undertaken responsibly. It was never the intention of the drafters of the constitution and laws to ban coal or anthracite mining.
South Africa will never ban coal mining. No amount of litigation will stop it. The justifiable need to protect the environment must not tempt anti-mining fundamentalists like Youens to superimpose their ideological views on the otherwise sophisticated legal instruments that balance the need for preservation of heritage and modern economic development.
Youens criticises the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy for issuing mining rights. While she has a right to campaign against mining in terms of free speech, she is not entitled to manufacture facts. An example of a false statement is this: “What DMRE is doing is showing complete disregard for any other department in government and for the people of South Africa.”
As an educated person, Youens should know that the task of DMRE is to promote sustainable mining for the benefit of all the people of South Africa. The DMRE can neither control nor disregard the Department of Water and Sanitation, and the Department of Environmental Affairs. These departments are run by separate ministries and bureaucracies, and are responsible for the enforcement of various legislations.
Youens takes pride in opposing mining applications. In so doing, she is effectively proud of perpetuating the high unemployment rate in one of South Africa’s poorest regions. She, by implication, also takes pride in denying the state much-needed taxes to fund developmental needs. Indeed, it is cruel of Youens to blatantly praise herself for opposing mining applications claiming to be doing it on behalf of “us, the people”. Do “us the people” include mineworkers and job seekers?
She should speak for herself and the wealthy funders of her litigation who hobble economic development in South Africa. Youens has previously demanded the closure of Tendele mine in a court case which, according to journalist Peter Bruce, was supported by the wealthy Raith Foundation.
In a recent column in Business Day, following the closure of Tendele mine, Bruce correctly noted: “Today she [Youens] wins. Let’s hope those trees get to growing quickly and feed the 20 000 or so people directly dependent on the mine – employees and their families, local contractors and suppliers on top of that.”
Youens invites her readers to be “honest”. Her definition of honesty in part means no one wants to drive through the wasteland of filth that is an open-cast coal mine before entering a game reserve; spend time in a wilderness area when light and noise pollution from a mine ruins the experience.
What she doesn’t mention is that no country wants the kind of poverty South Africa is experiencing and the red-tape that prevents more investment and job creation. Was she in the country when the July unrest happened that signalled the danger of a high unemployment rate to South Africa’s stability? Also conveniently omitted in the equation of “honesty” is that part of the mining regulatory regime is the strict compliance with levels of pollution.
The South African modern regulatory regime is one of the toughest and most transparent. It is far more advanced than the colonial and apartheid era when imperial companies did as they liked, leaving many mines unrehabilitated. Interestingly, some of the opposition to mining by NGOs is funded by legacy trusts whose origins can be traced to the ancient days.
Youens’ piece is conveniently accompanied by a picture of an accidental spill from ZAC, deliberately omitting the success and speed with which it was cleared up, and followed by the installation of a brand-new filter press to process and re-use water as part of our water conservation measures. And she wouldn’t even bother to mention that ZAC provides clean water in nearby villages.
ZAC Filter Press
Youens writes that “while the world moves away from coal, South Africa welcomes more and more.” She adds: “what DMRE is doing by issuing mining licences in this area is nothing short of ecocide”.
It’s difficult to decipher which “world” she is referring to. The developed world of Europe is importing coal from South Africa. The world’s leading economy, the United States, buys anthracite from South Africa to support its industries. Australia, which is part of the developed world, is one of the biggest coal exporters. Indonesia’s fast-growing economy is backed by coal. Coal will continue to be a source of energy and an indispensable industrial input for many chemical products.
Perhaps, Youens must return to the real world and co-operate with all stakeholders to ensure the co-existence of various economic activities. She should use the litigation funds to help the unemployed and complement the bursaries and learnerships provided by mining companies. Only then will she realise that some things are not as utterly bizarre as they seem from a distance.
To read the Daily Maverick opinion piece click here
For more information, contact:
Menar Corporate Communication Department
Siphiwe Tame
Tel: +27 11 783 7996
Email: pr@menar.com