A closer look at the current Mining Application



An application for a mining permit, designated as MP 30/5/1/2/2/10259MR, has resurfaced, drawing attention to the persistent endeavours of a particular company seeking mining rights over portions of Tenbosch, Turbelt, and Tecklenburgs Ranch. This company has consistently pursued mining activities in the region, despite encountering repeated setbacks, since before 2012. Their continued efforts have been marked by a string of failures, undue processes and not adhering to legal requirements has characterised their pursuit. Their pursuit and sequence of unsuccessful attempts has been characterised by myriad issues and concerns raised that have served to highlight their modus operandi of shortcuts and legal noncompliance.

Just to illustrate a few of the shortcomings:

  • Continued Non-Compliance with NEMA: The public participation processes conducted in the past did not align with the requirements set forth by the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), indicating a lack of adherence to crucial environmental regulations.
  • Unaddressed raised objections and concerns: Concerns and objections raised by stakeholders have not been satisfactorily resolved and have failed to meet the standards required by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), further underlining their untrustworthy modus operandi.
  • The need for Specialist Studies undermined: The sensitive environmental nature of the area necessitates comprehensive, specified specialist studies, a requirement that has not been met by the applicants.
  • Lack of Consultation and Proof thereof: Evidence and outcomes of consultations with the Department of Water, and other stakeholders, are a critical aspect in assessing the potential impact on water resources. These were conspicuously absent from their previous submissions.
  • Agricultural Land and Rehabilitation Plans not being evident: Given that the land in question holds agricultural significance, the absence of a detailed mining plan and a robust rehabilitation strategy poses substantial concerns regarding the potential ecological repercussions.
  • Plagiarism and Legal Implications: Previous environmental assessments were tainted by allegations of plagiarism, resulting in a criminal charge against the consultants involved, casting doubts on the credibility of the entire process.

Despite these recurring unresolved issues, the company in question persists in its pursuit of mining rights within the area. A history marked by repeated shortcomings has not deterred their determination to secure their desired outcome of mining rights that would undoubtedly lead to the destruction of the sensitive ecological environment, and the heritage of the Kruger National Park.

This reality serves as a poignant reminder to stakeholders and concerned parties to engage actively in the ongoing process. The potential ramifications on the environment, agricultural lands, and the community underscore the significance of vigilant oversight and stringent adherence to regulatory protocols.

Given the gravity of the situation and the persistent nature of the applicant’s efforts, a renewed call for engagement and vigilance from stakeholders is imperative.

The continued resurgence of the mining application, despite a history marred by unresolved concerns, warrants a renewed emphasis on our shareholders to ensure that all attempts to mine in the area are approached in compliance with the relevant legislation, with transparency, and with the safeguarding of environmental integrity as the primary outcome.

The collective voice and vigilance of stakeholders remains pivotal to shaping the outcome of this protracted mining rights application saga, MP 30/5/1/2/2/10259MR.