Ineke Steinhauer
Technical secretary
The NCEA advised on the Terms of Reference (ToR) for an EIA for a gold mining project in Suriname. The EIA was undertaken and reviewed by the NCEA.
Significant details
The Commission restricted the scope of its advice to the impacts of exploration and exploitation, the alternatives and mitigating measures. The selection of the most favourable site from the environmental point of view was not considered. The decision to undertake a so-called ‘implementation EIA’ instead of a ‘site-selection EIS’ was made because current biogeographical knowledge of the Surinam hinterland gives no reason to believe that the three sites significantly differ in the composition of the ecosystems and species diversity. The commission advised that the exploration activities take place in parallel with the preparation of the EIS. In November 1996 an interim report was submitted, and the final report completed in June 1997. The conclusion was that although the Gran Kreek concession has not been fully and totally explored, the results do not support a convincing case for the feasibility of further exploration. This would be time-consuming and costly, and there is sufficient evidence that there is gold in the concession.
Although no complete EIS has been prepared, the DGIS requested the Commission to review the report on the basis of chapter 5.4 of the ToR, to advise on the quality of the report and make suggestions for follow-up action. The conclusion of the advisory review was that there were sufficient reasons for discontinuing work on the EIS, although the expectations of the proponent and local inhabitants were high. In September 1997 the Dutch embassy decided to withdraw support for this project because the economic feasibility of gold mining could not be substantiated.