Roșia Montană is Europe's largest gold mine
It is set to extract 314 tonnes of gold and 1,500 tonnes of silver over a 16-year period. It will destroy four mountain tops, force the relocation of hundreds of families, and leave behind a lake containing
215 million cubic metres of water contaminated with poisonous cyanide.
In summation: Rosia Montana Gold Corporation (RMGC) will demolish three villages, four forested mountains, an ancient Roman mine and build a reservoir that will hold 215 million tons of highly toxic cyanide waste. After 16 years the investors will depart, leaving the hapless Romanian government with a toxic wasteland that will be impossible to clean up. The project is shortlisted as one of the 7 most endangered cultural heritage locations in Europe.
Although cyanide is used in Scandinavian mines (where small quantities are used in sealed containers) nothing on this scale has been attempted before in Europe. The only comparable projects are in Canada, where the area in question is under permafrost, and in the Australian desert. RMGC will use forty tons of cyanide every day and the groundwater and air supplies of Transylvania, one of the most beautiful and pristine parts of Europe, will become so toxic that whole populations will be displaced.
RMGC have spent hundreds of millions of pounds in convincing the Romanians that the destruction of their ecosystem is in their own best interests. They have become the biggest advertising spender in the country, have promised local jobs (even though the local villages will disappear from the face of the earth) and billions of pounds in tax income (even though RMGC's contract with the government is a state secret). They also promise to protect the environment.
Victor Ponta was a vehement opponent of the project until he became Prime Minister last year. Now he's been converted and is pushing through a new mining law that will enable mining investors to seize whatever land they like. This flies in the face of the property rights that successive Romanian governments have been carefully building up since they overthrew Communism in 1989. [7]
What will be left behind? Open craters, moon-like terrain and cyanide waste. The Rosia Montana gold mine would use as much as 12,000 tons of cyanide annually over an exploration period of up to 16 years, according to Gabriel Resources. The cyanide would be stored in a 300-hectare pond in the Corna Valley in northern Romania, behind a dam 185-meters high.
The Canadian company argues that the technology is safe. Gabriel Resources and its subsidiary the Rosia Montana Gold Corporation have stressed that cyanide is so heavily regulated in the European Union that its toxicity is effectively regulated out of the picture. Some level of cyanide has been deemed to be acceptable. In 2010, the European Commission declined to impose an EU-wide ban on cyanide because it deemed the existing regulatory regime to be sufficient.
EU requirements on cyanide are stringent. They came about partly as a direct result of the 2000 Baia Mare cyanide spill, one of the worst ecological disasters since Chernobyl. Baia Mare is a village also in Romania. Since that disaster, Germany, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Turkey have banned cyanide in gold extraction.
Not everyone agrees with the “Save the Rosia Montana” protesters. Hundreds of people have gathered in Rosia Montana to support the mine’s development, arguing that the plan would create jobs and alleviate widespread poverty in the area. Thirty three workers had blockaded themselves into the Rosia Montana site 300 meters below ground; they threatened to go on hunger strike over fears that jobs would be lost if plans by Gabriel Resources’s plans for an open-cast gold mine did not go ahead.
So far, Romanian government officials have responded as they always do: they turn to where the wind blows. President Traian Basescu was once an avid supporter of the mine. After the protests, however, Basescu came out condemning it on environmental grounds. Given that the majority of Romanians are now opposed to it, Prime Minister Victor Ponta also announced an emergency procedure that would, he claimed, stop the project once and for all.
Gabriel Resources executives are livid. Since the protests broke out, many of its shareholders have sold off their shares, causing the company’s stock price to crash. As the company’s shares plummet, the company has now threatened to sue the Romanian government. Company executives claim that if members of the Romanian parliament vote against the mining project, they will “commence litigation for multiple breaches of international investment treaties for up to $4 billion.”
Ponta abandoned his emergency procedure. He has now set up a special parliamentary committee to debate the proposed mining project and to issue a report by October 20. A vote in both chambers of the Romanian parliament will follow. [8]
According to Mediafax, the EC does not currently work on a law to ban cyanide mining, considering that such a measure is not justified by environmental or health considerations, even though the MEPs requested in 2010 that a law was drafted in this regard by the end of the year.
"With regard to the introduction of a general ban on cyanide mining, the Commission considers that this is not justified by environmental and health considerations. The current legislation, particularly on the management of waste from extractive industries (Directive 2006/21/EC) includes precise and stringent requirements which should be able to ensure the proper safety level for the facilities from the extractive industry", shows the EC’s response, sent to MEDIAFAX.
In arguing its decision, the Commission indicates that the limit values for cyanide storage, set out by Directive 2006/21/EC, are among the lowest ones, these provisions being introduced after the accident from Baia Mare "so that the circumstances of the accident and its consequences can no longer reoccur".
Under such circumstances, the European executive reminds that guaranteeing the full application of the Directive by all the Member States is critical and that it will continue to take all measures necessary in this context.
"As far as we know, there are no proper alternatives to cyanide use in gold extraction. In most of the European deposits (underground deposits – editor’s note), gold is mixed with other metals, which means that a separation method is required. The general ban on cyanide mining would imply the closure of the existing mines which operate in accordance with stringent standards defined by Directive 21 of 2006, which would affect the number of jobs without bringing additional added value in environmental or health terms. A total ban on cyanide mining would, thus, imply the end of the European extractions and, as a consequence, an increase of the gold imports often made with countries with lower social and environmental standards", according to the EC.
The European executive explicitly shows that "a total ban on cyanide use at present would imply the closure of the existing mines, particularly in Sweden and Finland which have been operating safely for many years". [9]
Although cyanide is used in Scandinavian mines (where small quantities are used in sealed containers) nothing on this scale has been attempted before in Europe. The only comparable projects are in Canada, where the area in question is under permafrost, and in the Australian desert. RMGC will use forty tons of cyanide every day and the groundwater and air supplies of Transylvania, one of the most beautiful and pristine parts of Europe, will become so toxic that whole populations will be displaced.
RMGC have spent hundreds of millions of pounds in convincing the Romanians that the destruction of their ecosystem is in their own best interests. They have become the biggest advertising spender in the country, have promised local jobs (even though the local villages will disappear from the face of the earth) and billions of pounds in tax income (even though RMGC's contract with the government is a state secret). They also promise to protect the environment.
Victor Ponta was a vehement opponent of the project until he became Prime Minister last year. Now he's been converted and is pushing through a new mining law that will enable mining investors to seize whatever land they like. This flies in the face of the property rights that successive Romanian governments have been carefully building up since they overthrew Communism in 1989. [7]
What will be left behind? Open craters, moon-like terrain and cyanide waste. The Rosia Montana gold mine would use as much as 12,000 tons of cyanide annually over an exploration period of up to 16 years, according to Gabriel Resources. The cyanide would be stored in a 300-hectare pond in the Corna Valley in northern Romania, behind a dam 185-meters high.
The Canadian company argues that the technology is safe. Gabriel Resources and its subsidiary the Rosia Montana Gold Corporation have stressed that cyanide is so heavily regulated in the European Union that its toxicity is effectively regulated out of the picture. Some level of cyanide has been deemed to be acceptable. In 2010, the European Commission declined to impose an EU-wide ban on cyanide because it deemed the existing regulatory regime to be sufficient.
EU requirements on cyanide are stringent. They came about partly as a direct result of the 2000 Baia Mare cyanide spill, one of the worst ecological disasters since Chernobyl. Baia Mare is a village also in Romania. Since that disaster, Germany, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Turkey have banned cyanide in gold extraction.
Not everyone agrees with the “Save the Rosia Montana” protesters. Hundreds of people have gathered in Rosia Montana to support the mine’s development, arguing that the plan would create jobs and alleviate widespread poverty in the area. Thirty three workers had blockaded themselves into the Rosia Montana site 300 meters below ground; they threatened to go on hunger strike over fears that jobs would be lost if plans by Gabriel Resources’s plans for an open-cast gold mine did not go ahead.
So far, Romanian government officials have responded as they always do: they turn to where the wind blows. President Traian Basescu was once an avid supporter of the mine. After the protests, however, Basescu came out condemning it on environmental grounds. Given that the majority of Romanians are now opposed to it, Prime Minister Victor Ponta also announced an emergency procedure that would, he claimed, stop the project once and for all.
Gabriel Resources executives are livid. Since the protests broke out, many of its shareholders have sold off their shares, causing the company’s stock price to crash. As the company’s shares plummet, the company has now threatened to sue the Romanian government. Company executives claim that if members of the Romanian parliament vote against the mining project, they will “commence litigation for multiple breaches of international investment treaties for up to $4 billion.”
Ponta abandoned his emergency procedure. He has now set up a special parliamentary committee to debate the proposed mining project and to issue a report by October 20. A vote in both chambers of the Romanian parliament will follow. [8]
According to Mediafax, the EC does not currently work on a law to ban cyanide mining, considering that such a measure is not justified by environmental or health considerations, even though the MEPs requested in 2010 that a law was drafted in this regard by the end of the year.
"With regard to the introduction of a general ban on cyanide mining, the Commission considers that this is not justified by environmental and health considerations. The current legislation, particularly on the management of waste from extractive industries (Directive 2006/21/EC) includes precise and stringent requirements which should be able to ensure the proper safety level for the facilities from the extractive industry", shows the EC’s response, sent to MEDIAFAX.
In arguing its decision, the Commission indicates that the limit values for cyanide storage, set out by Directive 2006/21/EC, are among the lowest ones, these provisions being introduced after the accident from Baia Mare "so that the circumstances of the accident and its consequences can no longer reoccur".
Under such circumstances, the European executive reminds that guaranteeing the full application of the Directive by all the Member States is critical and that it will continue to take all measures necessary in this context.
"As far as we know, there are no proper alternatives to cyanide use in gold extraction. In most of the European deposits (underground deposits – editor’s note), gold is mixed with other metals, which means that a separation method is required. The general ban on cyanide mining would imply the closure of the existing mines which operate in accordance with stringent standards defined by Directive 21 of 2006, which would affect the number of jobs without bringing additional added value in environmental or health terms. A total ban on cyanide mining would, thus, imply the end of the European extractions and, as a consequence, an increase of the gold imports often made with countries with lower social and environmental standards", according to the EC.
The European executive explicitly shows that "a total ban on cyanide use at present would imply the closure of the existing mines, particularly in Sweden and Finland which have been operating safely for many years". [9]
September 7, 2013 - Roșia Montană is a commune of Alba County in the Apuseni Mountains of western Transylvania, Romania. It is located in the Valea Roșiei, through which the Roșia River flows. The commune is composed of sixteen villages: Bălmoșești, Blidești, Bunta, Cărpiniș (Abrudkerpenyes), Coasta Henții, Corna (Szarvaspatak), Curături, Dăroaia, Gârda-Bărbulești, Gura Roșiei, Iacobești, Ignățești, Roșia Montană, Șoal, Țarina and Vârtop.
Rosia Montana has been a mining town since Romania was actually Roman. Before the socialist period, villagers were going into the mines themselves to search for gold, which they then sold to banks. Even today, they feel a sense of ownership over the precious resources hidden underground.
This region in the Apuseni Mountains is extraordinary for its rich biodiversity. With mining now halted, many people live off the land and from raising animals. Old people from Rosia say that no gold in the world can buy the peace the neighboring mountains offer them.
So when Gold Corporation began the process of buying up properties in the village (which it started doing in tandem to applying for necessary construction and exploitation permits), not everyone in the 3,000 strong village was happy. [6]
On top of that, there is local pride for the cultural value of the houses, churches and ancient mining galleries the village and nearby areas host. Rosia Montana is the oldest documented Romanian locality and has been considered for inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage list for its cultural and natural riches. [6] According to academician Alexandru Vulpe, President of the Archaeology and Historical Science Department of the Romanian Academy and director of the Institute of Archaeology, such an inclusion stands no chance of being accepted by UNESCO (and this idea is in his opinion "simply ridiculous") but could delay the project for another 10 years.
The state-run gold mine closed in late 2006 in advance of Romania's accession to the EU. Gabriel Resources of Canada plan to open a new mine. This has caused controversy on one hand over the extent to which remains of Roman mining would be preserved and over fears of a repeat of the cyanide pollution at Baia Mare and on the other, over the benefits that mining would bring to this poor and underdeveloped part of the country.
The campaign against mining at Roșia Montană was one of the largest campaigns over a non-political cause in the last 20 years in Romania. A plethora of organizations spoke out against the project, from Greenpeace to the Romanian Academy, while groups representing the local community expressed support for the project. In late 2009, the Romanian government announced it made the project a priority, recognising the economic benefits of the mining operation, but it continues to review the environmental impact assessment initially filed in 2004. [1]
A majority of Romanians remain opposed to the prospect of mining gold with cyanide. They arguably have reason for concern. A cyanide accident in the year 2000 in the northern Romanian city of Baia Mare occurred after days of rainfall led a reservoir to burst. In the aftermath, 100,000 tons of mud containing cyanide and heavy metals flowed into the Tisza and Danube rivers, resulting in one of the most serious environmental catastrophes in European history.
"The mining industry is very dirty, they will use tonnes of dynamite each day.
Think of the noise, the toxicity - life here is going to be impossible"
The Transylvanian town of Rosia Montana has been at the centre of a long-running debate in Romania, as politicians consider whether to give the green light to a large opencast gold mine in the region.
Romania is one of the EU's poorest nations and unemployment is high, so the promise of foreign investors wanting to re-open the town's communist-era mine appears to be a much needed lifeline.
Rosia Montana Gold Corporation (RMGC) is the company behind the project, which was first mooted back in the mid-1990s. It says the new mine could benefit the Romanian economy to the tune of $19bn (£12bn) and create thousands of jobs.
It is an enticing proposal for a country which was bailed out by the IMF as recently as 2009. Yet over a decade on, politicians continue to drag their feet on whether to give the project the green light, or not.
"If this project starts, life is over for me," says Sorin Jorca, a Rosia Montana local, speaking to the BBC's Crossing Continents programme.
Standing in his exquisite rose garden, he tells me about everything he is set to lose.
"I would lose my house, the graves of my parents, the church, and the heritage that belongs to all of us.
"The mining industry is very dirty, they will use tonnes of dynamite each day. Think of the noise, the toxicity - life here is going to be impossible," he says.
Mr Jorca has set up an opposition group - The Rosia Montana Cultural Foundation - and is making the most of being able to say "No" in this one-time communist state.
His organisation is part of a broader church of international NGOs and action groups across Romania, which to date have managed to stall the project.
RMGC is 75% owned and funded by Gabriel Resources - a Canadian mining company. The Romanian government owns the remaining 25% stake
Many within the country worry that to give the go-ahead to the project would be to sign away Romania's most valuable natural asset - and its ancient heritage.
The fear of corruption and a lack of faith in the Romanian political system has united many opponents of the Rosia Montana project. The government's reluctance to publish the contract it signed with RMGC has exacerbated suspicions there is something to hide.
Fear of a political fallout from giving the mine the go-ahead is high among the country's politicians, despite the economic benefits the mine might bring.
The former finance minister and one time employee of RMGC Sebastian Vladescu told Tessa Dunlop, a BBC journalist, that when he was in government, many politicians, including President Traian Basescu, were in favour of the project. [2]
The Hypocrisy of the Romanian Government:
Why the Rosia Montana project must be stopped!
The following article was written by Raluca Besliu on May 29, 2013 and originally published on the website of 'Politics in Spires' from the University of Cambridge
Whilst in opposition to the then liberal government, current Romanian Prime Minister Victor Ponta and his Social Liberal Union (USL), an alliance of several political parties, vehemently protested against the Rosia Montana mining project, which was supported by President Traian Basescu and his Democratic Liberal Party (PDL). According to Gabriel Resources Ltd., the Canadian company behind the scheme, the plan for the project is to dig up the estimated 800-4,000 tons of gold squirreled away in Rosia Montana using an astonishing amount of 40 tons of cyanide per day.
Gold cyanidation is a highly controversial practice used to leach gold from extracted material that has been banned in various countries as a result of the fact that even small amounts of cyanide are poisonous for the environment and human health. The enormous daily quantity of cyanide to be used during the Rosia Montana mining project would therefore produce a gruesome and irreversible environmental destruction in area. Exploiting the mine would mean destroying four forested mountains, contaminating multiple rivers, devastating several fragile ecosystems and destroying over 900 buildings. It would also require the damming up of one end of the Corna valley to hold 250 million tons of cyanide-laced waste generated by the gold leaching.
On the 5th of September 2011, in a blog post entitled “Rosia Montana-USL’s position,” the then opposition leader Ponta shared 7 key points why the Coalition was against the Canadian project in its proposed format and called for additional safeguards. These included the needs to make public and transparent the clauses of the agreement signed with RMGC, to respect the right to property and ensure that no one gets expropriated in Rosia Montana, and the need to conduct an independent analysis of the project’s overall costs and benefits for Romania. Ponta explicitly stated in his blog post that Gabriel Resources had “spread erroneous and constantly changing public messages” and that President Basescu had also misinformed the population about the mining project.
Since gaining power, the Prime Minister and USL have radically changed their position. At the present moment, Prime Minister Ponta and his fellow USL members seem to be even more willing than the previous government to bend the law of Romania, including on many of the issues that they once considered inviolable, in order ensure the project goes ahead.
Dominating in the Parliament and presiding over the government, USL has taken multiple measures to demonstrate its lack of political consistency on the matter. The first sign after the election that the new USL government intended to pursue the Rosia Montana project was its decision to divide up Minvest SA Deva, a state-owned company specializing in mining, extraction, processing, and export of gold-silver and copper, and create a new part, called Minvest Rosia Montana. This new company was established to handle the Rosia Montana project and manage its afferent patrimony – consisting of the company’s package of shares in the mining project and the liabilities resulting from loans it has taken in order to participate in the project.
The Romanian state will be a direct shareholder in the newly-created company, through the Department for infrastructure projects and foreign investment. However, Gabriel Resources would obtain 80 percent of the profits, with the Romanian government getting only 20 percent. Rosia Montana is the largest known gold deposit in Europe and the third largest in the world. Its value is estimated to be around at around $20.8 billion, representing a huge possible endowment for Romania but one the country is likely to see little of. Even if Minvest Rosia Montana starts renegotiating the profit percentage, it is unlikely that the Canadian company, which has to satisfy its stakeholders, will be willing to allow the Romanian government a substantially larger share of the profit.
In addition, according to the Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, after the environmental clean-up costs and the repayment of loans taken out by Minvest from Gabriel Resources, the project would generate nowhere near the $4 billion claimed by RMGC, but instead bring “nothing to the region but a long term sentence to poverty.” This conclusion dismantles the myth that the mining project would bring economic benefits, much hailed by both the company and the Romanian government. Simply put, Romania has nothing to gain from this project. The country would effectively just be offering its highly valuable gold resources in exchange for hundreds of thousands of tons of cyanide, which would destroy one of its most beautiful and ecologically diverse regions forever and transform it into a toxic wasteland.
Apart from creating Minvest Rosia Montana, the Romanian government has not released any public information about its intentions at Rosia Montana since the beginning of 2013, maintaining the same level of secrecy as the previous government, which it once so ardently criticized. For instance, the Committee for Technical Analysis, responsible for assessing the environmental impact of the Canadian project, restarted its operations in April 2013 for the first time since November 2011 but the Ministry of the Environment failed to publicly announce this development. The information only became available because Gabriel Resources published the information in a report for its investors. Furthermore, Gabriel Resources recently announced that, on April 22, 2013, it had obtained a new planning certificate for the project, which the Romanian government has also failed to disclose.
Similarly, the Romanian government has apparently demanded additional financial guarantees from the company for the post-exploitation environmental restoration process in order to demonstrate their conformity to existing EU standards, but has not made any information on these demands available to the general public. Even if these unknown guarantees were to be accepted, however, restoration is but a euphemism in this case given the fact that the environmental damage caused to the Rosia Montana region would be irreversible. It would be impossible to restore the four mountains that its operations would destroy, purify the cyanide contaminated-rivers or revive the biodiversity destroyed in the long-term exploitation process. It would appear, therefore, that the demand for additional financial guarantees is more a ploy to convince the Romanian general public of the good intentions of Gabriel Resources – and thus persuade them that it should be allowed to start mining – than a trustworthy pledge for Rosia Montana’s rehabilitation.
There are other, equally concerning, signs of the government’s plans for Rosia Montana. The Romanian Parliament, also dominated by USL, is currently debating the modification of the 2003 Mining Law and considering amendments which would facilitate important erosion of citizens’ rights, particularly by allowing foreign companies to expropriate the lands and houses of Romanian citizens on behalf of the Romanian government. This clause goes against article 44(3) of the Romanian Constitution. This law would also facilitate the approval of other mining projects, including dangerous cyanide-based ones, like the RMGC-led one, by depriving citizens of their right to protest by remaining on their lands.
With the Romanian government seemingly rushing to start the project, the Canadian company is also increasingly impatient to get it going, after waiting for 16 years. So far, Gabriel Resources has spent more than $400 million, but has been constantly thwarted by the mentioned environmental concerns over its use of cyanide. However, it has been encouraged to be patient in its pursuit of the initiative by the fact that successive Romanian governments have indicated that they are happy to accept “its 19th century colonial operations, compared to […] modern gold mines” and are willing to tolerate the concomitant risks of contamination and environmental damage, deemed “alarming” by Victor Bostinaru, a member of the European Parliament.
While both the current and previous Romanian governments do not seem to mind their country being ripped off, the Romanian public has expressed its vehement opposition to the project. The Rosia Montana protest movement has grown to be the largest in Romania since the fall of Communism, taking place at the local, national and international level. During the January-February 2012 protests organized throughout the country, many Romanian protesters demanded that the Rosia Montana project be ceased. Moreover, in December 2012, the wide majority of residents of Alba, where Rosia Montana is situated, made a conscious decision to boycott a local referendum regarding the resumption of mining in the Apuseni Mountains and the gold mining exploitation at Rosia Montana. This implies that they do not want the Rosia Montana project to commence or mining in the Apuseni to be conducted under current circumstances.
The opponents of the Rosia Montana project are leading a historic battle that will play a decisive role in shaping not only the prospects for Romania and the extraction of its natural resources, but of all countries’ relations with international corporations and the future of international mining. In the context of the overwhelming general public and civil society opposition and its 2011 own position on the Rosia Montana project, the current government must desist from its plans for Rosia Montana. Its members should remember that they are only in power as a result of the discontent of the population with the previous government, on issues that included Rosia Montana, and that they can be removed as well, if they fail in their duty to govern according to their mandate.
Raluca Besliu is a Masters student in Refugees and Forced Migration Studies at Oxford.
According to an article published by 'Financial Post', Gabriel Resources Ltd may soon finally get the OKAY to go ahead building Europe's biggest gold mine.
After the project had been on halt for many years because of vicious opposition from anti-mining activists and the successive Romanian governments being reluctant to give the go-ahead amid such heated environment, the Romanian government approved a draft law last week that sets out a course for development of the mine, and which now needs to be approved by parliament.
Current Prime Minister Victor Ponta (who is married to Dacaina Sarbu, Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals) won a convincing victory in last year’s election, and has majority control over parliament which has allowed him to be far more aggressive than his predecessors in approving large capital projects that can boost the economy. One of his priorities is Rosia Montana.
“What gives us the comfort this is real and the process will happen is that we are in the early term of a new parliament that has a significant majority of the population behind them,” Gabriel chief executive Jonathan Henry said in an interview. “And therefore, they can actually get things done.”
If the project is ultimately approved, the years of delays will have been well worth it for Gabriel. Rosia Montana has more than 17 million ounces of gold resources, including 10.1 million ounces of reserves. Gabriel would hold 75% of the mine, according to the draft law, with the state holding the balance. It is the largest gold resource on the continent.
Gabriel has already poured an estimated US$550-million into Rosia Montana, according to BMO analyst John Hayes. “The introduction of the law demonstrates that the government is engaged on the project,” he wrote in a note. [3]
In early September 2013, Romania witnesses the largest environmental protests in its post-Communist history. Across the country, thousands of people have taken to the streets in protest of Europe's largest gold mine.
"They take our gold, and we get cyanide," they shout. Demonstrators that range from environmentalists to parents with their children, students, poorly clad pensioners, and well-off looking middle class citizens have been protesting in Bucharest for days now. Their signs read: "Treason in exchange for a bit of money!" "Culture instead of cyanide!"
These people fear that the use of poisonous substances in the Rosia Montana mining project will cause severe damage. Activists have blocked a central square in Bucharest. The protests are to continue for the next week.
Romanian environmental organizations called the protests after the government gave the go-ahead to the project last week. The Rosia Montana gold mine, Europe's largest, had been on hold for the past 14 years. It now awaits approval from parliament, which is set to vote on the project later this month.
President Traian Basescu, who in the past has openly supported the project, said this week that the protests were "justified." He even said that calling a referendum on the project was being considered.
Earlier, Prime Minister Victor Ponta gave a similar statement: As the head of the government, Ponta said he was bound to support the project. On a personal level, however, the prime minister said he was against the operation and that he would vote against it in parliament.
The Romanian-Canadian Firm Rosia Montana Gold Corporation (RMGC) is looking to extract some 300 tons of gold and 1600 tons of silver from the mine, located in northern Romania. The process includes the use of cyanide, one of the main sources of anger among protesters.
The company says it looks to begin operations by 2016, should it receive parliamentary approval. According to estimates, the mine could produce a profit of $2.3 billion (1.74 billion euros).
The RMGC's chief investors include the American billionaires John Paulson and Thomas Kaplan as well as the Israeli diamond mogul Beny Steinmetz. In spite of lacking approval for the project, the company has already invested hundreds of millions of dollars, and a significant chunk of Rosia Montana's population has already been resettled. Some residents, however, continue to refuse to sell their property and homes to RMGC.
For the mining to go forward, the valley surrounding the village of Rosia Montana must be cleared completely to create room for the enormous reservoirs intended to store waste water and mud that contain cyanide and heavy metals. Environmental activists fear that the groundwater could be contaminated along the way, though. Furthermore, they warn that constant explosions in the area could lead the reservoir walls to collapse.
"This project is a huge environmental mess," said Eugen David, a farmer from Rosia Montana and head of the NGO Alburnus Maior, which opposes the mining plans.
Ex-culture minister and Democratic Liberal Theodor Paleologu agrees, saying, "The project is technically dubious, the law behind it is against the constitution because it ignores property laws as well as the interests of the Romanian state, and it has corrupted many politicians."
It is, indeed, true that many Romanian politicians in recent years have done a surprising turnaround on the project, including head of state Victor Ponta, who, while a member of the opposition, was a vocal critic of the plans.
Rosia Montana Gold Corporation denies having bribed any politicians. However, the RMGC invested a great deal of money in a PR campaign in recent years intended to convince the Romanian public of the usefulness of the project as well as a purported lack of environmental concerns associated with it.
A cyanide accident in the year 2000 in the northern Romanian city of Baia Mare occurred after days of rainfall led a reservoir to burst. In the aftermath, 100,000 tons of mud containing cyanide and heavy metals flowed into the Tisza and Danube rivers, resulting in one of the most serious environmental catastrophes in European history.
Along with the residents in and around Baia Mare, Hungary emerged as a principal victim of that disaster. There, nearly all life was extinguished within several hundred kilometers of the Tisza.
Hungary fears that such a scenario could repeat itself, and its government has repeatedly issued protest against the Rosia Montana project. On Monday (02.09.2013), Budapest again called on the Romanian government to stop the project.
"Gold mining with the use of cyanide technology involves serious environmental risks, endangers groundwater and bodies of water as well as biodiversity, as the citizens of Romania and Hungary experienced first-hand during the Baia Mare catastrophe," Hungary's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement on the matter. [4]
A perch poisoned by cyanide lays on the bank of Tisa river, in Becej, some 120 km (74 miles) north of Belgrade, in Vojvodina province, Yugoslavia Saturday February 12, 2000. The deadly cyanide spill has killed huge numbers of fish in the Tisa river in Yugoslavia. The spill originated in Romania where a dam at the Baia Mare gold mine overflowed on January 30, causinig cyanide to pour into the Lapus and then to Samos river. From there, the polluted water ran west into neighboring Hungary. (Jaroslav Pap, File,/AP Photo) via: http://globalnews.ca/news/831675/protests-cyanide-concerns-may-halt-canadian-romania-gold-mine-project/
The 2000 Baia Mare cyanide spill
The 2000 Baia Mare cyanide spill was a leak of cyanide near Baia Mare, Romania, into the Someş River by the gold mining company Aurul, a joint-venture of the Australian company Esmeralda Exploration and the Romanian government.
The polluted waters eventually reached the Tisza and then the Danube, killing large numbers of fish in Hungary and Yugoslavia. The spill has been called the worst environmental disaster in Europe since the Chernobyl disaster.
On the night of January 30, 2000, a dam holding contaminated waters burst and 100,000 cubic metres of cyanide-contaminated water (containing an estimated 100 tonnes of cyanides) spilled over some farmland and then into the Someș river. Esmeralda Exploration blamed excessive snowfall for the dam failure.
After the spill, the Someș had cyanide concentrations of over 700 times the permitted levels. The Someș flows into the Tisza, Hungary's second largest river, which then flows into the Danube. The spill contaminated the drinking supplies of over 2.5 million Hungarians. In addition to cyanide, heavy metals were also washed into the river and they have a long-lasting negative impact on the environment.
Wildlife was particularly affected on the Tisza: on a stretch, virtually all living things were killed, and further south, in the Serbian section, 80% of the aquatic life was killed.
Large quantities of fish died due to the toxicity of cyanide in the waters of the rivers, affecting 62 species of fish, of which 20 are protected species. In Hungary, volunteers participated in removing the dead fish to prevent the disaster from spreading across the food chain, as other animals, such as foxes, otters and ospreys have died after eating contaminated fish.
After the cyanide entered the Danube, the large volume of the river's water diluted the cyanide, but in some sections it still remained as high as 20 to 50 times the allowed concentration.
Five weeks later, a spill of contaminated waters (this time with heavy metals) hit the region. A dyke burst in Baia Borş, Maramureş County and 20,000 cubic metres of zinc, lead and copper-contaminated water made its way into the Tisza.
A year later, another cyanide spill occurred in Romania, this time being a deliberate emptying of cyanide solutions into the Siret River.[
Brett Montgomery, the chairman of the mine operator, Esmeralda, denied responsibility, claiming that the damage of the spill has been "grossly exaggerated" and that the fish died in such numbers because of lack of oxygen due to the freezing of the river.
A spokesman for the company later claimed that media reports from Hungary and Serbia are politically motivated and the fish were killed by spills from industrial plants along the Tisza, due to the dynamite explosions used to break the ice locks on the river or simply due to the raw sewage pumped into the river.
The Hungarian government called the storing of cyanide next to a river madness and argued that the weather was not unprecedented. A European Union report on the disaster blamed the design faults at the mine.
In mid-February 2000, as the spill reached the Romanian section of the Danube, the Romanian government temporarily banned fishing and the usage of Danube water for drinking.
Two years after the spill, the ecosystem began to recover, but it was still far from its initial state, as the fishermen of Hungary claim that their catches in 2002 were only at a fifth of their original levels. [5]
The polluted waters eventually reached the Tisza and then the Danube, killing large numbers of fish in Hungary and Yugoslavia. The spill has been called the worst environmental disaster in Europe since the Chernobyl disaster.
On the night of January 30, 2000, a dam holding contaminated waters burst and 100,000 cubic metres of cyanide-contaminated water (containing an estimated 100 tonnes of cyanides) spilled over some farmland and then into the Someș river. Esmeralda Exploration blamed excessive snowfall for the dam failure.
After the spill, the Someș had cyanide concentrations of over 700 times the permitted levels. The Someș flows into the Tisza, Hungary's second largest river, which then flows into the Danube. The spill contaminated the drinking supplies of over 2.5 million Hungarians. In addition to cyanide, heavy metals were also washed into the river and they have a long-lasting negative impact on the environment.
Wildlife was particularly affected on the Tisza: on a stretch, virtually all living things were killed, and further south, in the Serbian section, 80% of the aquatic life was killed.
Large quantities of fish died due to the toxicity of cyanide in the waters of the rivers, affecting 62 species of fish, of which 20 are protected species. In Hungary, volunteers participated in removing the dead fish to prevent the disaster from spreading across the food chain, as other animals, such as foxes, otters and ospreys have died after eating contaminated fish.
After the cyanide entered the Danube, the large volume of the river's water diluted the cyanide, but in some sections it still remained as high as 20 to 50 times the allowed concentration.
Five weeks later, a spill of contaminated waters (this time with heavy metals) hit the region. A dyke burst in Baia Borş, Maramureş County and 20,000 cubic metres of zinc, lead and copper-contaminated water made its way into the Tisza.
A year later, another cyanide spill occurred in Romania, this time being a deliberate emptying of cyanide solutions into the Siret River.[
Brett Montgomery, the chairman of the mine operator, Esmeralda, denied responsibility, claiming that the damage of the spill has been "grossly exaggerated" and that the fish died in such numbers because of lack of oxygen due to the freezing of the river.
A spokesman for the company later claimed that media reports from Hungary and Serbia are politically motivated and the fish were killed by spills from industrial plants along the Tisza, due to the dynamite explosions used to break the ice locks on the river or simply due to the raw sewage pumped into the river.
The Hungarian government called the storing of cyanide next to a river madness and argued that the weather was not unprecedented. A European Union report on the disaster blamed the design faults at the mine.
In mid-February 2000, as the spill reached the Romanian section of the Danube, the Romanian government temporarily banned fishing and the usage of Danube water for drinking.
Two years after the spill, the ecosystem began to recover, but it was still far from its initial state, as the fishermen of Hungary claim that their catches in 2002 were only at a fifth of their original levels. [5]
If these protestors win against the Rosia Montana mining project – then what?
Go home or stay out on the streets,
armed with plastic bottle and bicycle pump?
...is the title of an article by Michael Bird, a UK journalist in Romania.
September 16, 2013 · by michaelbirdjournalist
An English version of an article on the Rosia Montana mining project, Romanian version here: http://www.contributors.ro/editorial/ce-se-intampla-daca-protestatarii-castiga-impotriva-proiectului-minier-de-la-rosia-montana-se-duc-acasa-sau-raman-pe-strazi-inarmati-cu-sticle-de-plastic-si-pompe-de-bicicleta/
On 8 September, the protest in Bucharest against the multibillion-dollar Rosia Montana gold-mining project in Transylvania was reaching the city’s central business district of Piata Victoriei, home of the Government assembly.
I raced to be at the head of the crowd to see how the 10,000-strong mass would react to facing the hub of their leaders. A few gendarmerie were creeping around the bushes in front of the building where the Cabinet meets. The main body of the protestors did not know which direction to take. Organisers on megaphones were telling the people to go to Obor – a shabby nexus of cheap and semi-legal markets. But when you have thousands of youngsters high on the confidence of the mass, it is hard to persuade them to walk four kilometres to a market that sells Turkish jeans, counterfeit cigarettes and fresh carp, when they have the seat of Government in their range. A bearded man about 30 years in age ran forward carrying a giant Romanian flag, hoping to lead a charge of some kind. The thin line of Gendarmerie were stunned. They could not form a cordon. He slipped through their grasp. More people followed him, breaking through the loose ranks, with nothing to stop them. The gendarmerie were scattered, frantic, moving from place to place, unsure of where to stand, looking no more fierce than a team of amateur volleyball players.
Around a hundred were standing in the space between a disorganised militia and the HQ of their elected representatives. Unsure of what to do. But knowing that, if there had been more of them, only a few hundred more, it would have been easy to storm the Government.
It made me realise that, here in Romania, power is nothing but a paper curtain drawn between the people and an elite. It takes a second to expose. So far this protest, without even trying, has managed to force a fracture in the leading coalition, by seeing National Liberal Party president Crin Antonescu taking a sympathetic line with the protestors – believing this to be in his own interests as a Presidential candidate in 2014 – and Prime Minister Victor Ponta flip-flopping between passion or dispassion for the project.
If in the UK or France, 20,000 people took to the streets, it would be a footnote, even in Liberation or The Guardian, which Hollande or Cameron could ignore, but in Romania, the Government quakes.
This is partly due to the non-violence. When protestors break apart the city’s paving stones and throw rocks at the gendarmerie, power in Romania knows how to react – with a baton to the face and belly. When protestors collect on the same streets and put those same rocks in a plastic bottle and shake them like a pair of maracas, the Government teeters on the brink of self-destruction.
But it is too early to call this a victory. Even if the Government agrees to postpone the project, the protestors know that a verbal agreement in Romania is worth nothing – they will not stop until the cancellation of the gold mine is written in blood.
But what happens to a community of thousands of dissident youth? The organisers have drawn up a shopping list of demands which the protestors repeated to me ad verbatim. They want to remove the mono-industrial status of Rosia Montana, which reserves the area only for ore mining, and make it open for business. To ensure the welfare and prosperity of the Rosia Montana people should be the responsibility of every protestor – and this needs to be more than buying a square metre of land on a hill in a place they will never visit. They also want to make Rosia Montana a UNESCO heritage site to protect it from future exploitation – but UNESCO may argue this is too much of a politically motivated decision for them to take.
Many protestors believe shale gas exploration in Romania is the next target. With big energy names like Chevron spiking the ground, pumping in water and cracking the minerals to release energy, this is a controversial business which can poison drinking supplies – but some protestors argue shale gas does not have the “romance” of Rosia Montana. There is no gold or cyanide. It does not glitter or kill. It is only dirty water and grey rock.
Will this be the base of a new political movement? With many protestors calling for party leaders to resign, it may be possible that Rosia Montana could break apart the current coalition. But another election would only see a rearrangement of positions in a tired elite, rather than a new political force. Some political faces on the protest told me they were reluctant to stand for election right now – if their campaign invokes their part in the downfall of Rosia Montana, the protestors will reject them as opportunistic. It was our protest, they will state as a collective, not yours.
One option would be a new political network of independents standing for European Parliamentary Elections in 2014 – a slate of candidates who have the spirit of the protest, but do not exploit its achievements as their own. But this requires leadership and organisation. Getting 20,000 people on the streets is easier than getting them to ballot box.
Right now the protestors know what they don’t like – they are just not sure what they do like. This is a start. If they win, they may go back home to work or study or just to get some sleep.
But the next time the nation’s leaders try to pass a similar law, they will be back and they will be pissed. Because those demonstrating are decisive, well-informed and without fear – three qualities the Romanian leadership is not showing.
“They know they can’t fuck with us again,” one protestor told me, “that is enough for now.”
Link to original link
The love of gold and the fear of dogs
Following the death of little Ionut, the four-year-old boy, who has been supposedly mauled to death by 5 stray dogs on a private, fenced property, more than 1 km away from the park where the grand mother had lost sight of him and his older brother, was followed by a campaign without precedent in Romania, and which, led mainly by Antena 3, hides INCREDIBLE POLITICAL STAKES AND INTERESTS! A campaign with an unimaginable visual and psychological pressure! ...A mediatic destruction which was never met before!
A continuous and intense campaign, full of lies, calumnies, accuses, unimaginable scenarios regarding the animal lovers, especially the NGOs, is undertaken by the televisions, especially by “Antena 3” (please, send protests to [email protected]). The animal welfare NGOs are merely „bastards who steal the state's money”, which have „turned rich by exploiting the strays problem”, which have „done businesses with the mayors for huge amounts of money”, „impostors, fake animal lovers, only ruled by their own interests”. The loss of credibility towards the NGOs has occurred and thus the people are starting to talk about the NGOs like entities for which the „truth” is only now surfacing. Fake statistics, images with „fearsome” strays, interviews with „terrorized” citizens, have fully occupied the TV broadcasts these days! Fake histories, forged documents are presented to the population!
Since little Ionut's death, the televisions are debating and are hysterically yelling and screaming on the same subject! And ONLY on this subject!
The protests against the gold extraction by cyanide in Rosia Montana has brought 10.000 people in the streets, for 9 days. This is a protest without precedent in Romania but still the televisions only rarely present this subject. Nonetheless they are constantly debating the subject of the child killed by the strays!
Only the joint and destructive forces they resorted to in a premeditated manner show us just how high the stake really is!
FACT IS:
While Romania's populace is occupied blaming and killing strays because of the tragic death of little Ionut - who was probably not even killed by strays - their Government is moving forward with their plans to give the go-ahead for the construction of Europe's biggest gold mine and to sign away Romania's most valuable natural asset!
But the case of the 4 year old child killed by dogs is more than blurry and strange. There are things in the official version that just don't add up and many people have started to ask questions and wonder. Even Romanian MEP Corneliu Vadim Tudor had publicly expressed doubts on the official version of the boy's death.
The child was found approximately 1 km away from the park and in order to get there he would have had to walk a highly difficult road even for an adult! Especially for a child!? He should have passed a steep and then pass homeless people.
If the boy had been mauled to death by dogs, he would have screamed. How comes that no-one has heard the boys cries for help although there are a couple of residential buildings and many many houses in close proximity to the place where the boy is supposed to having been killed?
A journalist and his team took the same "possible path" that little Ionut is supposed to have taken when he left the park. Already the first part of the "possible path" was very difficult for an adult and it took them more than one hour until they landed in front of a very high fence which separated them from the place where the little boy had been found. According to the journalist, a child would have had no chance to walk this path till the end and to even reach the fence. And: why would a child do it?
If it took an adult more than 1 hour walking, a child would need even more time, but let's just assume that the two children really managed to reach the place where Ionut was later found in one hour time.... Ionut gets attacked by strays, his brother runs back to his grand mother. He would have needed at least 2 hours only to make the 2 ways. But it is said that the grand mother left them unsupervised for about 45 minutes...
According to the journalist, the coroner had found little Ionut in the yard with his pants down...
Furthermore, the majority observes the attitude and behavior of the parents, which are constantly present in the TV studios, especially the mother who is awkwardly relaxed and untroubled. In order to counter-balance this relaxation, some journalists resort to shocking titles, by expressing their own suffering, by photos. There are more and more details which do not make sense and which do not fit the story. And the grandmother who lost sight of the child is not in any way legally accused or pursued, not even interrogated! On the contrary, the entire fault is attributed to the NGOs!!!
We have compiled the inconsistencies which have emerged days after the death of the little boy at the bottom of the following page and we invite you to read them, to watch the video and see the pictures, to read the different statements, and to build up your own opinion...
For information (in English) on the current situation regarding the fate of Romania's homeless animals, and the death of little Ionut, please visit: http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html
For German, please see: http://www.million-actions.de/2013/09/08/hexenjagd-auf-rumaenische-strassenhunde-medien-und-politiker-rufen-zu-massenmord-an-hunden-auf/
Please read also the information compiled on our page 'Corruption, organized crime and stray dog business in Romania'. It will open your eyes as to the classic mechanism of siphoning off public money... How Romanian's tax payer's money goes down the drain - or better said: is being incinerated together with the dogs while the stray animal populations only keep growing!
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--organized-crime--stray-dog-business.html
A continuous and intense campaign, full of lies, calumnies, accuses, unimaginable scenarios regarding the animal lovers, especially the NGOs, is undertaken by the televisions, especially by “Antena 3” (please, send protests to [email protected]). The animal welfare NGOs are merely „bastards who steal the state's money”, which have „turned rich by exploiting the strays problem”, which have „done businesses with the mayors for huge amounts of money”, „impostors, fake animal lovers, only ruled by their own interests”. The loss of credibility towards the NGOs has occurred and thus the people are starting to talk about the NGOs like entities for which the „truth” is only now surfacing. Fake statistics, images with „fearsome” strays, interviews with „terrorized” citizens, have fully occupied the TV broadcasts these days! Fake histories, forged documents are presented to the population!
Since little Ionut's death, the televisions are debating and are hysterically yelling and screaming on the same subject! And ONLY on this subject!
The protests against the gold extraction by cyanide in Rosia Montana has brought 10.000 people in the streets, for 9 days. This is a protest without precedent in Romania but still the televisions only rarely present this subject. Nonetheless they are constantly debating the subject of the child killed by the strays!
Only the joint and destructive forces they resorted to in a premeditated manner show us just how high the stake really is!
FACT IS:
While Romania's populace is occupied blaming and killing strays because of the tragic death of little Ionut - who was probably not even killed by strays - their Government is moving forward with their plans to give the go-ahead for the construction of Europe's biggest gold mine and to sign away Romania's most valuable natural asset!
But the case of the 4 year old child killed by dogs is more than blurry and strange. There are things in the official version that just don't add up and many people have started to ask questions and wonder. Even Romanian MEP Corneliu Vadim Tudor had publicly expressed doubts on the official version of the boy's death.
The child was found approximately 1 km away from the park and in order to get there he would have had to walk a highly difficult road even for an adult! Especially for a child!? He should have passed a steep and then pass homeless people.
If the boy had been mauled to death by dogs, he would have screamed. How comes that no-one has heard the boys cries for help although there are a couple of residential buildings and many many houses in close proximity to the place where the boy is supposed to having been killed?
A journalist and his team took the same "possible path" that little Ionut is supposed to have taken when he left the park. Already the first part of the "possible path" was very difficult for an adult and it took them more than one hour until they landed in front of a very high fence which separated them from the place where the little boy had been found. According to the journalist, a child would have had no chance to walk this path till the end and to even reach the fence. And: why would a child do it?
If it took an adult more than 1 hour walking, a child would need even more time, but let's just assume that the two children really managed to reach the place where Ionut was later found in one hour time.... Ionut gets attacked by strays, his brother runs back to his grand mother. He would have needed at least 2 hours only to make the 2 ways. But it is said that the grand mother left them unsupervised for about 45 minutes...
According to the journalist, the coroner had found little Ionut in the yard with his pants down...
Furthermore, the majority observes the attitude and behavior of the parents, which are constantly present in the TV studios, especially the mother who is awkwardly relaxed and untroubled. In order to counter-balance this relaxation, some journalists resort to shocking titles, by expressing their own suffering, by photos. There are more and more details which do not make sense and which do not fit the story. And the grandmother who lost sight of the child is not in any way legally accused or pursued, not even interrogated! On the contrary, the entire fault is attributed to the NGOs!!!
We have compiled the inconsistencies which have emerged days after the death of the little boy at the bottom of the following page and we invite you to read them, to watch the video and see the pictures, to read the different statements, and to build up your own opinion...
For information (in English) on the current situation regarding the fate of Romania's homeless animals, and the death of little Ionut, please visit: http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html
For German, please see: http://www.million-actions.de/2013/09/08/hexenjagd-auf-rumaenische-strassenhunde-medien-und-politiker-rufen-zu-massenmord-an-hunden-auf/
Please read also the information compiled on our page 'Corruption, organized crime and stray dog business in Romania'. It will open your eyes as to the classic mechanism of siphoning off public money... How Romanian's tax payer's money goes down the drain - or better said: is being incinerated together with the dogs while the stray animal populations only keep growing!
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--organized-crime--stray-dog-business.html
Key archeological permit suspended
for Gabriel Resources’ Rosia Montana gold mine
on 31 January, 2014, the Independent reported [10]: A tribunal in Romania has suspended a key archeological discharge certificate (ADC) of Gabriel Resources – a Canadian miner - for the exploitation of gold and silver at Rosia Montana’s Mount Carnic – the Transylvanian village’s largest and richest mountain.
Three non-governmental organisations (NGOs) - Alburnus Maior, the Independent Center for the Development of Environmental Resources, and Save Bucharest - applied for the suspension of the ADC pending a court case to nullify the permit.
The next court date is set to take place in Buzau, and will be held on 10 February.
Gabriel Resources is now facing one of its biggest setbacks in its controversial mining project to date, but still holds two other ADCs for the project’s Ceteate and Jig open pits.
Mount Carnic has some of the oldest Roman gold mine galleries in the world, and is being called for recognition as a UNESCO World Heritage Site by campaign groups.
ADCs are required by European law for various parts of the proposed mine to ensure that historical artifacts will be protected.
READ MORE:
GABRIEL RESOURCES GOLD PLANS SUFFER SETBACK, AS ROMANIAN PARLIAMENT REJECTS MINING LAW ROMANIAN GOLD RUSH CANCELLED AS PROTESTERS DEFEAT EUROPE'S BIGGEST MINE
Professor Andrew Wilson, one of three British experts who carried out the statement of interest report on Rosia Montana’s cultural heritage in 2011, said: “Rosia Montana is a particularly important example not only of Roman gold mining, but of the history of gold mining over the last 1900 years. If this [ruling] is not overturned, this is very good news for the cultural heritage of Rosia Montana.”
“Our initial statement of interest was used as a key piece of evidence in the case, I think that’s very encouraging.”
The Canadian junior mining company’s proposed project has been met with fierce international opposition over the past 14 years, but particularly since August last year, when Romania’s Prime Minister Victor Ponta passed a bill effectively giving the mine’s go-ahead.
Over planned 16-year period the controversial project was geared up to extract 314 tonnes of gold, 1,500 tonnes of silver, flatten four mountain tops, and deposit a massive waste lake containing cyanide.
The company’s planned use of cyanide in the project - a toxic chemical used in the process of gold extraction – is of particular concern to protestors opposing Gabriel Resources’ plans.
In December last year, a parliamentary vote ruled against a bill that would’ve allowed the Rosia Montana project to proceed.
CEO and president of Gabriel Resources, Jonathan Henry, said in a statement: “We remain committed to our goal of building one of Europe’s most modern mines in Rosia Montana, developed in full compliance with Romanian and European Union legislation, using the best available practices and sympathetic to the cultural heritage of the area.”
Three non-governmental organisations (NGOs) - Alburnus Maior, the Independent Center for the Development of Environmental Resources, and Save Bucharest - applied for the suspension of the ADC pending a court case to nullify the permit.
The next court date is set to take place in Buzau, and will be held on 10 February.
Gabriel Resources is now facing one of its biggest setbacks in its controversial mining project to date, but still holds two other ADCs for the project’s Ceteate and Jig open pits.
Mount Carnic has some of the oldest Roman gold mine galleries in the world, and is being called for recognition as a UNESCO World Heritage Site by campaign groups.
ADCs are required by European law for various parts of the proposed mine to ensure that historical artifacts will be protected.
READ MORE:
GABRIEL RESOURCES GOLD PLANS SUFFER SETBACK, AS ROMANIAN PARLIAMENT REJECTS MINING LAW ROMANIAN GOLD RUSH CANCELLED AS PROTESTERS DEFEAT EUROPE'S BIGGEST MINE
Professor Andrew Wilson, one of three British experts who carried out the statement of interest report on Rosia Montana’s cultural heritage in 2011, said: “Rosia Montana is a particularly important example not only of Roman gold mining, but of the history of gold mining over the last 1900 years. If this [ruling] is not overturned, this is very good news for the cultural heritage of Rosia Montana.”
“Our initial statement of interest was used as a key piece of evidence in the case, I think that’s very encouraging.”
The Canadian junior mining company’s proposed project has been met with fierce international opposition over the past 14 years, but particularly since August last year, when Romania’s Prime Minister Victor Ponta passed a bill effectively giving the mine’s go-ahead.
Over planned 16-year period the controversial project was geared up to extract 314 tonnes of gold, 1,500 tonnes of silver, flatten four mountain tops, and deposit a massive waste lake containing cyanide.
The company’s planned use of cyanide in the project - a toxic chemical used in the process of gold extraction – is of particular concern to protestors opposing Gabriel Resources’ plans.
In December last year, a parliamentary vote ruled against a bill that would’ve allowed the Rosia Montana project to proceed.
CEO and president of Gabriel Resources, Jonathan Henry, said in a statement: “We remain committed to our goal of building one of Europe’s most modern mines in Rosia Montana, developed in full compliance with Romanian and European Union legislation, using the best available practices and sympathetic to the cultural heritage of the area.”
Rosia Montana declared site of historical interest, granting it protection from Gabriel Resources, blocks the mining for gold
“Rosia Montana village has been designated a place of historic site of national interest which has a radius of two kilometres [just over a mile],” said Adrian Balteanu, the Romanian culture ministry’s adviser on cultural heritage.
“At such a site, all mining activity is prohibited,” he said early January, 2016.
The step is a new blow for Canada’s Gabriel Resources which has been trying for 15 years to get an environment ministry permit to extract 300 tonnes of gold from the picturesque village in a project it claims would create hundreds of jobs and boost Romania’s economy. [11]
“At such a site, all mining activity is prohibited,” he said early January, 2016.
The step is a new blow for Canada’s Gabriel Resources which has been trying for 15 years to get an environment ministry permit to extract 300 tonnes of gold from the picturesque village in a project it claims would create hundreds of jobs and boost Romania’s economy. [11]
Sources & references
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ro%C8%99ia_Montan%C4%83
2) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19428193
3) http://business.financialpost.com/2013/09/04/gabriel-resources-rosia-montana-gold-mine-rests-in-romanian-parliaments-hands/
4) http://www.dw.de/protests-erupt-in-romania-over-gold-mine/a-17068049
5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Baia_Mare_cyanide_spill
6) http://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/claudia-ciobanu/revolution-begins-with-rosia-montana
7) http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/rupert-wolfemurray/open-letter-to-greg-hands_b_3436215.html
8) http://thejournalist.ie/comment/europes-ecological-time-bomb-rosia-montana-gold-mine-hills-romania/
9) http://en.rmgc.ro/news-feed/the-european-commission-does-not-intend-to-ban-cyanide-use-in-mining.html
10) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/key-archeological-permit-suspended-for-gabriel-resources-rosia-montana-gold-mine-9099913.html
11) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/14/romanian-village-blocks-canadian-firm-mining-for-gold
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ro%C8%99ia_Montan%C4%83
2) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19428193
3) http://business.financialpost.com/2013/09/04/gabriel-resources-rosia-montana-gold-mine-rests-in-romanian-parliaments-hands/
4) http://www.dw.de/protests-erupt-in-romania-over-gold-mine/a-17068049
5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Baia_Mare_cyanide_spill
6) http://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/claudia-ciobanu/revolution-begins-with-rosia-montana
7) http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/rupert-wolfemurray/open-letter-to-greg-hands_b_3436215.html
8) http://thejournalist.ie/comment/europes-ecological-time-bomb-rosia-montana-gold-mine-hills-romania/
9) http://en.rmgc.ro/news-feed/the-european-commission-does-not-intend-to-ban-cyanide-use-in-mining.html
10) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/key-archeological-permit-suspended-for-gabriel-resources-rosia-montana-gold-mine-9099913.html
11) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/14/romanian-village-blocks-canadian-firm-mining-for-gold