Dear Editor,
There is much debate at present in the mining sector pertaining to the proposed six-months waiting period before mining. The general assumption is that this process is to maximise the benefits of the other resources of the area, especially for forestry, before it is mined. While such a proposal has its merits (and indeed its negatives) one wonders how much benefit such a system will have for the forestry sector.
Individuals involved in mining usually mine small acreages of land as against the much larger amount usually untilized for logging. Indeed, GGMC has been quoted as saying that actual mining activities on available mining lands is a very small percentage of the amount of land owned for mining.
This therefore raises the question of whether the proposed six months waiting time will achieve anything in terms of better land utilization.
Would a logger be willing to invest in building a road to an (often inaccessible) area where there may be a few mining blocks within his concession, simply to log the small acreage?
On the other hand, is the GFC aware of the amount of forest resources that are wasted on mining operations? This is because there must be total clearance of the forest before mining can occur (as against forestry where the law mandates selective logging). As such much lumber is wasted during this land clearance. Miners are often interested in converting these logs to lumber (either for sale or personal use) but find that the necessary permits from the GFC to do so are often tedious and difficult to obtain. The simpler thing to do therefore is to waste this valuable log resource.
It is probably time for the Land Resource Committee or the GFC to start thinking about the amount of lumber that is wasted on a mining concession and start putting plans in place for it to be better utilized. It seems an absolute shame that a resource as important as lumber is allowed to go to waste mainly because the red tape by the GFC prevents miners from obtaining the benefit of a resource. Even if the miner himself is not interested in extracting the lumber from his mining block, he should have a simpler system where others who may be interested in extracting the logs could be allowed to do so – a process which is speedy and will not unduly slow down the mining operations. If the situation exists where the mining block falls within a logging concession then of course the logger is given first preference in extracting the resource. If he is not interested, then that option should automatically be given to the mining block owner. Such a process will definitely take less than six months and there will be better utilization of the resources in the given area.
A system should also be implemented where a mining application can be done simultaneously with a forestry application (rather than the present system where you first have to apply for a mining permit which takes a few months to approve, and then have to go through another application process for forestry – this long and tedious process often discourages miners from attempting to utilize the forest resources. That way both processes could occur over the same area by the same individual/company, thereby maximising the resource benefit of the location.
Complete land clearance is an inevitable aspect of mining, and it is covered in the mining laws. We need to come up with ideas on how the resources that are within this land clearance are properly utilized rather than its present wasteful disposal.
Our country is too poor to let this process continue, and even six months notice will not solve the problem. The most logical and simplest process would be for the GFC to relax its regulations pertaining to the removal of lumber so that miners may extract that which falls within their mining block/claim.
Yours faithfully,
(Name and address provided)
