On the morning of Tuesday 21 March a one-tonne bale of concentrated sodium cyanide pellets plummeted from a sling underneath a Tolukuma Gold Mines (TGM) helicopter through the canopy of the Papua New Guinean rainforest.

The helicopter was carrying the cyanide from the TGM base at Veimauri to the minesite. Almost halfway into the flight the pallet underneath the helicopter fell. The cyanide smashed into the ground only 20 metres from a stream.

Three days later, the Australian company Dome Resources, owner and operator of the Tolukuma mine claimed that the recovery of cyanide from the site had been completed.

"… Dome has removed topsoil considered to have been exposed to contamination", an upbeat Dome media release claimed. 1 Downplaying the potential problems, Dome claimed "a visual inspection of the stream and river system below the site … continued to find no detectable contamination or environmental effect."

Until the Mineral Policy Institute (MPI), Greenpeace Australia (GPA) and local landowners arrived at the crash site, Dome claimed the clean up was complete.

On Sunday the 26th a representative of the landowners, Mr Billie Strange, and Greenpeace visited the site. Contrary to Dome's statements, they found no evidence that any soil had been removed. The investigation also showed large quantities of iron cyanide, the product of stabilising cyanide, present around the crash site.

The tests found a total cyanide contamination of 2800 parts per million on the soil surface at the spill site. Although cyanide levels decreased away from the impact site, sediment from the creek, 30 metres downstream, still had levels of 5.4 parts per million (ppm). 2 As an indication this level is 25 times the United States limit of 0.2 ppm for drinking water.

The same day local landowners and the MPI visited the closest village, Inaina, approximately 15 kilometres downstream of the crash site. Fearing the consequences of crossing the river, landowners had been cut off from their gardens. The villagers had not eaten from their gardens since last Thursday four days ago. Nor had adequate water been delivered for the villagers.

In 1993, when Dome Resources was seeking approval to open the mine, it promised to ensure "specialised training for operators involved in specific process or material handling operations". 3 PNG Environment Protection Manager, Leslie Irima, believes Dome broke the international regulations when they loaded the cyanide. 4

Nor are the problems with the Tolukuma mine limited to accidents. TGM discharges its mine waste directly into the local river system. While the Environmental Plan fails to discuss the potentially serious long-term impact of heavy metals on fish, humans or other life, it does acknowledge some other significant impacts from river dumping. 5

"High sediment deposition rates", the assessment report says, "are expected to cause obliterative impacts on the fish habitats and food resources of these sediment-impacted reaches". 6

This 'obliterative' impact stretches approximately 30 kilometres down the Auga River to the Angabanga River. The mine is also expected to have a significant impact on people and their livelihoods. In an echo of the impacts of the Ok Tedi mine, the report states that "In the floodplain mainstream reach of the Angabanga river, moderate to minor impacts on the primary production are expected in the long term resulting in decreases in the standing crops of benthic algae, diatoms and macrophytes …". 7 This in turn will affect the food chain and fish will die and food sources will be reduced.

The chairperson of the Auga Dilava Development Association and principal landowner from the spill site, Mr Billie Strange, has no doubt about the impact of the mine. "The mine has had a major impact on the people's social and environmental life. For seven kilometres from the mine outfall, river life has been destroyed", he said. 8

Nor has the mine brought prosperity to the local peoples. "The Dilava Yaloge people have received no substantial benefit from the mine since it started production in 1995" the chair of the adjoining Dilava Yaloge Landowners' Association, Mr Daniel Mona, said. 9

Conclusions

From investigations carried out by Greenpeace, the Mineral Policy Institute and Papua New Guinean investigators it is apparent that the villagers downstream from the spill were very lucky not to have been seriously harmed by the cyanide spill.
At the time of writing (1/6/2000), Dome has almost finished the decontamination of the spill site. This will be validated by Department Environment Protection (DEP), with European Union advisers, within the month. 10
Dome has made efforts to provide food and water tanks to some of the affected villagers downstream. However many villagers had not been contacted by the company after the spill and had received no official notice not to drink the river water.
Comprehensive testing including microtox and bio indicators should have been conducted but in all likelihood it is too late now for meaningful results.
Recommendations

Australia

The Tolukuma spill demonstrates the ineffectiveness of the Mineral Council of Australia's voluntary Code of Environmental Management. Membership of the Code is voluntary and the Code has no sanctions that are applied to companies that do not comply. The Code has failed to stop Australian mining companies exploiting lower standards offshore. Dome Resources is not a member of the Council, nor a signatory to the Code. 11

There is an urgent need to change this behaviour. At a minimum Australian law and other applicable international standards should bind the overseas operations of Australian mining companies as well as in PNG the local laws. Without such regulation the companies will continue to exploit lower or non-existent standards or regulations.

In Australia legislation is needed to regulate the operations of Australian companies operating overseas. It is clear that operations by Australian and other overseas mining companies in Papua New Guinea are carried out in ways that are totally unacceptable in the western countries the companies are based in. The costs of such projects are born by the local people, PNG's environment and ultimately the wider community.

Papua New Guinea

In Papua New Guinea there is a clear need for action by government and mining companies. PNG non-government organisations believe that "whatever is applicable in Australia and elsewhere in terms of Safety Standards should also apply here in PNG.

With catastrophic experiences felt by ordinary Papua New Guineans in Western Province and recently in the Goilala and Mekeo areas, the Government of PNG must now seriously look at developing and implementing the following": 12
Health & Safety Standards - Regardless of whether there are loopholes in the laws of the country the same safety standards followed in Australia, US and elsewhere should be complied with in PNG.
All mining companies operating in PNG must build infrastructure like road systems to help transport dangerous chemicals. Roads will also assist landholders in the area bring produce for sale in the mining towns.
No transportation of cyanide and chemicals in helicopters.
The PNG Government should repeal the "Foreign Proceedings & Prohibitions Act". Landholders should be given a choice where to take and argue their cases and not be bound by a PNG which takes away their rights and fails to cater for their wellbeing. 13
Waste from mining has a major impact on people and the environment in PNG. The Tolukuma mine continues to dump its waste directly into the Angabanga River. There is no tailings dam. This must stop. A safe tailings retention system as well as cyanide detoxification must be constructed if the mine is to continue.

Riverine waste disposal and submarine tailings disposal systems are not acceptable practices and must not be used for any new mines.

Cyanide

The Tolukuma accident highlighted the need to reform the way cyanide is used not just in Papua New Guinea but around the world. The recent United Nations Environment Program Workshop on Cyanide (Paris, May 2000) found that reform was needed and summarised the changes as follows:

" The Chair then presented an overview of what a sound Voluntary Industry Code of Practice for Cyanide Management might cover on the basis of the discussion. Specifically, there is a need for:
safety, handling and treatment of cyanide;
alternatives to cyanide;
cyanide containment: handling, transport, with zero discharge as the long-term aim;
security features need to be built into conception, design and operation of processing technology;
contingency plans and emergency preparedness and response." 14
Users of cyanide need to be bound by mandatory regulation not a voluntary code. As detailed above and in other studies the Mineral Council of Australia's Code of Environmental Management demonstrates that voluntary codes and codes without enforcement provisions or sanctions are ineffective. 15

Practices like carrying cyanide in helicopters and cyanide leaching are intrinsically risky. This is recognised by many sectors for example by a current bill which proposes to ban cyanide leaching in new mines in New South Wales, Australia. 16 Legislation banning this practice already exists in the US State of Montana.

While the mining industry maintains that cyanide breaks down quickly the reality is that little is understood about the health risks posed by the break down products which persist in the environment for longer periods. 17 Dome Resources material focuses on cyanide and not the break down components.

The uncertainties and unknown problems connected with cyanide as well as the demonstrated dangers with its use mean that a zero discharge standard for cyanide and cyanide compounds should be adopted.

Existing mines using cyanide must abide by this standard and be rigorously monitored. If safety threats persist the mine should be closed.

It is also clear that the environmental and social costs of gold mining with cyanide can outweigh the benefits for many affected communities throughout the world. Safe alternatives to cyanide use need to be implemented and where this is not practical new mines should not proceed.

Chronology of the Spill

Tues 21/3 0830-0900: 1 tonne Sodium Cyanide dropped from Tolukuma Gold Mines (TGM) helicopter on the way from their base at Veimauri (approx. 70 kilometres North West of Port Moresby) to Tolukuma mine (55 kilometres N of Veimauri). The impact site is approximately 20 kilometres south of the Tolukuma mine

Near cyclonic conditions, heavy rain (according to local villagers) from approximately 1400 to 2200.

Sodium Cyanide lost overnight in extremely rugged and inaccessible terrain (no roads approximately 2-4 day walk from nearest road-head at Inaina)
Wed 22/3 At approximately 0900 the search is resumed. Helipad cut and search camp established. Sodium Cyanide located by TGM 90m from camp. Location of spilt cyanide is at E 147, 04, 29; S 08, 47, 17;

Recovery and neutralisation starts.

Approximately 1000 -1100am TGM informs Inaina villagers not to drink water. Villagers are so scared that some drink swamp water. They get no water for 24 hrs.

Approximately 1130 Greenpeace informed of spill via Reuters. Mineral Policy Institute notified and PNG landowner associations contacted by PNG NGOs.

TGM starts "neutralising" Sodium Cyanide with four tonnes of iron sulphate (also an inorganic herbicide). While reducing immediate danger this will probably result in increase in longer lived toxic reaction products.
Thur 23/3 0700 am: Local video production professional, Andrew Johnston, flies by charter helicopter to spill site, records the rugged mountainous jungle landscape and what initially looks like spill site (subsequent investigation reveals it to be TGM helipad only).

Pilot recalled to PORT MORESBY immediately, on grounds that a temporary (48hr) exclusion zone has been declared (at 0800 am) by the Department of Civil Aviation. Exclusion zone is huge; 15 nautical mile radius around designated point, although centre given is approximately 12km east of spill site. Reason given as an air operational safety issue, on request from TGM via Australian High Commission. ABC airs footage that night in Australia.

The company states that up to 150 kg of cyanide has not been recovered. This may have entered waterways before treatment or recovery could commence.

Papua New Guinea Non Government Organisations including NEWG (PNG NGO Environmental Watch Group) Greenpeace Pacific attempt to contact landowners associations while the same association chairpeople try to contact these groups.

First drinking water arrives at Inaina (the villagers say only 50l for 150 people). This is woefully inadequate and for drinking and is nowhere near enough for cooking or washing.

Attempts by TGM to recover and break down cyanide continue. Rain falls every afternoon and night during this period at spill site and downstream. This is confirmed in subsequent interviews with villagers
Fri 24/3 1400: Mineral Policy Institute and Greenpeace arrive in Port Moresby.

Meet local landowners, and PNG NGOs outraged at imposition of exclusion zone. The zone stops access to traditional lands and an independent assessment of spill containment and cleanup attempts.

Delegation of landowners, Greenpeace, PNG NGOs goes to MP Ajax Bia for affected area known as Goilala. Also meet Civil Aviation Deputy Director of Operations to protest exclusion zone and enlist support for landowner access.
Sat 25/3 Greenpeace, NGO and landowner informal meeting with Ajax Bia, District administrator, and Elliot Rafaele (local NBC radio journalist) and also pressure Civil aviation for an exemption to exclusion zone so that the landowners can view the damage for themselves.

Greenpeace/Mineral Policy Institute officially asked by landowners to do independent assessment for them. The air exclusion zone is finally lifted by approximately 1pm but first helicopter access attempt fails because area is clouded in.

Cleanup continues. Company says cyanide is less than 0.5 ppm. They then state that their current mine discharge limit is 5 ppm. They do not state that the PNG standard for water is 0.005 ppm.
Sun 26/3 Mineral Policy Institute/Greenpeace/Billie Strange from the local landowner association fly to impact site. First view of site by landowner since aware of cyanide crash. Unable to land in small clearing with heli (too big, too heavy, pilot too cautious). Fly on to Tolukuma mine site, film clean river upstream of tailings outflow, contaminated below discharge.
Mon 27/3 0830am: Helicopter finally lands at cyanide crash site with Billie Strange, Greenpeace and camera man - see Investigation at Cyanide Crash Site

Approximately 1000am: 4WD with Mineral Policy Institute, local landowners and villagers gets to Inaina, closest village to spill site approximately 15 km downstream. Arrive exactly when TGM manager flies in - see Inaina Investigation.

1700 Edit run into EM TV for broadcast that night.

1800 EM TV in PNG covers the limited cleanup spill site with Billie talking on site.
Tue 28/3 It is revealed that the cyanide load was not slung under the helicopter according to international safety standards. Further the PNG government has no laws about the transport of hazardous and toxic material.

Landowners meet with DEP and provincial governor and Informed that

1) Testing at site has been limited to indicator tests.

2) There are reports of fish and prawn kills at the river mouth.
Wed 29/3 Greenpeace, landowners and cameraman to mouth of Dilava river (into which Aroa and Yaloge rivers drain) to investigate fish kill rumour. Visited Hisiu (West bank) and Gabadi (E bank) villages. Also investigated point where river meets sea; extensive tidal and current sorting of flotsam on beach; zero evidence of any biota kills. Spoke at length with villagers. Found that:

No fish kills at all.

At a meeting at Avabadina school villagers very concerned over rumours of spill. There have been no visits by TGM or Government officers to provide information, alternate water supplies, or food. The villagers downstream of Inaina are still using river, albeit reluctantly and cautiously. Starting to dig wells. see Hisiu and rivermouth investigation.

The government Minister (Mr Heroea Agiwa) for the Environment refutes claims by Mr Ajax Bia the local member that no adequate supplies have reached potentially affected villages.

TGM claims Greenpeace obstructed its operations due to presence of sampling team helicopter in rainforest clearing. This was despite TGM media claims on Sunday that the clean up was nearly complete. GP sampling and footage show this to be not true.

Greenpeace Pacific Campaign Co-ordinator Arlene Griffin responds to TGM assertions by letter to the PNG "National" newspaper pointing out that TGM is failing to recognise the right of traditional owners to visit their land and assess the damage for themselves. Greenpeace offers sample results to TGM in a spirit of co-operation. (results released to media and TGM on 13/4/00). No sampling results have been forthcoming from TGM to date (5/7/00), despite repeated requests.

Investigation at Crash Site
The onsite investigation team was comprised of Billie Strange (chairperson of the local landowner association), Rob Taylor (Greenpeace Australia Logistics Coordinator) and (Betacam operator). This report is from the onsite investigation on March 27, 2000.

GPS coordinates for the crash site were the helicopter landed are (in degrees, minutes and seconds):

E 147 04 29
S 08 47 17

Upon landing, it was discovered that the cleared area was in fact nothing more than a helipad, work and storage area, not the impact site.

The cyanide impact site is approximately 90m SSW of the GPS coordinate given above, and relatively easy to find by following trails used by the company cleanup team.

Along this trail there is evidence of vegetation spots dying off and tainted with what appeared to be a dark blue dye. The first evidence of these spots, which are well away from the most directly affected area appear at least 60m from the impact site, suggesting that Sodium Cyanide pellets have been extensively distributed by the impact, and certainly not confined to the impact site.

The blue dye material is believed to be a neutralising agent, although the colour suggests it may not have been iron sulphate that was used. (Subsequent discussion with Dome and our own analysis shows it to be complexed ferricyanides, one sample yielded 2800ppm total cyanide.)

Approaching the impact site initially from the North there is an obvious hole in the ground where the cyanide bale landed. On the way up to the hill several patches of a creamy/white compound could be observed, applied to the ground at several locations up to 15m from the impact site. (Subsequently revealed to be unreacted ferrous sulfate)

There was no boundary fencing or Chemical Hazard tape to be observed delineating the contaminated zone. It would subsequently be possible for anyone to walk into the contaminated zone without any warning.

Approaching the impact site it was observed that all the vegetation directly downhill from the lip of the crater was dead or dying, and plumed out from the hole at this point, running all the way to a stream. The dead vegetation had a stream frontage of 20-30m.

It is estimated that this stream is no more than 20m from the impact down the slope. In a straight line the impact site is approximately 15m from the stream.

The dead vegetation was showing dark blue.

The gradient of the hill is about 1:3 from the impact site to the stream in a fairly consistent manner. In some places the hill cuts away directly vertically to the stream at a height of 2m.

The area of blue dead vegetation was also evident on the other side of the stream as well. It is estimated that this area is at least 15m X 15m, and directly opposing the die off that plumes from the hole.

As the blue compound was more than likely a neutralising agent, it was concluded that the area of vegetation die off was the area directly contaminated with spilt Sodium Cyanide, released on impact of the bale. This area directly takes in a fast flowing mountain stream of 2-4m breadth over a length of 20-30m.

The impact hole itself, measured just over two metres square, if one were looking down onto the hole. As it was on the side of a hill, the hole was 1.5m in height on the uphill side through to a lip on the downhill side, which enabled one to walk straight into it, should one want to.

There was no evidence that any vegetation or soil that would have come into direct contact with the Sodium Cyanide, was removed. Indeed there is pretty much still a full upper canopy shielding most of the impact site from identification from the air, with the exception of a small hole that the pallet came crashing through.

It appeared that the hole had been backfilled to a limited extent with some fresh soil, which more than likely had come from the sides of the crater.

Inspection the crater also confirmed a much larger amount of the afore mentioned creamy/white compound found in spots further down the hill. On closer inspection it was discovered that the texture of this compound was crusted over and solid.

Sample Results Location Cyanides

1m from Impact crater edge - blue compound 2800ppm
FeSO4 residue in crater 25 ppm
sediment 30m downstream from impact site 5.4 ppm
sediment 60m downstream from impact site <0.5ppm
water 30m downstream <0.01ppm
water 60m downstream 0.08ppm
18
Inaina Investigation
Inaina, while the sampling team was at work at the impact site, another team, consisting of MPI and local landowners visited Inaina. The team arrived on foot at the same time TGM's manager Mike Fisher arrived by helicopter.

Mike Fisher was visiting Inaina to tell the villagers not to drink from the river and that the company would soon deliver a large water tank for drinking water. Previous deliveries of water to the village were limited to two 44-gallon drums a day commencing on Thursday 23 March. The water supply to date is totally inadequate for a village of 150 people in the Tropics. This visit by Mike Fisher is on Monday, nearly a week after the cyanide was lost.

After Mr Fisher departs the village chief tells MPI and landowner representatives about the problems and suffering inflicted on the village by the spill. The chief first states that the villagers do not believe the company (the chief also said this directly to Mr Fisher).

The chief says, "the company is telling us lies. It is obvious they are confused, therefor we are confused too".

It is also clear that TGM is not able to communicate with the villagers. For example the villagers believe that Mr Fisher told them the water from the river was safe to drink. We witnessed Mr Fisher telling the villagers not to drink the water (the villagers say that they are too scared to drink the water anyway).

The chief states that they do not know wether the villagers can eat and sell fish. They are not doing this at the moment and this mean that they will face significant problems in getting enough protein. No food deliveries have been provided by TGM or promised by the company.

In addition to fish the villagers have not been crossing the river to get to their food gardens. This is because they are so scared of the potential impacts. The result is that the village is going without food.

Villagers also say that they are worried children will continue to drink and play in the river. They say that if the problem is so serious they should be relocated.

The chief summarises their problems saying, "the river is our life".

The villagers also confirm that it was raining heavily on Tusday 21 March by the early afternoon. This contradicts the Environment Minister's statement from 26 March which said, "Fortunately there was no rain during the night of Tuesday 21/03/2000". 19

The villagers also state that there have been other accidents with drums falling from TGM helicopters. They believe these drums contained fuel but are unsure what exactly was contained in drums from previous accidents.

Sample Results Location Cyanides

Inaina water samples <0.01ppm
Inaina sediment <0.05ppm
Inaina sediment <0.05ppm
20

Hisiu and Rivermouth Investigation

On the evening of Tuesday 28/3/2000 the team was told of rumours of fish kills at villages near the mouth of the river. Early the next day (29/3/2000) a team comprising reps from Greenpeace, three local landowners and a cameraman, drove to the mouth of the Dilava river, and met with villager heads from Hisiu, Avabadina, and also checked the driftwood berms at the junction of the river and the beach.

A thorough inspection of the area, and interviews with local fishermen found no evidence whatsoever of any fishkills. While villagers expressed their concerns over lack of information, water, or other assistance, they denied any fish kills.

The villagers revealed that Tolukuma Gold Mines had not contacted them at any stage to date. One local villager had walked to the TGM base at Veimauri to ask for information, found no one present who could answer his questions and returned the next day to be told not to drink the water from the river. There had been no water or food deliveries to any of the villages visited by the investigation team on this day.

Background to Mine and Environmental/Social Problems

The Tolukuma mine dumps its mine waste directly into the Angabanga/Auga river. The waste dumping is expected to 'obliterate' fish and other freshwater river life.

The Environment Plan for Tolukuma "Mine Induced Impacts on the River system" is by Natural Systems Research with David Ballach & Associates and is written for Dome Resources in November 1993

It states that:

"Impacts can be expected to occur from:
solids derived from construction activities, and tailings discharge and waste rock dumping operations
Cyanide contained in tailing discharge
Heavy metals associated with the tailings discharge" 21
Before the mine started the Auga/Angabanga rivers were extremely clear containing very low suspended solids even during the wet season.

Tailing dumping is 50,000 tonnes per year. Waste rock dumping adds an extra 50,000 tonnes of which the company estimates approximately 50% will enter into the river system. 22

Toxic Metals

Tailings are expected to contain significant quantities of As, Pb, Zn, Hg and after cyanide CIP circuit Fe, Cu, Zn, As, Ni, Hg.

The waste rock is high in As, Sb, and Bi, Se, Pb, S, Tl, Cd, Hg.

The waste dumping is expected to create heavy levels of metals throughout the 'mixing zone', that is approximately 35 kilometres of river that will suffer from toxic metal concentrations above the Papua New Guinea water standards.

The table below is for 'filterable metal concentrations'. The expected discharge into the river is calculated in the report on non-cyanide detoxified tailings: 23

Metal Liquor Analysis PNG Water Quality Standard

Hg 0.0754 0.0002
As 1.23 0.05
Cu 7.6 1
Cd 0.06 0.01
Co 0.405 Lod
Ni 1.17 1.0
Cr 0.052 0.05 as hexavalent Cr
Zn 13.4 5.0
Pb 0.01 0.005
Se 0.041 0.01
Ag 8.2 0.05

The waste discharged by the mine contains metals at levels significantly above the acceptable amounts under PNG law. The mine uses the river to dilute these levels so that at some point down the river they are "acceptable". T o do this the report estimates that the waste will be diluted by factors of 1:1462 & 1:4022. 1:1462 is "conservative estimate of" dilution at Yaifu, approximately 35 km downstream of discharge.

And that is all the discussion of the impact of heavy metals in the mine's environment plan. There is no more discussion of the impact of the metals on fish, humans etc. There is no acknowledgement of bioaccumulation. There is no recognition of the precautionary principle.

This level of analysis would be totally unacceptable in Australia or another western country. Any further analysis of the waste dumping impacts would inevitably conclude that dumping mine waste into a river is not an acceptable practice. The waste contains large quantities of toxic, persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals. The waste could reasonably be expected to have a long term and potentially irreversible impact on the environment.

There are numerous international standards that if applied would mean that Dome Resources should be required not to put the waste into the river. This practice is simply unacceptable in the OECD countries which companies like Dome are based in.

Direct discharge of the large quantities of long lived persistent, toxic and/or bio-accumulative chemicals in waste from Tolukuma into PNG river systems cannot be justified. There is more than sufficient evidence that this has the potential to cause long term or irreversible damage.

Look here for details of the Precautionary Principle and how it is applied around the world.

Cyanide

"an estimate of the likely cyanide concentration at Yaifu when detoxified tailing is discharged …… Assuming a WAD CN concentration in the trailing liquor of 13 mg/L and a dilution ratio of 1:2700for 90% exceedence flows at Yaifu, a WAD CN value of 5 lg/L can be expected due to dilution" 24

The plan does not consider cyanide break down products. Metal cyanide complexes will almost certainly be present in the discharge as well as other cyanide break down chemicals.

These chemicals can persist in the environment for a longer time than cyanide and need to be considered in any assessment of the environmental impact of a mine. 25

Sediment

Waste from the mine will also have a major impact on the rivers because of the mud, sand and gravel it will add to the system.

"During both the construction and operational phase of mining, significant sediment deposition is expected to occur along the entire lengths of Irive and Iwu creeks immediately downstream of the mine site to their confluences with the Auga River, with significant aggradation of stream beds. In addition, temporary deposition of sediment during flood recessions and low flow regimes is expected to occur in the Auga River as far downstream as the Angabanga River confluence. The resulting high sediment deposition rates are expected to cause obliterative impacts on the fish habitats and food resources of these sediment-impacted reaches." 26

The distance along the Auga river to Angabanga River is approximately thirty kilometres.

"Frog tadpole populations occuring in Irive and Iwu creeks are expected to be eliminated by in-stream sedimentation and elevated TSS concentrations. However …" the report hopes that the animals will still live in tributaries. 27 Landowners reports from March and April 2000 indicate that frogs are not being seen by people from the area.

The mine is also expected to have a significant impact on people and their livelihoods.

"In the floodplain mainstream reach of the Angabanga river, moderate to minor impacts on the primary production are expected in the long term resulting in decreases in the standing crops of benthic algae, diatoms and macrophytes …" 28

Throughout this section of the report that estimates the social and environmental impacts of the mine there is no mention of heavy metals, their toxic effects or accumulation of the metals in fish and other life.

Press Releases

Tolukuma Cyanide Spill Highlights Environmental Double Standards

Yet again Papua New Guinea people and their environment have suffered as a result of an Australian company's bad mining. The cyanide spill from Tolukuma highlights this company's disregard for the PNG people and their environment.

Tolukuma also dumps poisonous mine waste directly into the Angabanga River in PNG. No Australian company is allowed to do this at home. The mine is permitted to kill seven kilometres of river.

"The mine has had a major impact on the people's social and environmental life," said Billie Strange, Auga Dilava Development Association chairperson and principal landowner from the spill site.

"For seven kilometres from the mine outfall, river life has been destroyed. No adequate course of action from the Government or from Tolukuma Gold Mine has been taken. People's demands for compensation are not being addressed. Losses include food and water sources, cultural and commercial uses of the river, disappearance of large, rare, edible frogs and recourse to favourite places during the dry season," he said.

The Dilava Yaloge Landowners' Association chairman, Daniel Mona, said:

"The Tolukuma Gold Mine needs to dramatically upgrade its safety standards. The Government and Civil Aviation Office must also revise the mine's safety requirements. The mine's aircraft must not fly over people and villages any more."

"The Dilava Yaloge people have received no substantial benefit from the mine since it started production in 1995," Mr. Mona concluded.

The chairmen of the two associations want an independent scientific assessment conducted on the spill site. They are not reassured by the latest statements on the issue by the TGM Company and by the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

The PNG NGO Environmental Watch Group (NEWG) is deeply concerned by the inconsistencies and qualified statements of the company and the PNG Government today.

"No detailed information has ever been released. We are being asked to take all these statements on trust alone," said spokesperson, Ursula Rakova of NEWG.

No Safe Water - Cyanide Spill Impacts Thousands

A continuing investigation into the Tolukuma cyanide spill by local landowners, the PNG Non-Government Environmental Watch Group (NEWG), Greenpeace and the Mineral Policy Institute is revealing a total lack of information on health and safety. Villages are not being informed about cyanide effects just 40 kilometres downstream of last week's spill.

Relief action is being demanded of the Tolukuma Gold Mining Company and the PNG Government. People all along the affected rivers are frightened to touch the water. They are suffering from lack of food, drinking and cooking water. Villagers say that relief supplies to date by the company have been grossly inadequate.

"The villagers are extremely scared" said Wep Kanawi, NEWG spokesperson. "Only one village, Inaina, tells us they are getting fifty litres of water per day, which is shared by one hundred and fifty people. Nearly 4000 people live twenty kilometers downstream of Inaina and have received nothing, not even a warning not to drink the water."

Promises by the government and the mining company to deliver large water tanks have not yet been met. Dome would never get away with this behavior in Australia. The cyanide spill has highlighted the problems with mining in PNG.

"Once again, this disaster shows that the overseas mining industry is running out of control operations in PNG," continued Mr Kanawi.

"The industry is proposing a mining code of conduct. This proposed remedial action is totally inadequate, weak and voluntary. The code would make no real difference to present and future destructive mine operations."

"What is needed is government laws to impose internationally accepted safety, social and environmental standards," concluded Mr Kanawi.

"All around the world, the mining industry uses codes of conduct as an excuse to avoid government regulation," said Simon Divecha of the Mineral Policy Institute.

"The Australian code has not stopped the massive cyanide spill by Esmeralda in East Europe. Here in PNG BHP's world class Ok Tedi disaster and ongoing sea dumping at Lihir are not prevented by the Australian code."

"Australian companies should be bound by Australian laws and the best international standards. It is totally unacceptable for the companies to continue to take advantage of PNG. The Australian government must act to stop these excesses" concluded Mr Divecha.

Letters
Mr. Miria Ume 24/3/00
Director of Civil Aviation
PO Box 684
BOROKO
National Capital District

Attn: Deputy Director
Flight Safety Regulations

Dear Sir,

Subject: NO FLY ZONE OVER TOLUKUMA

We the landholder representatives of Auga-Dilava Landowners Association wish to seek your permission in granting our independent scientific study team, and us access into the area in which Tolukuma Mining Company has dropped pellets of sodium cyanide into the Yolage area.

We are extremely concerned over the lack of independent audits and validation of the company's sponsored clean up. We are also concerned that detailed and appropriate testing is undertaken. Testing needs to look at the full range of the problems that can result from a cyanide spill. Such testing must include a full range of cyanide breakdown chemicals and metals cyanide complexes.

As landholder representatives we are not satisfied with the current response from the company. In particular we are concerned for our lands and our responsibility to care of our lands over a period of time. We feel that not granting us access to our customary lands, especially as we wish to assess for ourselves the impact of the contamination, is a denial of our human rights.

We therefore respectfully ask that you grant us access into the exclusion zone. We are urgently seeking your response in this matter as we feel our assessment of this situation during this time is critical.

Please consider and act promptly as we wish to access this area urgently.

Yours faithfully,
Mr. Billie Strange
Chairman & Spokesperson

April 5, 2000
Mr. Michael Silver
Managing Director
Dome Resources N.L.

Dear Mr. Silver:

We would like to extend our thanks to you and Mr. Hutt for meeting with us on the 4 April, 2000. We found our discussion enlightening and constructive, and hope to continue our communication on the unfortunate accident of 21 March 2000, as well as other issues regarding ongoing heavy metal and cyanide emissions to the Auga River.

We would also like to confirm our interest in your sampling results from the waterways downstream from the impact site. We would also like to confirm our commitment to send you a copy of our own analyses of the site and stream when they are complete.

Further to our discussion of Greenpeace's concerns regarding cyanide complexes and possible delayed impacts we enclose references to peer reviewed papers on the relevant chemistry.

Greenpeace maintains that for full confidence in the efficacy of the clean-up and the elimination of any future hazards from complexed cyanides, testing for likely complexes must be undertaken at the point of exposure for the bulk of the at-risk populations; that is at the villages which use the river water directly. (Inaina, Gabida and Hisiu in particular).

We sincerely hope the immediate hazard from this most recent accident has passed, and trust that the conclusion of Dome's decontamination effort will be thoroughly successful.

Yours sincerely,
Jeanne Moffat and Mark Oakwood
Chief Executive Officer and Campaigner
Greenpeace Australia

Mr Hutt
Director and Company Secretary
Dome Resources N.L.
13 April 2000

Dear Mr Hutt,

Further to our meeting on the 4 April, 2000, I am writing to inform you of the results of testing undertaken by Greenpeace at and near to the 'spill' of cyanide pellets from a helicopter travelling to Dome Resources' Tolukuma mine, north of Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea.

These results are also being made available to the affected landowners, NGOs and Government ministries in PNG. We look forward to receiving the results of sampling undertaken by your company, which I understand, will be made available to us on Monday.

Our team took samples from the spill site, then continued sampling further downstream to more comprehensively track the flow of the contamination.

The full results as received from the independent laboratory are attached. The results show:

· Cyanide contamination (2800ppm) was found on soil surface at the spill. Levels as high as this can be fatal to humans if ingested.

· Cyanide levels decreased away from the impact site, but sediment from the creek 30m downstream still had levels of 5.4ppm. These levels are 25 times the United States of America drinking water standards (200ppb).

Samples taken at the closest large population (Inaia), 15km downstream showed no detectable levels of cyanide above 50ppb.

These figures provide Greenpeace with some assurance that there is no immediate threat to the nearby community. However given that:

· The high level of cyanide contamination at the spill site is indicative of an incomplete clean up;

· There are discrepancies between the information provided to the public regarding the impact sites proximity to the nearest creek, (ie 20 metres not 50 metres);

- the limited nature of our sampling (three samples on only one day) cannot provide the total assurance required by local communities.

Greenpeace is requesting that Dome Resources make a clear public commitment to:

1. A comprehensive testing program, with regular samples taken at all major villages to the mouth of the river, for at least the next four weeks. (This program to be at the company's expense, and the results made available to the PNG public.)

2. Sufficient alternate water supplies to ALL villages down to the mouth of the river.

We look forward to meeting with you on Monday and analysing the results from your own sampling.

Yours sincerely,
Jeanne Moffat and Arlene Griffin
Chief Executive Officer and Pacific Project Coordinator
Greenpeace Australia-Pacific

References
1 Dome Resources, "Dome Cyanide Recovery Completed", Press Release, 24 March 2000. back to text

2 GM Laboratories, "Analysis Report", 10 April 2000. back to text

3 Tolukuma Gold project environmental plan, 1993, page 80. back to text

4 Robyn Sela, "PNG has no laws to govern transportation of chemicals", PNG Post Courier, 27 March 2000. back to text

5 Natural Systems Research and David Ballach & Associates, "Mine Induced Impacts on the River system", Dome Resources, November 1993; page 17. back to text

6 ibid, page 27. back to text

7 ibid, page 28, back to text

8 PNG NGO Environmental Watch Group (NEWG), "Tolukuma Cyanide Spill Highlights Environmental Double Standards", Press Release, 26 March 2000 back to text

9 ibid back to text

10 pers. comm. Dr R. Braun 30 May 2000 back to text

11 pers. Comm. Ms K Isaacs, Minerals Council of Australia, 5 July 2000 back to text

12 Ursula Rakova, "Recommendations on Mining - Tolukuma Report", email, Environmental Law Centre PNG, 4 July 2000 back to text

13 ibid back to text

14 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) with the assistance of International Council on Metals And the Environment (ICME), "A Workshop on Industry Codes of Practice: Cyanide Management", Report, 21 June 2000, page 15 back to text

15 See for example: Mining Monitor Vol 1 no. 1 "Forum Code Of Conduct: Help Or Hindrance?", Mineral Policy Institute, February 1996 and Mining Monitor Vol 3 no. 1 "Solomon Is. Gold Ridge", Mineral Policy Institute, April 1998, page 9 back to text

16 NSW Greens, "Mining Amendment (Cyanide Leaching) Bill 2000", April 2000 back to text

17 Robert Moran, "Cyanide Uncertainties, Observations on the Chemistry, Toxicity, and Analysis of Cyanide in Mining-Related Waters", Mineral Policy Center, September 1999 back to text

18 op cit GM Laboratories back to text

19 Hon Herowa Agiwa, MP, "Tolukuma (Gold Mine) Sodium Cyanide Spill Incident", Ministry of Environment and Conservation, Office of the Minister, 26 March 2000 back to text

20 op cit GM Laboratories back to text

21 op cit Natural Systems Research et al; page1 back to text

22 ibid page 7 back to text

23 ibid page 14 back to text

24 ibid page 15 back to text

25 op cit Robert Moran back to text

26 op cit Natural Systems Research et al, page 17 (our emphasis) back to text

27 ibid page 27 (our emphasis) back to text

28 ibid page 28 back to text

For more information, please contact:

Techa Beaumont
Executive Director

Workphone: +61 2 9557 9019
Mobile: +61 (0) 409 318 406

Created: 01 Jan 1970 | Last updated: 26 Mar 2000

Print this page

Email to a friend Return to top

	Print this page
	Email to a friend

E-Bulletin

Subscribe yourself to our email bulletin for monthly updates.


more »

Support Us

Communities and the environment impacted by the mining industry need your financial support! more »

Volunteer

Be part of the solution - volunteer with us! more »

| |

Mineral Policy Institute
PO Box 435
Katoomba NSW 2780 Australia
Phone: +61 (2) 9011 6884 | Email: mpi@mpi.org.au