Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
developing world often operate under much less scrutiny. According
to the EML 2006 Annual Report, there was a major environmental
incident involving a pipeline failure along a section of the Toko tailings
dam pipeline. This incident resulted in the coverage of a 30 meter by 30
meter residential compound with industrial waste (Emperor Mines Ltd.
2006). During our study, one resident explained his concern about the
lack of community knowledge of the risks posed by mining wastes: “At
times we have cyanide spillages into the river. Because of the lack
of knowledge in the community, at these times that the fi sh are dead
in the river, we go out there and bring it and cook it and eat it, because
we are not aware of that” (Romeo Kivi, personal communication, July
6, 2007).
As early as 1981, a United Nations Environmental and Social Com-
mission for Asia and the Pacifi c (ESCAP) report recommended that until
the mining company at the time, EML, could develop a “satisfactory
program for monitoring their environmental impact,” their lease should
not be renewed (Macdonald 2004). Later, in 2003 EML claimed that it
could not afford to supply treated drinking water without government
funding (Macdonald 2004). However, according to a representative from
the Ministry of Health, the ministry tried on several occasions to put in
a publicly treated water supply, but the company would not permit them
to do so on their privately owned land (Timothy Young, personal com-
munication, August 9, 2007). Following a formal request from the Fiji
Mine Workers Union (FMWU) and the Citizens Constitutional Forum
(CCF) in May 2003, the Oxfam Australian Community Aid Abroad
Mining Ombudsman conducted an investigation into the mining activities
at the Vatukoula Gold Mine the following November (Macdonald 2004).
The case report, published in July 2004, recommended that “an inde-
pendent audit of the occupational health and safety practices at the
Vatukoula mine site be undertaken” (Macdonald 2004). In addition, the
report recommended that independent environmental and social impact
assessments be undertaken and be released publicly, “in a transparent
and accountable manner” (Macdonald 2004). EML did not respond to
the requests for comment on the 2004 report or to the recommendations
the report set forth (Oxfam Australia 2006). The Mining Ombudsman
returned to the site in 2005 to conduct a follow-up investigation and
Gender Impact Assessment (GIA). Mine workers reported that newer
mine management had taken some steps to improve safety, specifi cally
by installing a new ventilation shaft. However, workers maintained
that underground conditions were “very poor, with an intensely hot and
