A brand new mining invoice is predicted to additional ignore environmental issues and permit unauthorised mining to happen on non-public property. This can place farmers’ livelihoods and meals safety in danger.
Picture: Wikimedia Commons
The Division of Mineral & Petroleum Assets (the division) is at present reviewing written feedback on the Draft Mineral Assets Growth Modification Invoice, 2025.
Involved events have stated that if notable adjustments weren’t made to the invoice, artisanal and small-scale miners could be allowed to entry and mine non-public agricultural land, with out conducting environmental impression assessments (EIAs). The invoice was additionally imprecise about session or compensation necessities.
Janse Rabie, head of Agri SA’s Pure Useful resource Centre of Excellence, stated in an announcement that the invoice undermined constitutionally protected property rights and threatened the viability of farming operations, significantly in high-potential agricultural zones.
“The absence of EIAs and enforceable rehabilitation ensures additional exposes landowners to long-term degradation with out treatment,” he added.
The invoice has heightened farmers’ ongoing issues about unlawful mining actions, together with situations the place giant mining firms held licences and permits however ignored their authorized obligations to guard the surroundings and water sources.
Robert Daval, CEO of Agriculture Mpumalanga, instructed Farmer’s Weekly the invoice’s earlier provisions have been already in impact.
“There has but to be an instance of a mine that has rehabilitated the land as soon as mining has been accomplished. If miners who’re legally sure to rehabilitate the land don’t achieve this, what recourse would there be to get an artisanal miner to repair land that has been destroyed?” he stated.
Daval stated that the illegal factor within the mining sector was a “huge headache” for the agriculture sector.
“There isn’t a political will on the highest degree to cease illegal mining actions. Now they’re bringing in legal guidelines to make it even simpler for miners to do what they need with the land.”
Rabie added that the broader relationship between mining and agriculture remained fraught: “Fragmented allowing regimes, opaque session processes, and weak enforcement mechanisms proceed to erode belief and compromise land-use planning.”
Agri SA expressed concern that the invoice had not undergone a socio-economic impression evaluation (SEIA), as required by Cupboard coverage. Rabie stated that had such an evaluation been performed, the dangers to meals manufacturing, water high quality, and rural livelihoods would have been evident.
Agri SA known as on authorities to withdraw the present invoice and topic it to a full SEIA, introduce binding landowner consent for mining on zoned agricultural land, and implement cumulative environmental and water impression assessments for all mining actions.
