SAVE RAPU-RAPU. SAVE OUR FUTURE.

Latest Report from the Island

2011-12-05T11:04:00.002+08:00

The following text message was received by a friend of the Alliance:

Digdi po sa Mananao nagpoon na an exploration kan pagmimina. Asin nahahandal an mga residents nin huli ta an saindang tubig apektado.

Translation:

Here in Mananao mining exploration has started. The residents are apprehensive because their water supply is affected.

Date: November 25, 2011

Aside from the effects on water supply, the coloration of creeks has been observed. The silt has reached the sea and fishing is made more difficult.

The MGB V Photographs and "Bathing" in the Creeks of Rapu-Rapu

2011-06-07T15:12:00.011+08:00

In his letter to SARA Spokesperson and Secretary-General of Aquinas University of Legazpi, Mines and Geosciences Bureau Region V Director Reynulfo A. Juan claims that Mr. Virgilio S. Perdigon, Jr. has interminable questions. He alleges that they went to the creeks and bathed there. He attaches photographs as evidence of such bathing. We direct the attention of the reader to those photographs which we post above under the same title “MGB V Photographs and Bathing in the Creeks of Rapu-Rapu.” We place them there for better viewing.

Mr. Perdigon replies as follows:

As regards your feeling that I have interminable questions, I respond that we citizens are interminable in paying our taxes. Every year we pay our income tax and every day we pay EVAT. Hence, I do not see consistency when you “feel (I) have interminable questions.” The fact is that the questions are the same. They are just not answered well enough to be credible to us taxpayers. At best, your answers have been piecemeal and evasive. It is our right to raise the same unanswered questions per guarantee of the Constitution and it is your duty to properly answer them according to RA 6713.

We cut and paste our challenge because it seems you fail to understand it (please refer to letter dated March 21, 2011):

Your bathing in the creeks will be open to the public, the sites and dates will be chosen randomly by our side, it will be done four times with each lasting for at least thirty minutes. If any fish is found, we will cook it for you. We do not agree that the dates will depend on the next MMT inspection since we have already expressed no faith in that group. It is also necessary to withdraw the armed men preventing public access to the creeks.

These conditions are essential because they are intended to establish credibility. None of these are met in your alleged “bathing” for the following reasons:

(1) The good Director says he believes the contamination data but he is not among those “bathing.” Someone is shown sitting on the rocks (obviously not bathing) but the face is not recognizable. A group of men seated around some food are not bathing either. They do not appear to be anywhere near the creeks. Instead they are in a parking lot as indicated by the pickup truck in the background.

(2) Our side did not randomly choose the dates and sites hence we cannot say that the photos were taken in any of the contested creeks. It is apparent by your unilateral action that your side is not willing to concede this condition. Our random choice is essential to prevent any prior “sanitization” of certain spots for the purpose of photo operation (though we do not claim that your group actually did it this time).

(3) The people in the creeks are not actually in contact with the water. They are perching on rocks instead, obviously avoiding the effluent. The feet of the men in blue overalls are almost all hidden from the camera but obviously not immersed in water. Still, two photos show that they are wearing what appears to be rubber boots, another evidence of avoidance.

(4) The photos show that green vegetation is distant from the water while vines that are in contact with it are brown, leafless and (as they appear in the photos) dead. (In healthy creeks like those at the foot of Mt. Mayon, the leaves mingle with the water and the creek beds are green with moss. Please see my attachment.) In the creeks photographed by MGB V yellowish coloration is evident. In the data you have presented, nothing is mentioned about results of sampling for heavy metals and nothing is said about freshwater organisms. Allowing us free access and surprise visits would have revealed if there are even snails in the creeks.

(5) The people shown to be at the mouth of one creek are also not bathing but standing. Since they were photographed at a great distance, MGB V fails to prove that they are not wearing rubber boots.

(6) The people shown to be bathing are not doing so in the creeks but far out in the sea whose location is not verified. We cannot tell how long they stayed in the seawater.

(7) Even after the alleged event, we cannot verify your photos through an ocular inspection because armed guards are preventing us, contrary to the “invitation” stated in your letter dated April 15, 2011.

As another example of your evasiveness, it took several months before we were informed of the identity of the “geochemist.” Any taxpayer would not be satisfied until this information is given. We want to know his or her identity because the day will come when our group will either praise for truth or file a falsification case for data tampering. I took note of your information that the geochemist Ms. Pearl Marian A. Peralta is a contractual employee of MGB V.

The strength of our Republic lies in the vigilance and persistence of its citizens. The Arroyo administration failed in its bid for a “strong republic” because of lies. Under the new administration of PNoy, we taxpayers believe in Daang Matuwid. Our contribution to its realization is to scrutinize every information we receive from public servants. Saving Rapu-Rapu means knowing whether there is environmental damage and economic injustice or not, and then acting on the basis of truth.

Nice try about the “bathing” and the photos but please make them convincing next time. Thank you.

Two Conferences and a Fishkill

2011-05-16T14:03:00.007+08:00

The following was written by SARA Spokesperson Virgilio S. Perdigon, Jr.:

Through a text message to the radio program of the EMB V over Radio Veritas, Marhay na Aga Kapalibutan, I informed the new Director, Fernando Quililan, that the creeks emanating from the mine sites of Rapu-Rapu are colored red, yellow, orange and brown. That was on January 3, 2011. The Director promised publicly that he would have the matter investigated. I followed up with a letter dated January 15.

January went and February came but no result was reported. I called up the radio program and only the EMB V staff was on board. They said an investigation team would go to the island in the first week of March. I waited.

On March 31, I received a fax message inviting me to a technical conference with EMB V and the mining companies on April 14. Two days before the schedule, the conference was reset to April 26. On that day, at past 2 pm, Engr. Rogelio Corpus, President of Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. and Mrs. Carmelita Borbe Pacis, RRMI Pollution Control Officer, came. Several personnel of EMB V attended, including Engr. Henry Lopez who presided. EMB V presented its findings with color photographs allegedly of the creeks and Engr. Lopez asked me if I had any comments. I replied that I would rather give the floor to the mining companies’ representatives first. I say “companies” because, as I understood, Engr. Corpus and Mrs. Pacis were representing Rapu-Rapu Processing, Inc., Rapu-Rapu Holdings, Inc., Korea Resources Corporation, LG International Corporation and Malaysia Smelting Corporation.

Engr. Corpus said that the photographs of EMB V did not show much improvement in the creek coloration. He asked to be allowed to present photographs taken on April 25. So, Mrs. Pacis presented what they alleged to be the most recent pictures of the creeks. She claimed that the SARA photographs were taken in 2005 and downloaded from the Internet. Some of the photographs, she added came from the mining companies.

In my reaction, I mentioned that the photographs were taken not in 2005 but from 2006 to 2009. SARA did not download them from the Internet. Instead, SARA gave them to supporters who uploaded the same to the Internet. The pictures of SARA were shown to the DENR in 2006 to 2008 but no action was taken. They were shown to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan ng Albay in its session on October 20 and November 3, 2009 in the presence of Engr. Corpus and other mining officials but no action was taken. In 2009 we began to have difficulty going to the creeks because armed guards were stationed there.

SARA presented photographs of the creeks. In response, EMB V and mining companies allegedly went to the creeks to validate. This time, EMB V and the mining companies present photographs of the creeks. In the same token, SARA must be allowed to go back to the creeks to validate the “latest” photographs. I insisted that SARA be given free and surprise access to the creeks for the results to be credible. The response of Engr. Corpus was that the visits by SARA should be coordinated with them. I refused to accept such requisite because they could do prior sanitization and the results would not be a truthful record of the condition of the creeks.

The EMB suggested that SARA join the Multipartite Monitoring Team but I replied that SARA stands otherwise because of the team’s performance during the October 2005 toxic spills. SARA would rather be independent of the MMT.

We also debated on the severely diminished fish catch in Albay Gulf. Mrs. Pacis claimed that such is a worldwide phenomenon. I countered that when fishermen of Rapu-Rapu go to Samar and Pandan, Catanduanes they catch fish. Moreover, there is a fish sanctuary in Sitio Gaba in Batan Island but even that is not able to sustain the fish population in Albay Gulf. That indicates something wrong with the water itself.

I also mentioned that in July 2010 a 25-ton sperm whale died near Sitio Gogon of Poblacion but no investigation was conducted to determine the cause of death. BFAR V should have exerted all means to know the cause but nothing came from that office except the initial allegation that the whale died of old age which was later retracted. In the end, BFAR V claimed that the whale was too decomposed for any examination.

Prior to my communications to EMB V, I had been writing letters to Director Reynulfo Juan of MGB V about the same complaint of creek coloration. I began in October 2010. By January 3, 2011 nothing had been done by the MGB V so I formally wrote EMB V which by then had a new Director.

By February 2011, Director Juan took my letters more seriously and our exchanges went on until in his letter dated April 15, he claimed to have dispatched a team to the creeks. He claims that they “bathed” in the creeks, had a picnic there and took photographs. He further invited me to a technical conference on May 10, 2011. I prepared a reply regarding their alleged “bathing,” “picnic,” and picture-taking in the creeks but held it until after the second technical conference. (Read my separate article titled “The MGB V Photographs and Bathing in the Creeks of Rapu-Rapu.”)

The second technical conference was attended by Director Juan, Director Quililan, Engr. Corpus, Mrs. Pacis, Punong Barangay Reynold Asuncion of Malobago, the Punong Barangay of Pagcolbon, and personnel of MGB V and EMB V. Mrs. Pacis presented the same photographs. When Director Juan asked me to comment I said the presentation of Mrs. Pacis was not new and we already had a debate on collateral issues on April 26. I requested those present to just refer to the record of proceedings of our technical conference with EMB V. There was just one point I said that I wanted to focus on: SARA’s stand that the armed guards be pulled out from the creeks and we be allowed unhampered and surprise visits. Director Quililan expressed favor to our stand. He said the creeks are part of the “Philippine Islands” and any citizen has the right to go to any public place. Director Juan would rather make us join the MMT and leave the matter of surprise visits to the mining companies. Engr. Corpus just repeated what he stated before: they would consent only to visits coordinated with them. I said again that coordinated visits will not yield credible results and SARA cannot join the MMT owing to its performance during the October 2005 toxic spills. The two Punong Barangays said SARA should first do a courtesy call to them. I replied that such is alright provided that within minutes SARA would be allowed to proceed to the creeks and not be unduly delayed.

Director Juan said that they would wait for the mining companies to consent to surprise visits and promptly adjourned the conference.

In the afternoon of the same day, I was informed by personnel of the Social Action Center that they received a text message stating that a fishkill had occurred near Linao and Binsosawan. The following day, Fr. Pao Barandon, Station Manager of Radio Veritas, reported the same information from the island, specifying who sent it. Allegedly, the mining companies hired people to gather the dead fish and bury them even amidst the onslaught of Typhoon Bebeng. In an interview over the same radio station, I recounted what transpired during the technical conferences and advised people in Rapu-Rapu to take videos or photos of the reported fishkill. By my count, that would be the 6th since 2005. I hypothesize that the fish which died could be migratory from the Pacific Ocean. They could be going to Albay Gulf and upon reaching the vicinity of Linao and Binosawan, they died. However, we await the investigation of authorities. We hope that, this time, the results are credible.

Abangan ang susunod na kabanata!

May 11, 2011

Two Gains for Environmentalists in Albay

2011-04-06T15:57:00.011+08:00

We are happy to report two major developments in the struggle for environmental protection in Albay, two good news, that is; and no bad news.

The first good news: The Center for Environmental Concerns Philippines (CEC-Phil) has been cleared of all libel charges filed by then Lafayette Philippines, Inc. (LPI), now renamed Korea Malaysia Philippines Resources, Inc. (KMPRI) by the Regional Trial Court 67 of Pasig City.

On March 14, 2011, the KMPRI had filed an affidavit of desistance, claiming that it is “no longer interested in the prosecution of this case…” The public prosecutor, unable to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, with KMPRI’s desistance, thus moved for the dismissal of the case.

The case is a clear example of a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP), or a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition” (Wikipedia). Specifically named in the case is Ms. Frances Quimpo, CEC-Phil Executive Director.

In 2006, her group entered the stockholders’ meeting in Australia to directly present the Rapu-Rapu situation to Australian and other investors in the Rapu-Rapu mine. Her group exposed the severe environmental damage and economic plunder wrought on the island residents and distributed a primer elaborating this. Aside from Ms. Quimpo, KMP’s Mr. Danilo Ramos and some John Does were also charged.

Ms. Quimpo and her co-accused are thankful to Attorneys Victoria Avena, Howard Calleja, Emil Joven and Jobert Pahilga, and all who supported them in various ways during their ordeal.

The second good news: The Provincial Government of Albay, through Sangguniang Panlalawigan Resolution 2011-020 dated March 8, 2011 affirmed by Governor Joey Sarte Salceda on March 14, 2011, has declared the province off limits to future mining operations. This decision was reached after the SPA and the Governor noted that the benefits obtained from the current mining activities of the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project are “graphically Lilliputian.” Mar S. Arguelles of the Philippine Daily Inquirer reported on March 28, 2011 (page A22):

Salceda’s signing of the antimining measure came on the heels of a report from the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) in Bicol trumpeting the achievement of the mining sector in the region, including the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project (RRPP) operated in Rapu-Rapu town by a Korean-Malaysian-Filipino consortium.

The sector produced P11.4 billion worth of gold, silver, copper and cement last year and paid P782.6 million in taxes to the national government.

Salceda has lashed out at the gains that Bicol got from mining, saying the benefit was “a tiny gesture” compared to the billions of pesos worth of mineral resources extracted from the region.
He added that the gain from mining operations was artificial and merely bloated the region’s Gross Value Added (GVA).

GVA measures the contribution to the economy of each individual producer, industry or sector in the country. It is used to estimate Gross Domestic Product, a key indicator of the state of the economy.

He said only the mining giants benefited from the billions of pesos they earned because even with the almost P800 million in taxes they paid, the region was expected to get only P40 million, a measly 3 percent, in social fund from the national government.

“This report only makes me more angry, and more committed to oppose mining in Albay,” Salceda said.

He lamented that the billions in pesos that the mining firms earned from their operations were never remitted to the Philippines.

“They paid taxes of P782 million where we have little share and have not received our share at all. There is that social fund of P41.71 million or only 3 percent. So graphically Lilliputian to the P11.7 billion of Gulliver,” Salceda said.

If he had a say on the matter, he said he would stop mining operations to prevent disasters.
“As the leader of my province, I am so ashamed I could not stop this national imposition,” said Salceda, referring to mining laws that grant the Department of Environment and Natural Resources the sole authority to approve large-scale mining.

On the other hand, Director Reynulfo A. Juan of MGB V is reported to have said that “the MGB would welcome only new mining ventures that would operate responsibly.”

The Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance calls on the Provincial Government of Albay to take the step further: close the Rapu-Rapu mine. According to SARA:

Matagal na tayong nananawagan noon pa man na magpasa ng moratorium on mining ang Albay gaya sa ibang probinsya. Kahit sa mga pagharap natin sa SPA, mga rally at radio interview pinapanawagan natin ito.

Ang isang magandang pangyayari ngayon ay ang kategorikal na pagpatunay mismo ni Gov. Salceda na hindi nakakatulong ang kasalukuyang pagmimina, na talagang napakliit ng nakukuha ng Rapu-Rapu o ng buong Pilipinas mula sa mina.

Ang resolusyon ay isa nang partial na tagumpay na maituturing natin. Ito ay kalutasan sa mga darating pang problema na dulot ng pagmimina. Ang kailangan sa ngayon ay lutasin ang kasalukuyang problema sa Rapu-Rapu na patuloy na nagpapahirap sa mga taga-isla at mga mangingisda na umaasa sa Albay Gulf. Malaki na ang pinsala sa mga bundok, sapa, gubat at dagat. Paghihirap pa rin an nadarama ng mga taga-isla at bagsak na bagsak pa rin ang pangingisda sa Albay Gulf. Hindi rin tiyak kung ang expansion ng KMPRI ay sakop ng resolusyon.

Ang pagsasara sa minahan sa Rapu-Rapu ay siyang bubuo sa kalutasan ng problema.

SARA hopes that one day soon, the Rapu-Rapu mine will finally close.

April 4, 2011

AN APPEAL TO GINA LOPEZ RE LG INTERNATIONAL AND RAPU-RAPU MINING

2011-02-11T15:46:00.002+08:00

Recently, Ms. Gina Lopez of ABS-CBN Foundation issued a call for support in the fight against mining in Palawan following the assassination of Dr. Gerry Ortega, a known anti-mining activist.

We support the call of Ms. Gina Lopez of ABS-CBN about Palawan. In turn, we call on her to support our call about Rapu-Rapu.

Every night my eyes get sore from watching TV Patrol not for anything but for the background where the logo LG is prominently shown. LG owns 42% of the Rapu-Rapu polymetallic mine. (28% is owned by Korea Resources Corporation; 30%, by Malaysia Smelting Corporation)

The mine used to be owned by Lafayette Philippines, Inc. When the Australians left, they sold the mine to the three corporations. In place of LPI, a company called Korea Malaysia Philippines Resources, Inc. was put up by LG, Kores and MSC. To put a Filipino face to their operations, the Koreans and Malaysians sustained the existence of Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. and Rapu-Rapu Processing, Inc. The first does the blasting and quarrying of ores; the second, the processing of metals. The ownership structure is a bit complicated but that's their intention - to complicate the whole thing for publicity and tax avoidance purposes.

The effect of Rapu-Rapu mining is two-fold: (1) environmental damage as seen in the creeks which are colored red, yellow, orange, brown; (2) economic injustice as seen in the abject poverty of island residents and 95% fish catch decline in Albay Gulf since 2005 when the mine went full blast in its operations.

In spite of these, the MGB V says the level of contamination in one creek (Hollowstone) is within "tolerable limits" while no mention is made of the other creeks. DENR V has been silent since 2007. BFAR never investigated the cause of the death of a 15-meter sperm whale in July 2010. The Provincial Government of Albay says "No to Mining" but it has done nothing to stop the operation of the Rapu-Rapu mine.

The people of Rapu-Rapu and the 14,000 fishermen dependent on Albay Gulf are slowly starving. And every night we would watch ABS-CBN displaying on tv screens the hated logo of LG. I wrote to Julius Babao to send his XXX team here but he never responded.

Here comes Ms. Gina Lopez expressing opposition to mining in Palawan. Yes, we rally to her cause. Three people have died because of their anti-mining work in Rapu-Rapu: Rei Mon Guran, Atty. Gil Gujol and Jessie Ecleo.

There are parallels between Palawan and Rapu-Rapu:

1. Palawan: On January 24 a very dear friend and colleague Gerry Ortega was shot in the head dead. I was just with him that weekend - and a few minutes before he died what we were discussing over the phone was an anti-mining campaign in Palawan - given that on December two huge mining applications were railroaded - and they were to be near protected sites.

Rapu-Rapu: On July 31, 2006, Rei Mon Guran, a very young student of Aquinas University of Legazpi was shot dead on the bus he took on his way to school. The day before, he celebrated his birthday; less than two weeks earlier, we had rally against Rapu-Rapu mining in Legazpi City.

Atty. Gil Gujol was among the lawyers who filed a case against Lafayette Philippines, Inc. He was also gunned down in Sorsogon.

Jessie Ecleo was a resident of Rapu-Rapu, Albay. His corpse was found on November 16, 2008 in Sitio Mirikpitik, Barangay Pagcolbon, Rapu-Rapu. His murderer, Danilo Sumbilon Bungca, a CAFGU whose unit is based in the Lafayette mining area, confessed to the crime. Bongca was jailed for a while but today, without any trial conducted, he is at large.

2. Palawan: Gerry is dead but we will not let go of his dreams - and mine - and probably yours too.

Rapu-Rapu: Rei Mon, Atty. Gujol, and Jessie are dead but we continue to work for the closure of the mine.

3. Palawan: has 17 key bio diversity sites - which means it is part of the 70% bio diversity sites which are essential for sustaining life in the planet. It has 2 world heritage sites, 8 protected sites.

Rapu-Rapu: classified as among the areas with an extremely high priority for marine conservation. (DENR and Manila Observatory’s Integrated Marine and Terrestrial Priorities Map cited in Mining in the Philippines: Concerns and Conflicts. Report of a fact-finding mission to the Philippines, July-August 2006)

4. Palawan: Yet if you see Palawan on the map you will note that it is a very thin island - which is 82% mountain. It means that if the forest gets denuded and the minerals excavated - the tailings seep directly into the sea affecting the coral reefs. The top soil is thin - and the island eco system is fragile.

Rapu-Rapu: If you see Rapu-Rapu, it has steep slopes and any tailings will flow speedily to the sea affecting the coral reefs. The top soil is also thin and and the island eco-system is fragile, as attested to by the DENR and Manila Observatory.

5. Palawan: Mining is not the way to go for Palawan. I have five eco tourism sites wherein the communities involved can now send their children to school, can dream bigger dreams. Mayor hagedorn in Puerto Princesa has banned mining and logging - and focused on tourism and agriculture. From 2 flights a week, Puerto Princesa now boasts 10 flights a day. His revenues have gone up from several million to several billion.

Rapu-Rapu: Mining is not the sustainable means of development. We have cited: genuine land distribution, farm subsidies, potable water system, decent housing, fastcraft transportation, environment firnedly roads, power generation, and eco-tourism with preservation of the island's eco-system.

6. Palawan: Mining as an economic path in a magnificent "Last Frontier" is based on a paradigm of economic growth that is myopic and archaic . In this age of climate change and global warming any economic development that does not recognize and revere the web of life should be thrown in the dustbin.

Rapu-Rapu: In a statement released by Aquinas University of Legazpi and the Catholic Educational Association of Legazpi, Rapu-Rapu is cited as Albay's "Last Frontier." The economic paradigm being used came from PGMA, myopic and archaic. In my Powerpoint Presentation, I refer to the Rapu-Rapu mine as "An Open Pit Mine in an Era of Climate Change."

7. Palawan: Please please support the ten million signature campaign to Stop Mining in Palawan. The richness of Palawan is the wealth and pride of the country, it is the wealth of the world.

Rapu-Rapu: Please also support our campaign to close the mine. The wealth of Rapu-Rapu is being plundered by foreigners and local junior partners while the people are slowly dying from poverty.

8. Palawan: Log in to no2mininginpalawan.com. Register your vote and please please send it to thousands others. You can also include your household by downloading the form printing it -and faxing it to 4152227 or you can scan it and send it to signatures@no2mininginpalawan.com. Questions can be sent to signatures@no2mininginpalawan.com.

Rapu-Rapu: Log on to http://saverapurapu.blogspot.com. We are not gathering votes. We are calling for BOYCOTT OF LG PRODUCTS. DO NOT WATCH TV PATROL FOR AS LONG AS IT DISPLAYS THE LG LOGO.

The Recent Action of EMB V to Curb Coal Mining in Rapu-Rapu

2010-12-03T10:59:00.001+08:00

The recent action of EMB V’s new head, Director Fernando P. Quililan, to give attention to coal mining in Rapu-Rapu is welcome news. We in SARA are not in favor of any form of mining that destroys the natural environment. We also decry coal mining per se when its product will be used as fuel considering that coal burning is a major source of carbon dioxide that causes global warming. (Coal can be put to environment-friendly use as filter for cleaning polluted water.)

Coal mining in Rapu-Rapu, nevertheless, pales in comparison to gold, silver, copper and zinc mining being done in the island by RRMI and RRPI. While the former has not caused any fishkill, for example, since way back in the past, the latter has caused five major fishkills since 2005 when it went into full operation. Daily, the residents of the island see dead fish floating in the sea. This is the reason why there is no more major fishkill. There are not that many fish to kill anymore. Instead, fishermen are complaining of a severe drop in fish catch from 20 bañeras of “bolinao” before 2005 to 1 bañera today. Coal mining in Rapu-Rapu has been going on for years but only when Lafayette started its activities did the problems of fishermen and farmers begin.

The difference is like that between the bite of an ant and that of a poisonous cobra. EMB V should put proper perspective in its action. If it is alarmed with coal mining in Rapu-Rapu, it should cry extreme danger with gold, silver, copper and zinc mining. As the Bible says in Matthew 7:3: And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Certainly, EMB V can stop coal mining in Rapu-Rapu but first it must stop the bigger and more disastrous mine of RRMI and RRPI. Anything short of that is sheer hypocrisy!

Wikileaks and Rapu-Rapu Mining

2010-12-03T09:57:00.016+08:00

Wikileaks has captured world attention. Among the reactions it has so far generated is an article by Margaret Heffernan titled Bank of America is Not the Only Company that Should Fear Wikileaks. An excerpt from the article reads:

Most companies worldwide have skeletons in their closets that they hope no one will ever see - including themselves. That they’d prefer to look away is institutionalized willful blindness, and it’s reaching epidemic proportions.

Willful blindness started life as a legal concept; it holds that when there are things you could know and should know, but manage not to know, you’re still responsible. The idea was central to the conviction of Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay in the Enron trial. But it’s more than just a legal idea: it’s the bad habit that lies at the heart of far too many businesses.

The full text can be read in this site:http://www.bnet.com/blog/business-strategy/bank-of-america-is-not-the-only-company-that-should-fear-wikileaks/957?promo=713&tag=nl.e713

We believe there is WILLFUL BLINDNESS going on regarding the Rapu-Rapu mine of LG, Kores and MSC. Those working in and for these companies plus those in the Philippine government who have adopted willful blindness as a course of action should take heed because one day the truth will have its day in court. The mine will soon close and those responsible will have to reckon with the judgment of the people and history.

Yeonpeong and Rapu-Rapu Islands

2010-12-01T10:06:00.003+08:00

By now, the South Korean executives of LG and Kores should know how it feels to have one’s island destroyed. Or do they care? On November 23, North Korea destroyed Yeonpeong Island after South Korea provoked the former with a military exercise. It is the height of absurdity for South Korea to complain about the North’s attack while it was the South that risked trouble by displaying its war arsenal to the enemy. It is only proper for the South Korean Defense Minister to resign because he approved of the war exercise conducted by his country. Nobody lights a match within 50 feet of a gasoline lorry or inside a warehouse of dynamites. You do not whet your knife before the very eyes of a neighbor with whom you have a quarrel. You do that and you only have yourself to blame.

LG and Kores own a total of 70% of Korea Malaysia Philippines Resources Inc. (the renamed Lafayette Philippines Inc.), the same company that owns in turn RRMI and RRPI. KMPRI is destroying Rapu-Rapu Island. Our boycott campaign of LG products is therefore an appropriate reply.

If war breaks out again in Korea, Filipinos should not help the South. We helped them in the 1950s but look at their act of gratitude – they are destroying our Rapu-Rapu Island, our version of Yeonpeong. These South Korean executives should pack up, close the mine, clean the contamination and enlist in their army to face Kim Jong Il.

RRMI and RRPI Employment of CAFGUs to Guard Creeks Continues

2010-12-01T09:51:00.010+08:00

Reports from Rapu-Rapu Island by residents confirm the continued presence of members of the paramilitary Citizen Armed Forces for Geographical Units (CAFGU) in the mine site and creeks. The employment of CAFGUs was legalized through an executive order during the administration of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, author of the Philippine Mining Act of 1995 when she was a senator. The public is not allowed to freely go to the creeks. Members of the NGO Sagip Isla Sagip Kapwa report that whenever outsiders approach the creeks, warning shots are fired.

Violent incidents involving CAFGUs include the arrest on July 26, 2006 of a Greenpeace activist, David Andrade who was merely gathering soil and water samples in Mirikpitik Creek. On November 16, 2008, Jessie Ecleo was found dead in Sitio Mirikpitik, Barangay Pagcolbon. The suspect, CAFGU Daniel Sumbilon Bongca of San Pablo, Zamboanga del Sur, admitted that he hit the victim with a lead pipe at the head causing instant death. (See Rapu-Rapu police blotter) Bongca surrendered to the police soon after the incident but today he is at large.

RRMI and RRPI claim that they employ guards in the creeks to prevent anti-mining activists from pouring poison into them. This is a lame excuse because those guards are not able to prevent contamination of the creeks. It is like preventing people from entering a leprosarium not to contain the disease and protect the public but to prevent tinea flava from entering the compound. If the CAFGU presence is intended to preserve the clean condition of the creeks, then why are mining executives unwilling to dip into the water there, even with armed guards? It is obvious that the guards have kept away the activists but not the contamination understandably since the latter comes from the mine site. The truth is that those CAFGUs are there to prevent activists from taking water and soil samples which can be used as evidence in a fair court of law.

The CAFGUs also prevent environmentalists from taking still photos and videos of the latest condition of the creeks. If there is nothing to hide and instead there is evidence of clean operations to show, then why should the public be prevented from viewing the creeks? Opening the creeks to public scrutiny will finally silence the opposition but only if they are clean. Since they are not, the option of RRMI and RRPI is to seal the creeks off.

RRMI and RRPI cannot produce the still photos and videos themselves because there will be questions of credibility. In addition, to clean portions of the creeks for a few hours of photo operation would require ten or even twenty years of scrubbing the banks and creek beds. To do that, they need to suspend mining operations. That option will diminish their profits. So, why clean the creeks? For them it is less costly to hire CAFGUs and prevent eyewitnesses from gathering evidence. They can only arrange tours inside the mine site and show areas they have pre-cleaned and claim their operations are environment-friendly. What need to be visited are areas outside the mine site impacted by mining. Visitors should also interview the people in the island and mainland Albay (there are 14,000 fishermen among them) suffering from loss of livelihood since 2005, the same year when mining went full blast in Rapu-Rapu. The truth about the creeks is crucial to the mining issue because they are the link between the mining operation and the 95% drop in fish catch in Albay Gulf.

Indeed, Rapu-Rapu mining is responsible . . . for severe environmental damage to the island and economic injustice to the people.

Rangasa Advertises LG Product Despite SARA Boycott Call

2010-11-30T13:18:00.006+08:00

Another evidence of Mr. Rangasa's turnaround on the issue of Rapu-Rapu mining is this photograph showing that he does not support the SARA call for boycott of LG products. Notice the LG brand of the flat screen he is using. The same equipment was last seen in his CIRCA office. The reader can validate the authenticity of this photograph by turning to Page 9 of the booklet "Championing Climate Change Adaptation the Albay Experience," published by CIRCA and the Philippine Network of Environmental Journalists, Inc. after a program with the same title was held on August 5 to 8, 2010. While SARA does not recommend the destruction of LG products bought before the launching of the boycott, CIRCA’s (or Rangasa’s) subsequent use of the photograph serves to endorse or advertise now that the campaign is on. Inadvertence cannot be used as defense because Rangasa is supposed to be circumspect about the implications of his acts.

"We do not see sincerity in CIRCA!" - SARA and Sagip Isla Sagip Kapwa

2010-11-05T10:40:00.001+08:00

Joint Press Release

November 4, 2010

“We do not see sincerity in CIRCA!”- SARA and Sagip Isla Sagip Kapwa

Groups challenge LGUs to be more responsive to the environment, decries overkill in security preparations for the summit.

At a picket protest at the La Piazza Convention Center, the venue of the LGU Summit +3i, a multi-sectoral group questioned the sincerity of the sponsoring organization, the Center for Initiative and Research on Climate Change Adaptation (CIRCA) and challenged the local government units to walk their talk. The groups also decried the security overkill on the summit considering that the topic is about climate change. Police barricades were set up near the venue as well as in the Legazpi City Airport, these measures only goes to show the anti-people and anti-environment character of the summit, which it seems, is afraid of criticisms.

According to Virgilio Perdigon Jr., spokesperson of the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance (SARA), “Is CIRCA really doing this for the environment, for the funds of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) or for the big mining companies to gain pogi points in the public eye? CIRCA’s Executive Director Manuel C. Rangasa even suggested during the October 11 meeting in preparation for the summit that Filminera, Goodfound Cement and Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project participate in the exhibit for climate change.” As of this writing, the DENR reported that Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project would not join the exhibit during the summit. However, the other two companies have not indicated any sign of withdrawing. Nevertheless, the mere suggestion to invite them to the climate change summit is way out of bounds.

“It is not only ironic. It is downright insulting. These companies are involved in the most destructive mining practices in the region, open pit mining chief among them. Have CIRCA and Mr. Rangasa sold their principles? The best practice that these companies can exhibit to help alleviate climate change is the immediate and total closure of their mines,” said Perdigon.

Antonio Casitas, head servant of SAGIP ISLA, said, “While it is good that summits like these are conducted it would be better if non-governmental organizations (NGOs) both in the grassroots and environmental institutions had been invited to have a more holistic view of the environmental problem we are facing. It would also be better if LGUs not only talk about climate change and disaster risk reduction but actually do something concrete about them.”

“In the short term they can issue resolutions banning deforestation and open pit mining in their areas of responsibility like here in Albay. This summit will come to naught if companies like LG International, Korea Resources, Goodfound Cement and Filminera continue their operation and destructive practices. It will be a slap on the face of Albay Governor Joey Salceda if CIRCA and Mr. Nong Rangasa will legitimize their environmental assault,” ended Casitas. # # #

Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance is formally cutting ties with Nong Rangasa, CIRCA Executive Director

2010-11-05T10:35:00.002+08:00

Press Statement

We from the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance (SARA) are proud that we have remained true to our name and pledge since our inception. We therefore protect and uphold our honor by being upright in both word and deed. We consider it an affront not just on the alliance but on our environmental advocacy as well when people formerly associated with us are now working as advocates of big mining companies that have devastated the island of Rapu-Rapu and other parts of the region.

It is in this light we are now formally cutting our ties with Mr. Manuel “Nong” Rangasa, currently the Executive Director of the Center for Initiatives and Research on Climate Change Adaptation (CIRCA) who has time and again tried to project himself as an environmental crusader but all the while maneuvering to win the graces of big transnational mining companies.

An evidence of Mr. Rangasa’s advocacy for mining companies was his suggestion during the meeting on October 11, 2010 in preparation for the LGU Summit +3i that mining companies namely Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project, Filminera, and Goodfound Cement Corporation be invited to exhibit their best practices on disaster risk reduction. These companies violate Commandment Number 7 of the Ten Commandments on Climate Change proudly flaunted by the Albay Provincial Government:

Thou shall not resort to open pit mining . . . to avert climate change.

Allowing mining companies that operate open pit mines is a mockery of the Provincial Government’s advocacy against climate change. It would cast doubt on its sincerity. Mr. Rangasa’s suggestion is an indication that CIRCA wants to legitimize the violation of Commandment Number 7. We believe that the best practice which these mining companies can showcase is the total and immediate closure of their mines in order that they may contribute to our campaign against climate change.

Mr. Virgilio S. Perdigon, Jr. objected to the suggestion but when he received the copy of the minutes of the meeting, he noted that his statements were deleted. This is the second time that an omission was committed against Mr. Perdigon by Mr. Rangasa. In the 2007 National Conference on Climate Change Adaptation, the former rendered a presentation in Workshop 7 titled “The Impact of Climate Change on the Poor and the Role of the Academe in Adaptation.” It was appreciated by noted environmentalists like Dr. Helen Mendoza and Sr. Aida Velasquez who attended the workshop. However, when Mr. Perdigon received a copy of the final report, the presentation was omitted. But being Mr. Rangasa’s friend he did not mind it.

But this time, attention must be called to this second instance of omission lest Mr. Perdigon and the whole SARA be a party to a disservice to our local community residents who are major stakeholders in the climate change issue. # # #

Local Community Approval Required for Mining Operations to Continue, says PNoy

2010-10-14T12:52:00.002+08:00

In his report to the nation after the first 100 days in office, Philippine President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III, declared his policy on mining and related issues. Replying to a question from a representative of the Cordillera region, PNoy, as the President would like to be called, reiterated local community approval. We in the movement against Rapu-Rapu mining find a silver lining in this statement. We have the signature sheets to prove that mining in Rapu-Rapu has no social acceptability owing to four reasons cited in many fora and previous posts in this website. There is environmental damage and economic injustice, as we have repeatedly shown.

Hereunder is the dialogue between Alex Bangsil and the President on October 7, 2010:

Alex Bangsil, Regional Press Officer ng Tuloy Pinoy, Yellow Force and Pinoy Lawyer:

Hindi po lingid sa kaalaman ng karamihan na ang Cordillera ang isa sa mga pinakamayamang rehiyon at meron nga po tayong mga malalaking negosyo lalung-lalo na po ang mining at ang power sector na nagtayo ng malalaking negosyo rito. Ngunit marami po ang nasasadlak sa kahirapan. Ang rehiyon po ng Cordillera ang isa sa pinakamahirap dito sa ating bansa. Ano po ba ang inyong short, medium and long-term plan para sa Cordillera para maibsan ang kahirapan dito?

Translation:

It is widely known that the Cordillera is one of the richest regions (in terms of natural resources) and big business firms have invested here specially in mining and power generation. However, many are mired in poverty. The Cordillera region is one of the poorest in the country (in terms of socio-economic indicators). What are your short, medium and long-term plans to alleviate poverty here?

PNoy:

Tama po ang sinabi niyo. Napakarami ang yamang nandiyan sa Cordillera. Nandiyan po ang naudlot na autonomy niyo. Kayo po ang watershed resource the buong hilagang Luzon. Kailangan naman pong matamasa niyo ang biyayang binibigay niyo sa buong bansa. Yung short-term sa governance, more and more tutugunan. Ngayon sa mining, isa sa pinakamataas ang potensyal sa inyo ngayon, ang pananaw po natin diyan ang komunidad ang nagdidikta. Ito ba ang gusto niyong pahintulutan? Ito ba ay tumutugon doon sa mga safeguards para proteksyunan yung environment? Oo o hindi? Kayo ang dapat makilahok. Kayo dapat ang pakinggan ang boses tungo sa pag-eexploit natin ng inyong mineral resources. Sa reforestation program siyempre sa inyo magmumula. Talagang magkakaroon ng mga proyekto at pondo na kung saan trabaho ang dapat mapala ninyo. Yung sa power, natural po ineexploit ang resources niyo dapat po yung yaman na nakukuha po ng bansa ay maibalik sa inyo sa mga serbisyo, imprastuktura, pag-aangat ng kakayahan ng bawat isang mamamayan diyan.

Translation:

You’re right. Cordillera has so much wealth. Your bid for autonomy has been stymied. You are the watershed resource of the entire northern Luzon. You must reap the benefits you are bestowing on the rest of the country. The short-term plan for governance is to address this increasingly. In mining, you have the highest potential. Our view is that the community should be the one to dictate the terms. Do you approve of it? Do mining interests respond to the safeguards required for environmental protection? Yes or no? You must get involved. Your voice must be heard in the discussions about exploitation of your mineral resources. The reforestation program, of course, should begin with you. We will provide the projects and funds to generate jobs. As regards power generation, since your resources are being exploited, the benefits reaped by the country should be repaid with services, infrastructure, and the raising of living standards there.

Ilaw sa Isla

2010-10-04T14:02:00.002+08:00

The documentary on an alternative way of developing Rapu-Rapu can now be viewed on Youtube. Visit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p7OZ2_2X2w.

Yes, Rapu-Rapu Mining is Responsible . . . for the extreme environmental damage and severe economic injustice in the island and surrounding areas

2010-09-25T14:03:00.003+08:00

Lately, a couple of persons were seen roaming the city of Legazpi in T-shirts with the print We are for responsible mining and RRMI - Responsible mining at work. The title of this post is our curt reply.

BFAR V’s Amazing Ability to Contradict Itself

2010-09-24T11:15:00.002+08:00

Being far from the truth seems not to be the sole expertise of BFAR V. That office is also capable of contradicting itself.

Remember that Regional Director Dennis V. Del Socorro declared to Bombo Radyo Legazpi that the sperm whale found near Carogcog, Rapu-Rapu died of old age. (See previous post.) Now comes a letter from the very same official stating, among others that:

“Due to the advance (sic) stage of decomposition, necropsy was not made to ascertain the cause of death.” (italics supplied)

This statement is the last sentence in paragraph 3 of the letter from Del Socorro dated September 6, 2010 addressed to Virgilio S. Perdigon, Jr., Secretary-General of Aquinas University of Legazpi, External Vice-President of Pangataman Bikol and Spokesperson of Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance. The letter is shown on the side bar.

How can a government official contradict himself through a public declaration and an official letter to a taxpayer? It is impossible to reconcile the two statements. The public must never be shortchanged by any government official who derives his salaries from taxpayer’s money.

The more important questions, however, remain: What is the actual condition of the waters around Rapu-Rapu? Could the sperm whale have died of heavy metal contamination? Is the mining operation on the island not the real cause of the death of the sperm whale and many other environmental damages ?

BFAR has the obligation to conduct an honest study and inform the people of Albay about the actual condition of the waters around Rapu-Rapu. If BFAR cannot do that, then its personnel do not earn their pay and, therefore, must resign their posts out of simple delicadeza.

BFAR Very FAR from the truth; Sperm whale died of old age?!

2010-07-26T12:19:00.003+08:00

In a report coursed through the media in Legazpi City on July 23, the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) Region V attributed to old age the death of the sperm whale found in Rapu-Rapu, Albay on July 19, 2010.
(http://bomboradyo.com/index.php/news/regional-news/bicolano-news/11575-update-kagurangan-causa-kan-pagkagadan-kan-sperm-whale-sa-carogcog-rapu-rapu-albay)

This conclusion was made by the government agency despite its own prior information on July 20 that:

Ariel Tioquinto, BFAR Fisheries Emergency Response Stranding (FERS) team assistant leader, said the team confirmed that it was indeed a sperm whale measuring 15 meters long, 7.5 meters in diameter and 3 wide. (http://balita.ph/2010/07/20/dead-sperm-whale-fished-out-in-rapu-rapu-albay/)

At 15 meters long, the whale cannot be a female because the maximum length of a female sperm whale is 11 meters; its maximum weight 15 tons. The following data from different references support the hypothesis that it was not a female:

A bull can grow up to 20.5 metres (67 ft) long.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_whale)

The sperm whale is an animal of extremes in size (up to 18 m), sexual dimorphism (mature males have three times the mass of mature females).
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/41755/0)

Adult females may grow to lengths of 36 feet (11 m) and weigh 15 tons (13607 kg). Adult males, however, reach about 52 feet (16 m) and may weigh as much as 45 tons (40823 kg). Adult females may grow to lengths of 36 feet (11 m) and weigh 15 tons (13607 kg). Adult males, however, reach about 52 feet (16 m) and may weigh as much as 45 tons (40823 kg).
(http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/S/sperm_whale.html)

Sperm whales are the largest toothed whales. Adult males grow to be about 50-60 feet (17-20 meters) long, weighing about 40-50 tons (36-45 tonnes). Females are smaller, about 33-40 feet (11-13 meters) long, weighing about 14-18 tons.
(http://balita.ph/2010/07/20/dead-sperm-whale-fished-out-in-rapu-rapu-albay/)

At 12 meters (according to local residents) or 15 meters (according to BFAR V), the sperm whale that died in Rapu-Rapu could not have been a female but a young male. If so, then it could not have died of old age.

Another objection we raise to the BFAR conclusion is the total silence of the agency as to whether or not a sampling and sharing of the samples was done with third-party laboratories. Issuing the old-age cause of the whale’s death, BFAR V clearly shows that it never did any laboratory analysis or waited for any result. It takes 15 days to do the lab test. (On the dead sperm whale in 2006, the Philippine Institute of Pure and Applied Chemistry (PIPAC) of Ateneo de Manila University received the samples on April 5 and issued the results on April 20, 2006.) The 15-day requisite is confirmed by the Chemistry Department of Aquinas University of Legazpi as a period for the “incubation” of the sample. Releasing its conclusion on July 22, 2010 after visiting the site on July 20 clearly leaves the agency only two (2) days to make any laboratory test, if ever one was done. Also, BFAR V does not cite any basis for its conclusion that old age was the cause of the whale’s death. Hence, it is downright preposterous!

We reiterate our call for a third-party laboratory analysis of the flesh and internal organs of the whale. That is the transparent and objective process that will ascertain the cause of the sperm whale’s death. Anything less than that is another attempt at cover-up.

We plead to all government agencies to stop protecting the interest of aliens and big business. When the miners shall have done their damage and left the island, we the local residents of Bicol will be the ones to work together to clean up their mess. It is time, under the Aquino government, they made amends and performed their sworn duties to the people.

Sperm whale dies in Rapu-Rapu

2010-07-12T15:27:00.003+08:00

This time the “mine sweepers” of Lafayette could not hide the body of evidence. It is too large for their nets – 12 meters long and 20 tons heavy!

On July 19, 2010, we received a report that a dead whale was floating off the shores of Barangay Carogcog, Rapu-Rapu, Albay. Verification revealed that the casualty is a sperm whale. It was already decomposing, its black skin mostly peeled off revealing a white carcass.

We recall that on January 25, 2006, a smaller sperm whale, some 2 meters long, was also found dead in almost the same spot. Apologists of Lafayette (we still refer to it as such despite the change in name to Korea Malaysia Philippines Resources, Inc.) attributed its death to hacking by the island residents. Queerly, however, it was not consumed by the “hackers.” Laboratory tests by the Philippine Institute of Pure and Applied Chemistry of Ateneo de Manila University revealed that its blood, flesh, liver and intestines were contaminated with mercury, cadmium and copper.

Usually Lafayette would send out its boats to gather dead fish floating in the waters near the mine site specially on rainy days. This was testified to by Mr. Antonio Casitas, head servant of Sagip-Isla, Sagip-Kapwa, during a dialogue called by Bishop Lucilo B. Quiambao of the Diocese of Legazpi on September 30, 2008. Mr. Casitas daringly spoke in front of the media, government representatives, and executives of LG, Kores and MSC, the new owners of Lafayette. The company would also buy dead fish from residents who find them. The reason for this is obvious: to hide any evidence of the daily death of fish that happens around the island.

The sperm whale found on July 19, 2010 was a mammoth. Residents of Rapu-Rapu testify that Lafayette personnel went to the site and tried to haul away the whale. Members of the Philippine National Police and employees of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources also came. On July 20, 2010, BFAR Regional Director Dennis del Socorro was interviewed by the television network ABS-CBN and he said that his office would look for bullet wounds and bury or burn the whale that same day.

This statement arouses our suspicion that BFAR will not conduct a thorough investigation but focus only on its “bullet wound” theory as the cause of the sperm whale’s death. We call on that agency and the DENR not to repeat their action in October 2007 when they hastily concluded that the mining operation in Rapu-Rapu was not the cause.

Lafayette itself has a record of evasions in the wake of implicating incidents. In 2005, they deflected culpability by claiming that the fishkills harmed only “two kilograms of thumb-sized fish” despite the testimony by Binosawan residents that they gathered two sacks of palm-sized dead fish near the shores and not yet counting the dead fish far out into the sea.

On July 19-21 2006, during the “tutorial runs,” 9 kilograms of dead marine organisms were found in the shorelines after the pipes leaked. The company just claimed that only water leaked and, therefore, the death of the marine organisms could not be blamed on them.

On October 26-29, 2007, another fishkill occurred. The company defended itself by claiming that the site of the fishkill was seven (7) kilometers away from the mine site which they said did not operate at the time. (See rebuttals of the claims in a previous article)

When Jessie Ecleo was murdered by a CAFGU serving as company guard, they attributed the crime to “love triangle.” When children suffered from skin diseases after swimming in the beach, the company and the Municipal Health Officer claimed that the cause was not heavy metal contamination but bacteria.

Now this dead sperm whale adds to the growing preponderance of evidences. We will not take sitting down any knee-jerk response by BFAR, DENR or any agency the way they did in the past. There should be a sampling of the whale’s flesh and internal organs and a third-party laboratory analysis should be done. Looking for bullet wounds and speedily disposing of the carcass is not the responsible action to take. These government employees are beneficiaries of our taxes and they owe us the truth. They are mandated by the civil service code to exert all effort in the performance of their duties. Anything less than that will smack of flagrant cover-up. Prove to us that under the new administration of President Benigno C. Aquino III, there is no corruption. Otherwise, they should start packing up for we will petition the new President for their removal from office.

Genuine Development of Rapu-Rapu

2010-06-07T15:03:00.010+08:00

The mining operation in the small island of Rapu-Rapu has no significant direct or indirect benefit for the people. We have advocated the following, in lieu of mining:

1. Agriculture. – Support for farming, fishing and genuine land distribution has been the clamor of the island residents. With mining, the land that the miners will leave behind will not be conducive to agriculture because it will have no humus which plants need in their growth. Instead, acid-forming rocks and soil will make the land poisonous when the rains fall. The runoff containing both acid and silt will flow to and damage the sea. Mining will destroy the food supply of generations, whereas agriculture will ensure that every generation will have food on the table. Mining feeds the luxury of aliens - gold; agriculture sustains the most basic need of our own people - food.

2. Energy generation. – In Binosawan a microhydroelectric plant was designed by the British-Vietnamese engineer Minh Nguyen and installed through the help of the British Embassy, United Nations Development Program, Social Action Center, Sta. Florentina Parish, Sibol ng Bagong Agham at Teknolohiya, and Aquinas University of Legazpi. It sustained the lighting needs of 70 household 24 hours a day until Supertyphoon Reming damaged the lines. The miners provide a diesel-powered generator which operates 12 hours a day and emits air pollutants.

3. Fast sea transportation. – If the miners could use the fastcraft Lady Jacqueline of Leighton and reached Rapu-Rapu in one hour, why can’t the local government or any private firm invest in the same? At present it takes 3 hours to go to the island.

4. Ecofriendly road network. – After years of Hixbar and Lafayette presence on the island, and the pork barrel, none accrued to road projects in Rapu-Rapu. The only infrastructure built in the island after the alleged P135 million in taxes in 2009 is an earth road from Poblacion to Morocborocan allegedly worth P5 million and expected to be washed away when the rains come.

5. Decent housing. – With mining, the residents are pushed to the margins of the island. Residents of Binosawan are even under threat of a landslide from the waste rock deposit piled in the upper slopes. The people are entitled to houses that can withstand the typhoons that pass by the locality.

6. Potable water system. – The mining operation already poses severe drinking water problems to Pagcolbon as evidenced by the letter of Sanggunian Secretary Allan Asuncion to Engr. Roger Corpus. As the mining coverage expands, the island’s water supply will be erased.

7. Preservation of the island’s ecosystem. – No amount of taxes, no amount of rehabilitation fund will ever compensate for the damage to a fragile ecosystem because the damage is irreversible and would last for several generations, 2000 years according to National Geographic Magazine.

The basic question is not how to mine Rapu-Rapu but how to develop the island and mining is not a sustainable option. There is development when people have fair access to the seven basic material needs - food, clothing, shelter, livelihood or employment, education, security (against crime, disease and effects of old age), and recreation. When they have no such access as a result of mistaken economic priorities like permitting an island to be mined engendering environmental damage and economic injustice, there can be no development.

Where's the Development?

2010-05-21T11:28:00.017+08:00

In April 2010, report from the island said that heavy equipment were brought to Lagsingan, a sitio of Poblacion, Rapu-Rapu. Initial information includes the construction of a road from Poblacion to Morocborocan. In response to a letter, the Department of Agriculture disclosed that the project is a farm-to-market earth road 1,800 meters long and budgeted with P5 million. Our fear is that a mere earth road will not last when the rains fall later this year. Where is justice for Rapu-Rapu? After giving an estimated P10 billion to the miners, all that the island gets in return is an earth road!

A reporter of a big TV network went to the island and told this author that there is no development in Rapu-Rapu.

So, where’s the development promised by advocates of mining? I am reminded of the article written by Peter Wallace. On October 27, 2007, Mr. Wallace published his opinions through an article titled “Where’s the pot of gold?”

Mr. Wallace wrote:

Mining has been touted as one of the sectors government will promote as a major contributor to the economy. . . Early this year, mining exports were to be 3 percent of the total exports or about $1-$2 billion. Just recently the Mines and Geosciences Bureau quoted $10 billion as a likely investment figure.

By now investment should be far higher, the big mining companies should be aggressively exploring, joint venturing, buying mines. But, except for a handful, they’re not.
A smart government would ask why, and act to change it. The secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources should be talking to the industry and asking why.

The first to feel sorry for such a dour situation should be the government. It seems an Australian is sorrier and does all the sour-graping. Why? Because foreigners like him have more to gain from the newly bared mining resources of the Philippines than Filipinos ourselves. Like a virgin being undressed before alien eyes, the mountains of our country make the mouth of Mr. Wallace water.

Since Mr. Wallace really thinks so low of us Filipinos I am inclined to return the volley. Australia began to be colonized by England as a place of exile for rapists, murderers, thieves and other species of low life. If he thinks $10 billion is not being availed of by us then he should be happy because such huge amount is still in his countrymen’s hands. One man’s expense is another’s income. The Filipino’s non-income is the foreigner’s savings. We do not feel sorry for that but Mr. Wallace does! Why? Because that $10 billion is a “bait” with which the likes of him would ensnare our people and squeeze out the bounty of our land. No fool would put in one dollar and get 90 cents in return. Mr. Wallace proposes to pour in $ 10 billion because he wants foreigners to receive 20, 30 billion dollars or more. In Rapu-Rapu, for example, Lafayette is reported to invest $40 million. A browsing of the company’s website and a research on metal prices plus some arithmetic would reveal that Lafayette would earn $1.549 billion. That’s earning $38 for every $1 invested! What do the people of Rapu-Rapu get in return? In Mr. Wallace’s word NADA! They got five major fishkills, 68% decline in fish catch, decline in copra production, landslides, black bug infestation brought in by Lafayette ships, total loss of drinking water supply in Barangay Pagcolbon, militarization, poverty, and migration.

Filipinos are not taking the bait and so Mr. Wallace calls our government unsmart and by extension, our people too.

If the current rush into mining concessions is not enough for Mr. Wallace that is his problem. We, Filipinos, do not need an alien like him to tell us what to do. For us, the frenzy over mining explorations is destroying our forests, mountains, rivers and seas. In return, so much destruction of livelihoods has happened. In Rapu-Rapu, for example, five fishkills have been documented. An average of 68% decline in fish catch was reported by Ibon Foundation in a study conducted in February 2007.

We have been dictated to by foreigners since 1565 when Miguel Lopez de Legazpi arrived. We do not need another dictation disguised as unsolicited advice from an alien. That constitutes foreign interference. His advocated foreign investment in an industry originally exclusive to Filipinos is economic interference.

Mr. Wallace wrote:

There, of course, is one reason I can immediately cite: Continuity. You don’t change managers every few months if you wish to instill a sense of stability in a system. . . It’s crazy. It introduces a level of uncertainty that if you’re investing hundreds of millions of dollars, you will surely pause to think. Every manager (in this case Secretary) has his own philosophies, own set of priorities, own agenda. And a change can be quite substantial, particularly in a country where the leader herself has changed policy emphases fairly frequently.

If Mr. Wallace meets a problem he will not solve it. He will find someone or something to blame. In this instant case, he blames the government. If there is any wrong which our government has done it is not doing nothing. Rather, it is doing so much for foreign companies. One regional director even sounds like the spokesperson of Lafayette. Our government provides tax deductions and holidays to the countrymen of Mr. Wallace. I pay 23% of my annual income as tax. I work for 12 months, I give back two months income as tax. With 13th month pay, I have the equivalent of 11 months of earnings to use for my needs. Since there is a 12% EVAT approximately another month’s income is taken away as tax. That leaves me with only 10 months out of the equivalent of 13 months of work.

What tax is paid by mining companies? Under the PEZA privileges, they pay only 7% plus the measly real estate taxes. However, they are given by the Special Economic Zone Act, a tax-free period of six to eight years. Originally, Lafayette said its mine life was six years. Later the company adjusted it to eight years. Those estimates are not results of a technical study. They are results of a taxation study. Other corporations are taxed at the rate of 32% of their income.

Mr. Wallace wrote:

On top of that, the government has done a poor job at protecting the industry from attack. The incident at the Lafayette mine in Rapu Rapu was allowed to get completely out of hand. Oppositors, including Bishop Bastes, had a field day— and the government stood by. It even, quite unbelievably, encouraged it by appointing this bishop to head an investigation. He, of course, recommended closing the mine.

Well, he almost succeeded, and the government’s dilly-dallying over giving approval to re-open the mine almost broke the company. This was a minor incident. It should have been resolved within 3-6 months. Lafayette had made the corrections by then, but it was 12 costly months later before approval to re-open was given.

As to countering the rabid vilification by oppositors and giving a true picture of what happened, the government did nothing. Just stood by.

The Arroyo government has been overly protective of foreign interests while laying bare to alien rape the patrimony of its citizens. In the Rapu-Rapu case, Lafayette failed the “tutorial” run. The leaks and other failures are documented in the Technical Working Group Report. Instead of honoring his word, “You fail it, I close it!”, Mr. Angelo Reyes permitted the company to resume operations.

One nasty practice of opinion-makers is the use of exaggeration as in claiming that Bishop Bastes “had a field day – and the government stood by.” If I read the TWG Report on the “tutorial” run correctly and saw the ceremonies in Malacañang with clear eyes, the government was severely biased against the RRFFC and favored the minority report of Mr. Gregorio Tabuena. It was Mr. Tabuena who recommended a “test” run which was not in the recommendations of the commission. Of all the commission’s recommendations, none was heeded. If that was not protecting the foreign investor, then what is?

The government stood idly by. That’s true. It did nothing to protect Filipino interest. Yes, the recommendation was to close the mine. Just a minor correction: that recommendation did not come from Bishop Bastes. It came from the majority. The Tabuena recommendation for a test run was heeded by the government. In spite of so many concessions to Lafayette, Mr. Wallace still has the gall to whine about a government that “stood idly by”. He even has the chronology confused. The government did not stand idly by then appointed Bishop Bastes. Instead, the government appointed Bishop Bastes, ignored the recommendations of the Commission, heeded that of Mr. Tabuena, then showered Lafayette with so many favors. After all that, Mr. Wallace still feels so much inadequacy.

The “rabid vilification” was committed not by Lafayette oppositors but by Lafayette apologists and the company’s own Community Relations Department. Consider the following:

Atty. Bayani Agabin threatened to sue those spreading the “hoax that was the October 2007 fishkill”. Glaring evidences in the form of reports and photographs abounded but to Atty. Agabin the fifth fishkill was a “hoax”.

At least two members of the Albay Sangguniang Panlalawigan staunchly defended Lafayette against the accusations.

The true picture of what happened was distorted by Lafayette itself when its managers denied in public their culpability for the October 2005 fishkills but admitted it in their private communications to the DENR.

The truth about Lafayette operations was suppressed when the Philippine Daily Inquirer removed from its February 17, 2007 issue the body of the story titled “Environmentalists from 27 nations sign petition for investors in Rapu-Rapu mine to pull out. We searched every page of the issue but the story was nowhere.

If we remember correctly, it was the RRFFC specially Bishop Bastes who was severely vilified.

Mr. Wallace wrote:

When I come across media’s virulent attacks on mining, on top of the tirades of some members of the Church and well-funded NGOs, I wonder why mining companies even bother at all. Why not just leave the Philippines to be a backwater with its people in poverty? I’m not aware of any action any of these groups are doing that would give a job and a decent life to Filipinos. I’m not even aware of any positive action many of these groups are taking to improve the environment.

We also wonder why despite the strong and loud protests against mining companies they still remain in the country. Makapal ang mukha is our word for it. We also wonder why a guest of the Philippines is allowed to stay here longer than a day after insulting us with: Why not just leave the Philippines to be a backwater with its people in poverty? We had prosperity in the 1800s from the abaca industry. Our economy was second only to Japan’s in the 1960’s. It never boomed because of mining. Masbate and Camarines Norte have been mined since the Spanish times but they remain among the poorest ten provinces to this day. Take these statistics:

Aroroy, Masbate has been a mining town since 1837 (http://www.geocities.com/ppsec/pp/masbate.htm) yet it is only a 2nd Class municipality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aroroy,_Masbate). Masbate is the poorest province of Bicol with a poverty incidence level of 62.8% according to the NSCB survey in 2000 (http://txtmania.com/trivia/national.php).

Paracale, Camarines Norte has been a mining town since 1939 (http://www.wallstreetreporter.com/linked/PearlAsianMiningIndustries.html) and yet it is only a 3rd Class municipality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracale,_Camarines_Norte). Camarines Norte is the second poorest province of Bicol, with a poverty incidence level of 52.7% according to the NSCB survey in 2000 (http://txtmania.com/trivia/national.php).

Rapu-Rapu, Albay has been mined since the 1930’s but it is only a 4th Class municipality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapu-Rapu,_Albay ), the poorest in the province.

Both Masbate and Camarines Norte are listed as among the country’s ten (10) poorest provinces per NSCB survey in 2000 (http://txtmania.com/trivia/national.php).

On the other hand, the country’s richest provinces and congressional districts derive their wealth not from mining but other industries:

In its 2000 survey, the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) identified the ten provinces with the lowest poverty incidence levels. Each of the four districts in Metro Manila, composed of several cities and/or municipalities, was treated as a province in the survey.

1. 2nd district of Metro Manila1 4.1 percent (a)
2. 4th district of Metro Manila2 4.9 percent (b)
3. Bulacan, 5.4 percent
4. 1st district of Metro Manila (Manila), 5.8 percent (c)
5. Batanes, 7.5 percent
6. Rizal, 8 percent
7. Laguna, 8.6 percent
8. 3rd district of Metro Manila3, 9 percent
9. Bataan, 9.9 percent
10. Cavite, 10.2 percent.

(a) Mandaluyong, Marikina, Pasig, Quezon City and San Juan
(b) Las Pinas, Makati, Muntinlupa, Paranaque, Pasay, Pateros and Taguig
(c) Caloocan, Valenzuela, Malabon and Navotas

(Source: http://www.txtmania.com/trivia/national.php)

If those are not enough, consider these:

-----------------------Share in non-fuel minerals --------Population
-----------------------in Value of total Exports -------below Poverty line
Country -----------------(percent)-----------------------(percent)

Guinea-----------------------17----------------------------- 40
Niger-------------------------67----------------------------- 63
Zambia-----------------------66----------------------------- 86
Jamaica----------------------53----------------------------- 34
Chile--------------------------43----------------------------- 21
Peru---------------------------40----------------------------- 49
Congo------------------ ------40----------------------------- 49
Mauritania-------------------40----------------------------- n.a.
Papua New Guinea----------35------------------------------ 57
Togo--------------------------30------------------------------ 32

(Source: UNCTAD Handbook of World Mineral Trade Statistics; World Bank Development Indicators; UN Development Programme: Human Development Report 2001, quoted in the lecture of Dr. Giovanni Tapang of the University of the Philippines College of Engineering on January 31, 2006 at the Daragang Magayon Hall of Aquinas University of Legazpi).

The data show that these countries’ exports are composed of high percentages of non-fuel minerals and yet the percentages of their populations below poverty line are also very high. In his testimony before the commission on April 6, Hon. Alvarez stated that the mining communities of the Cordilleras, Canada, and Australia “have become miserable patches of poverty after the gold or the mineral ore was extracted.” So, what poverty alleviation can arise from mining?

These statements are downright arrogant: “I’m not aware of any action any of these groups are doing that would give a job and a decent life to Filipinos. I’m not even aware of any positive action many of these groups are taking to improve the environment.”

It is the problem of Mr. Wallace if he is unaware of certain things. Everyone has the privilege to choose ignorance. But arrogance is entirely different. He is unaware of the effect of Lafayette mining on the fish catch of fishermen in Rapu-Rapu – a decline of 68% according to an Ibon Foundation study in February 2007. Of the 286 jobs in the mine, only 131 are for the residents of Rapu-Rapu. The company promised 1000 during start up and 416 during normal operation in a Powerpoint presentation in 2001. The anti-mining NGOs are the ones protecting the livelihood of people. All that mining companies can give to ordinary people are menial jobs while their executives sitting in airconditioned offices earn millions. Mr. Wallace only has to read the annual reports of Lafayette to verify this. Not only are mining companies depriving people of their livelihood. The companies are also destroying the resources that should have been protected for the use of future generations as sustainable development requires.

Mr. Wallace also wrote:

If I were a mining company I’d like the government to tell me what it has done, and will do to fully protect my investment and my people. I’m not going to invest in a place where both are at risk. I’d have called all the mining company representatives that are here for an extended dialogue (meaning, two-way talks) about these issues: What are the concerns? What will be done about them?

Specific actions and corresponding deadlines committed to. I’ve offered to arrange it, but thus far I’ve had no response from government.

Since I am a taxpayer (while mining companies are given so much tax breaks) I’d like the government to tell me what it has done, and will do to fully protect my tax and my people. I’m not going to continue supporting an administration that places both at risk. I call on it to scrap the Philippine Mining Act of 1995. After 15 years, where is the development? What have mining companies like Lafayette done to our national patrimony?

Why demand response from our government? Mr. Wallace is not a citizen. He is better deported back to Australia for insulting us and advocating interests inimical to the Filipino people.

Mr. Wallace's article was downloaded from
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=peterWallace_oct26_2007 October 27, 2007

Would You Plant Your Feet in Mid-air?

2010-05-01T12:27:00.009+08:00

(A response to Peter Wallace’s "Would You Invest Here?")

George Bernard Shaw once said about liberals as people who “have their feet solidly planted in mid-air.” We have nothing against liberals, neither anything in favor of conservatives nor something about those in the grey area between. Also, we do not know if the Australian columnist Peter Wallace is a liberal, conservative or anywhere in the grey area between. Of one thing, however, we are certain: as to the reality of life for the millions of toiling masses of Filipinos, Mr. Wallace is way up in his Cloud 9. We do not blame him. He is an alien from Down Under where life is more pleasant. The Philippines is poor because we citizen Filipinos have no control over and do not benefit from our own natural resources. Those resources have been given over to foreigners by Filipino authorities who are junior partners of the former. The toiling masses get meager wages, the junior partners get much but the foreign investor reaps the lion’s share. In Rapu-Rapu, for example, based on figures from Lafayette itself, the gain is $37.5 for every $1 invested. If the Philippines is in such a mess, most of the cause is foreign domination which, today, masquerades as foreign investment which Mr. Wallace taunts us to accept hook, line and sinker much like the spider that welcomed its victims to the parlor:

Come hither, hither, pretty Fly, with the pearl and silver wing;
Your robes are green and purple — there’s a crest upon your head;
Your eyes are like the diamond bright, but mine are dull as lead!”
Alas, alas! how very soon this silly little Fly,
Hearing his wily, flattering words, came slowly flitting by;
With buzzing wings she hung aloft, then near and nearer drew,
Thinking only of her brilliant eyes, and green and purple hue –
Thinking only of her crested head — poor foolish thing! At last,
Up jumped the cunning Spider, and fiercely held her fast.
He dragged her up his winding stair, into his dismal den,
Within his little parlour — but she ne’er came out again!

And now dear little children, who may this story read,
To idle, silly flattering words, I pray you ne’er give heed:
Unto an evil counsellor, close heart and ear and eye,
And take a lesson from this tale, of the Spider and the Fly.

Again, take the case of the residents of Rapu-Rapu. Mr. Wallace once wrote, “where’s the pot of gold?” (Manila Standard Today October 26, 2007) We ask, in Rapu-Rapu where’s the development? When our NGO volunteers went there in August 2009, they saw a woman making hard brooms out of coconut midribs. Each sells for P15 (about 35 US cents). She makes four in a day. Yet, the coconuts are threatened by destruction as the mining operation of the former Lafayette Mining Limited of Australia through its local subsidiary, Lafayette Philippines, Inc. (now named Korea Malaysia Philippines Resources, Inc) expands from the southern tip to the north of the island.

Mr. Wallace is in the Philippines to convince Filipinos that Australian investment is good. We do know it is good! But good for whom? Certainly for them; we have doubts if it is, for Filipinos. The Rapu-Rapu trauma from Lafayette Mining Limited of Australia may not be the representative case of their engagement here but it definitely opens our minds to the very real phenomenon of good intentions paving the road to hell.

On March 5, 2010 Mr. Wallace wrote in the Manila Standard Today:

A mine (Lafayette) was closed for a mining spill that did no measurable damage. A delay of over 6 months to approve reopening forced the company into bankruptcy. Bishop Arturo Bastes lied to encourage that closure, which the government acquiesced to.

Mr. Wallace strayed too far from the facts of that unhappy incident (unhappy, for us here in the locality) as the following rebuttals would prove:

The mining spills of 2005 did a lot of damage. – Lafayette violated the Clean Water Act of the Philippines. It was slapped with a total of P16 million in fines. Mr. Wallace can go over the records of the Pollution Adjudication Board. If the fines were undeserved, then Mr. Wallace can initiate a refund proceeding.

The people of Rapu-Rapu and surrounding towns suffered immensely from income loss because the fish in Albay Gulf were poisoned with cyanide measured at 35 parts per million (the tolerable limit is 0.05 ppm). (Source: Mines and Geosciences Bureau “Fact sheet on the Mercury Issue in Albay” dated February 2, 2006 Page 9) While the executives of Lafayette continued to earn their millions in salaries, the fishermen of Albay and Sorsogon lost their meager incomes. The pre-operation survey of Lafayette revealed that the fishermen in the primary impact barangays of Malobago, Pagcolbon and Binosawan were earning P19.8 million a year. (Source: Lafayette Powerpoint presentation titled Baseline Data slide 12). The company did not reveal any economic impact study after the mining operation started. However, Ibon Foundation learned, through a study in February 2007, that the average weekly income of fishermen in five barangays (Poblacion, Malobago, Binosawan, Tinopan in Rapu-Rapu and Billante in Prioto Diaz) dropped by 68.56%. (Ibon Foundation; Mining Rapu-Rapu’s Pot of Gold, a Study on the Socioeconomic Impacts of the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project on the Residents of Rapu-Rapu, Albay and Prieto Diaz, Sorsogon). These are the hard facts on the ground. So, where’s the development? Would you invest in mining here and still raise your nose high in civilized society?

Mr. Wallace should have been there when the women, children and some men from Rapu-Rapu Island stormed the session of the Albay Provincial Board on December 12, 2007. Ms. Shanta Martin, then with Oxfam Australia, was there to witness for all Australians. Those people dared to storm a government function because they have been suffering from immeasurable damage. Does Mr. Wallace still insist on his “no measurable damage”? Perhaps, he is right - because “no measurable damage” also translates to immeasurable damage!

November 2005 to July 2006 was not a period of total closure. – During that period, Rapu-Rapu Processing, Inc. was ordered to stop but, Lafayette’s other arm, the Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. continued to blast the open pit and quarry for gold, silver, copper and zinc. The dust continued to settle on the surrounding villages and the shaking of the ground was felt as far as the town center. Instead of totally closing the mine, erstwhile DENR Secretary Angelo Reyes ordered a “test run” following the advice of one member of the Rapu-Rapu Fact-finding Commission, Mr. Gregorio Tabuena. What took place were one “test run” after another until the mine had a semblance of compliance with the Clean Water Act of the Philippines. True enough, the runs were not tests but “tutorials.” A test is administered by a teacher on a student who works independently. In the case of Lafayette, the Technical Working Group was behind the company tutoring it on what to do when there were failures (the TWG Report shows that on July 20-21, 2006 there was a fishkill; the graphs of the readings of heavy metal content of samples were “way above the charts.”)

Lafayette was not bankrupt. It could afford to pay Mr. Roderick Watt $ 365,867 or the equivalent of P18,293,350 (at exchange rates prevailing in 2006 and 2007) despite the October spills. Mr. David Baker earned $ 1,197,884 or P 55,433,075. (Source: LML Annual Reports for 2006 and 2007) Lafayette is like the man who went to a feast and later complained that he starved!

Some impudence.- Mr. Wallace has the temerity to write: Bishop Arturo Bastes lied to encourage that closure, which the government acquiesced to. If Mr. Wallace wrote a similar charge against a Muslim imam, he would have deserved a fatwah call for death. But we are Catholics and we are reminded of the first of the Seven Last Words of Christ: Forgive them for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34).

It is bad enough that an Australian meddles in Philippine affairs. It is worse that a foreigner insults a Filipino. It is worst that a foreign meddler fallaciously writes in the press of a predominantly Catholic country that a bishop lied!

Bishop Arturo Bastes, SVD of the Diocese of Sorsogon told the truth that the Commission, formed with presidential approval, recommended the closure of the Rapu-Rapu mine. The government did not acquiesce to the recommendation. On the contrary, Sec. Reyes allowed Lafayette to undergo “tutorial” runs; the company failed the “tutorials” as the TWG Report proves; and yet Lafayette was permitted in the end to continue normal operations. That is the bare truth! Wallace is the one lying!

How would he know the truth about Rapu-Rapu? He was never here. He did not see the mother of three children who almost died after eating poisoned fish from the seashore. He does not feel the earth shaken when RRMI blasts the open pit. He does not traverse hills and creeks on foot for seven hours just to sell farm produce in the town center. He cannot see the brown, yellow and orange colors of creeks emanating from the minesite and disgorging their waters into Albay Gulf. He is way up there in Could 9, his feet solidly planted in mid-air.

To prove how absurd the position of this Wallace is, the reader is invited to read his article titled “Corruption is endemic – but must it be?” published in the Manila Standard Today on April 9, 2010. After devoting ten paragraphs to the corruption of the Berlusconi government in Italy, Mr. Wallace writes: Don’t you find yourself transcribing “Philippines” into each of the paragraphs above?

What is the point of mentioning this? The point is that Mr. Wallace himself is convinced that the Philippines is wracked with corruption. If he knows the Philippines that much then he also knows how deep corruption has crept into the implementation of environmental laws, the Mining Act of 1995 included. For example, he should know that Lafayette’s lawyer offered P5 million to the local officials of Rapu-Rapu to get the latter’s assent to the reopening of the mine. Lafayette itself drafted the resolution supposed to be passed by the municipal council calling for the resumption of mine operation. There is the National Bureau of Investigation Legazpi District Office Report which concluded that there was no contamination in and around the mine site yet it says the sampling was done on April 4, 2006 then submitted to the NBI Forensic Chemistry Division in Manila on March 28, 2006 – one week before the date of sample gathering! Asked through two letters how this discrepancy in dates happened, the NBI Legazpi District Office never gave a formal reply, just a verbal word that we did not deserve a copy of the report because we were not the ones who commissioned the NBI investigation. I had a chance to divulge this discrepancy in a conference of pollution control officers on May 9, 2007 in Casablanca Hotel in Legazpi City in the presence of Engr. Jason Magdaong of Lafayette. The engineer replied that his company had nothing to do with the NBI Legazpi report!

A lot more skeletons in the closet await anyone who would care to read about the Lafayette misadventure in Rapu-Rapu. I have written a book about it. It is due for launching soon.

Two thousand years needed to restore forest damaged by open pit mining

2010-03-13T15:14:00.004+08:00

All along we have thought it would take 30-50 years to revegetate Rapu-Rapu after Lafayette is done mining. National Geographic just published a report that in a mountain top mining for coal in Boone County, West Virginia, it would take 2000 years. Note that they are coal mining in the area, where the process does not entail use of chemicals. In gold, silver, copper and zinc mining, cyanide and sulfuric acid are used. Hence, the process is much more contaminating and a longer period than 2000 years can be expected for Rapu-Rapu. Please read this: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100311-mountaintop-mining-west-virginia/

Visit to Rapu-Rapu by New Albay Bishop Confirms Grave Impact of Mining

2010-03-12T09:43:00.006+08:00

The following news item was broadcast over Radio Veritas Legazpi (DWBS) during its 7 AM news on March 11, 2010

Baretang Simbahan

Ginibo ni Bishop Joel Baylon kan Diocese kan Legazpi an saiyang kaenot-enoting pastoral visit sa Parokya kan Rapu-Rapu. Sa saiyang pagbisita an Obispo nakipag-ulay sa mga parokyano tanganing kumustahon an kondisyon kan buhay kan kada pamilya. Sa pakikipag-ulay kan Obispo sa mga taga-Rapu-Rapu, Albay napag-araman an sobrang epekto kan padagos na pagmimina sa saindang kabuhayan, salud, asin magin sa kapalibutan. Binisita man ni Bishop Bong Baylon an mga barangay na nasa luwas kan sentro kan banwaan na Rapu-Rapu na suboot plano pang minahon kan Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. Iyan an Baretang Simbahan.

Translation:

Church News

Bishop Joel Baylon of the Diocese of Legazpi made his very first pastoral visit to the Parish of Rapu-Rapu. During his visit, the Bishop talked to the parishioners to know the situation of every family. In his dialogue with the people of Rapu-Rapu, Albay the Bishop was informed about the grave effects of the ongoing mining operation on their livelihood, health and even the environment. Bishop Bong Baylon also visited the villages outside the capital of the town of Rapu-Rapu which, according to reports, Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. plans to mine. That is the Church News.

A Fishy Tale or Can the Fish Tell?

2010-02-20T10:22:00.004+08:00

Tuesday night I had fish for dinner. It was a species we call locally as "kwaw." The flesh measured 4 inches long and 3 inches wide. I noted that it had eggs in its belly. The fish was, therefore, pregnant. It was, therefore, mature. It was, therefore, in its biggest possible size. It would not grow any bigger. I stopped eating and took my camera. What's the big deal? In years past, "kwaw" used to grow very big before becoming pregnant. Its flesh would grow 8 inches long and 5 inches wide. Since 2005, the year Lafayette started full operation, fishermen have observed that the "kwaw" has been stunted in its growth. They attribute the diminution to contamination of the waters around Rapu-Rapu. I do not expect Lafayette to argue that the "kwaw" is having "teenage pregnancy." Another observation is that the supply of "kwaw" lasts for only 2-3 weeks nowadays. In the past, it could be bought in the marketplaces several weeks before and after Holy Week. It would start in March and end in May. This year, the stunted "kwaw" appeared as early as February. In other words, its biological season has been altered.

Those who have eyes must see the truth. Those who have brains need only little effort to realize what is happening around Rapu-Rapu. If certain persons with authority to reverse the down slide would instead pretend not to see empirical data, then that is the problem. That is, indeed, the fishy situation.

Let us not forget the threat of Coal Mining in Rapu-Rapu

2010-02-15T11:33:00.003+08:00

Here's a job offer found at http://www.jobsdb.com/PH/EN/Job.asp?R=JDBP140753199. Rock Energy International Corporation is engaged in coal mining in Liguan, Rapu-Rapu, and is looking for mining engineers, offering "good compensation packages and fringe benefits".

Now, the DENR is complaining that while they are perennially on the hot seat in Rapu-Rapu, the DOE which handles coal mining operations could very well afford to be silent on the issue. The DENR has a point to some extent. Still, you could not overly use -- and expect to get away with it -- the lame excuse that you are just following orders from above.

DOE, it's about time you tell the public the the extent of the coal mining operations in Batan and Rapu-Rapu, and your involvement in them.

.......

Rock Energy International Corporation

Our Company is engaged in coal trading operations and we are looking for highly competitive professionals to be part of the team.
Mining Engineer

Requirements

* Candidate must possess at least a Bachelor's/College Degree in Mining Engineering.
* Preferably with professional license.
* Must be computer literate; knowledge with autocad application is an advantage.
* Preferred languages: Filipino, English
* At least 1 year work experience in the field of mining.
* Preferably 2 years experience specializing in Geology/Geophysics.
* Fresh graduates are welcome to apply.
* Applicants should be Filipino citizens.
* Applicant must be willing to work in Liguan, Rapu-rapu, Albay
* Full-Time position available.

“GOOD COMPENSATION PACKAGE AND OTHER FRINGE BENEFITS AWAITS FOR THOSE WHO WILL QUALIFY”

If you wish to apply for the above position, you may send your resume in word format at recruitment@velcoasia.com or apply in person at G/F Mary Bachrach Bldg. 25th Corner Railroad St. Port Area, Manila

Telephone: 5277070 Fax: 5277373

Interested applicants may also apply in our office at Brgy. Liguan Rapu-rapu, Albay.
Look for Ms. Jenny Roa.

Interested applicants may apply online by clicking on the quick apply button

MGB Bicol bares accomplishments for 2009

2010-02-15T10:42:00.007+08:00

Patting themselves on the back for a job well done... putting mining over the environment

MGB Bicol may harp its checklist accomplishments but it could never shake off its image as Lafayette/RRMI handlers. Consider what they have done to Rapu-Rapu:

1. The MGB turned the much publicized 2006 test run (Angelo Reyes: "You fail it, I close it".) into a tutorial run, going out of the way to make sure the mining firm pass the so-called test.

2. The company "failed" in many respects during the much publicized 2006 test run. The volume of polluting mineral contents in bodies of water surrounding the mine was found to be off the charts. A fish kill happened in July 2007, in the middle of the test run. Yet MGB declared the company to have passed the test on the strength of a highly questionable "expert" opinion. An opinion that was roundly & soundly criticized by the expert's former mentor.

3. What Multipartite Monitoring Team is MGB talking about in Rapu-Rapu when credible stakeholders shun membership in the much-distrusted MMT?

4. We still could not forget how the MGB whitewashed the investigation as to the cause of the 2007 fish kill in Rapu-Rapu, how they suppressed evidence, how they would not explain their findings to the public. We never heard about the final repot of the investigation after their anomalous initial report that was made public via the Albay Provincial Board.

5. MGB's main task in Rapu-Rapu is to help ensure the continued operations of the mine. It trumpets its accomplishments at the expense of the environment.

6. Most likely MGB will include its endorsing RRMI's mining exploration of Poblacion and Morocborocan among their accomplishment for 2010. Can't you see it? It is already Poblacion we are talking about, the center of the island, where practically everybody resists the mine and where pro-mining politicians don't win in the elections.

We simply cannot buy your "we are just doing our job" line. There ought to be more to your being public servants than simply signing papers following a checklist.

MGB RO V, if you disagree with our conclusions, we would love to hear your side. But please do not use the perennial lame excuse: "We are just following orders from above."

.......

MGB Bicol bares accomplishments for 2009

Legazpi City (11 February) -- The Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) in Bicol has disclosed Monday (February 8) its major accomplishments for calendar year 2009 ensuring safety, health and environmental commitments of mining industry and measures to mitigate the implication of geologic hazards.

Engr. Reynulfo Juan, MGB Bicol regional director, told PIA News service that the agency has successful organized a total of 15 Capacity-Building Seminars of Geologic Hazard Awareness and Disaster Preparedness in the municipalities of Bulan, Sta. Magdalena, Matnog, Prieto Diaz and Castilla in Sorsogon; Pili, Ocampo and Tigaon in Camarines Sur; and Rapu-Rapu, Sto. Domingo, Bacacay, Malilipot, Tiwi, Tabaco City and Malinao in Albay.

During said seminars, local disaster manager and residents as well were briefed on the concept of geologic hazards, occurrence, areas prone to these hazards, reading and interpreting geo-hazard maps.

Juan said that the stakeholders were given information on how they could make use of the maps for preparedness planning, how to prepare and what to do during the occurrence of geologic hazards like flood and landslide.

MGB Bicol also distributed posters and flyers on flood and landslides hazards, geo-hazard maps with corresponding risk reduction, preparedness and mitigation measures

The bureau also turned over DVDs containing motion pictures on Living with Geologic Hazards and Community Based Flood Early Warning System.

A total of 408 barangays and 1,213 participants benefited from the capacity building seminar.

The bureau spearheaded Geo-hazard Identification Surveys to at least five subdivision/land development projects in Albay, Camarines Norte and Camarines Sur.

The bureau also had detailed investigation of areas threatened by landslides and other geologic hazards in Casiguran, Magallanes and Bacon in Sorsogon and in Bato, Catanduanes.

On mining, MGB Bicol regularly monitored the safety, health and environmental commitments of three active large-scale mines in the region, namely Ibalong Resources and Development Corporation, Rapu-Rapu Minerals Incorporated and Filminera Resources Corporation.

It investigated and resolved a total of 12 complaints, cases and conflicts involving illegal treasure hunting in Mt. Isarog National Park and Pacol in Naga City, all in Camarines Sur; seizure of MV Tina by the Esperanza (Masbate) Municipal Bantay Dagat Task Force suspected to be loaded with sand materials; alleged illegal magnetite sand extraction in the municipalities of Bulusan, Magallanes and Gubat including the reported extraction in Matnog, all in Sorsogon; against mining operation of Uni-Dragon Mining Corporation in Camarines Norte; alleged illegal small-scale mining within the watershed area in Jose Panganiban, Camarines Norte; alleged mining activities in Libmanan, Camarines Sur; alleged siltation caused by Konka-Fulim Mining and Development Corporation in Paracale, Camarines Norte; and alleged extraction of Ara-al (dimension stones) in Sangay, Albay.

At least 25 mining rights or permits holders, including Rapu-Rapu Minerals Incorporated, Trans-Asia, Masbate Phils. Incorporated, Filminera Resources Corporation, Johnson Gold Mining Corporation, United Paragon Mining Corporation, Uni-Dragon, OroPhil and Nena Pimentel were validated to ensure compliance to policies of activities undertaken within the area of their operation.

The bureau also monitored the compliance to safety, health, environment and social programs during exploration, development and operation stage of Ibalong Resources and Development Corporation in Camalig, Albay; Rapu-Rapu Minerals Incorporated in Rapu-Rapu, Albay; UBS Marketing Corporation in Legazpi City and Filminera Resources Corporation in Masbate.

Lastly, MGB Bicol implemented measures to strengthen the Multi-Partite Monitoring Teams (MMTs) for Ibalong Resources and Development Corporation (IRDC) in Palanog, Camalig, Albay; Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project in Rapu-Rapu, Albay and Filminera Resources Corporation in Masbate to monitor these mining companies' environmental and social commitments. (MGB V/PIA)

Social Action Center - Diocese of Legazpi statement opposing RRMI application for expansion ot its mining exploration

2010-02-11T19:22:00.002+08:00

Mr. Joselin Marcus Fragada
Regional Executive Director
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Region V, Regional Center Site, DENR V
Rawis, Legazpi City

STATEMENT OF SUPPORT TO THE OPPOSITION OF THE APPLICATION FOR EXPANSION OF THE MINING EXPLORATION

We strongly support the sentiments of the community in voicing their opposition against the application for expansion of mining exploration in the barangays of Poblacion and Morocborocan in the municipality of Rapu-Rapu, Albay. As experienced in the past, there were already violations committed by the Company and yet, were not given enough sanctions to merit such violations.

And now, application for such is being submitted to your good office weighing the benefits it has provided to the community as well as the destruction and deprivation it has incurred in the community, it has been found wanting.

The government’s drive to mitigate climate change in the province among its guidelines is contained in its Ten Commandments on Climate Change, expressed in the seventh commandment which says, “No to open pit mining”. Mining operations in Rapu-Rapu contradicts this very commandment and continuing to allow its operation makes us voiceless and toothless in order to punish this violators.

The general experience of the mining industry in the Philippines has never benefited areas from the mining operations. In fact, it has contributed to the worsening of economic and environmental condition. Allowing the further expansion of the mining exploration will only contribute to the ill effects of mining operations in the whole country.

We, the Social Action Center-Diocese of Legazpi would want to express our strong opposition against the said application of Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc.

Let us hear the voices of the little ones who are the greatest victims of this operation rather than protect the wealthy and the powerful who amassed the wealth of the poor.

(signed)
Rev. Fr. Ramoncito S. Segubiense
Executive Director
4 February 2010
Social Action Center-Diocese of Legazpi
Cathedral Compound, Albay District, Legazpi City

Resolution of Lagsingan Tribal Council in Rapu-Rapu condemning the MGB endorsement of the RRMI application for mining exploration in 2 barangays

2010-02-11T16:01:00.005+08:00

LAGSINGAN TRIBAL COMMUNITY
National Commission for Indigenous Peoples Registered
Sitio Lagsingan, Barangay Poblacion, Rapu-Rapu, Albay

Hale sa minutos kan biglaan na ginibong hororon kan Lagsingan Tribal Council kan petsa 11 kan Enero alas 4:00 an hapon sa Sitio Lagsingan, Poblacion, Rapu-Rapu, Albay.

Resolusyon kan Lagsingan Tribal Council
Blg. 001, Serye 2010

RESOLUSYON SA PAGKONDENAR ASIN PAGKONTRA SA BAKO MAKATAWONG PAG-ENDORSAR KAN MINES AND GEOSCIENCES BUREAU SA PAAGI NI REGIONAL DIRECTOR REYNULFO A. JUAN SA OPISINA KAN RAPU-RAPU, ALBAY KAN NAKAAGING PETSA 5 KAN PEBRERO 2010 MANONGOD DAA SA NOTICE OF APPLICATION KAN KUMPANYANG RAPU-RAPU MINERALS INC. (RRMI) EXPA 000080-V PARA SA EXPLORATION PERMIT SA BARANGAY POBLACION BUDA BARANGAY MOROCBOROCAN TANGANING MINAHON AN KABUBULDAN NA SAKOP KAN MGA NASABING BARANGAY

Proponent: Lagsingan Tribal Community

NA, an mga nasabing barangay igwa ki nakaistar na nagtitios na mga tawo asin tribu na an ikinabubuhay hale sa dagat asin kabubuldan, buda an tubig na samong pig-iinom hale sa kabubuldan na samong pig-iistaran. An mga sapa o salog na pinagbubulusan kan tubig na samong piggagamit sa oroaldaw siguradong makukuntaminar asin mapuputol an bulos kaini kun deretsong minahon an samong kabubuldan;

NA, kun maidadagos an pagmina digdi sa Barangay Poblacion siguradong aagihan an comunidad (nin) samong tribu na magkakawsa nin mga minasunod:

1. takot sa oras na sinda nagkukundukta nin pagbobomba sa kabubuldan;
2. pagkaraot kan kabubuldan na sa pag-abot kan tag-uran siguradong rarasayan an samong kaharongan;
3. dae na kami ki makukua na kabuhayan sa kabubuldan ta sainda nang dinistrungkar;
4. makukuntaminar an dagat na saro kan samong pigkukuwaan nin pagkabuhay dahil sa mga chemical na saindang piggagamit na mabulos sa sapa o salog na mabulos deretso sa kadagatan;
5. kahelangan dahil sa pagkakuntaminar kan tubig asin kadagatan na magkakawsa nin kagadanan.

NGONIAN KUN SIRING, an Conseho kan Tribung Taboy kaiba an (mga) miembro dae nanggad minauyon asin higot na minakontra asin minakundenar sa application kan RRMI na minahon an Barangay Poblacion buda Barangay Morocborocan.

Samong isinasagibo ini tanganing makaabot sa mga nanunundan an samuyang higot na pagkontra asin pagkundenar sa gabos na klase nin pagmimina digdi sa samuyang lugar.

Ginibo ini ngonyan na petsa 23 kan Enero digdi sa Rapu-Rapu, Albay.

Senertipikaran ko an nasambit sa itaas na totoo asin tama.

(signed)
JOSEPH ECLEO
Vice-Chieftain

(signed)
RONY B. BERNALDEZ
Tribal Secretary

(signed)
ALFREDO B. ECLEO
Treasurer

(signed)
MIGUEL P. DERRAMAS
Kagawad

(signed)
ALFREDO DE LA CRUZ
Kagawad

(signed)
RODRIGO BALIDOY
Kagawad

(signed)
HILARIO E. MAGTANGOB
Kagawad

(signed)
ANTONIO B. ECLEO
Kagawad

(signed)
JOSE REBECON BALINSAYO
Kagawad

(signed)
ALICIA B. ECLEO
Kagawad

Pinatotoohan asin inaprubaran:

(signed)
RUBEN E. SORRO
Tribal Chieftain

Green groups dismay on new appointed DENR Secretary

2010-02-11T13:38:00.000+08:00

February 11, 2010
Press Release

Horacio Ramos appointment a bad fung shui!
GREEN GROUPS DISMAY ON NEW APPOINTED DENR SECRETARY

MANILA, Philippines – Alyansa Tigil Mina (ATM), an advocacy group and people’s movement composed of more than eighty (80) organizations from mining-affected communities and civil society organizations nationwide, expressed dismay over the appointment of longtime Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) director Horacio Ramos as the new Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) secretary.

“We were in aghast to know that the longtime MGB director Horacio Ramos is now the DENR secretary. His appointment as DENR Secretary is a ‘bad fung shui’ or bad omen to the current unhealthy state of the Philippine environment, which is threatened by the impacts of 348 mining tenements equivalent to 744,199 hectares across the country,” said ATM national coordinator Jaybee Garganera.

“We fear that Ramos, as an appointee of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo who championed the Mining Act of 1995 and the aggressive promotion of mining in the country, will pursue the crime of irrational exploitation of our natural resources and turn a blind eye and deaf ears to the legitimate resistance of mining affected communities and environmental groups,” added Garganera.

“This appointment of Horacio Ramos as DENR secretary has great implications on the direction of the DENR – no moving away from the current, that of facilitating the unrelentless exploitation of mines, based on profit, on greedy consumption mostly of northern countries. This is a continuing bad news for us, particularly the communities,” said Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center executive director Judy Pasimio.

“How can a mining lover like Horacio Ramos lead in saving our environment from total destruction? Ramos has worked in connivance with Norewegian-based Intex Resources to pursue the nickel project strongly opposed by local government officials, Mangyan indigenous groups, Catholic Church leaders and residents of Mindoro,” said Fr. Edu Gariguez, Alyansa Laban sa Mina (ALAMIN) spokesperson, who went on a hunger strike in protest of the Mindoro Nickel project last year.

“We are heartbroken to know about Horacio Ramos’ appointment! Under his leadership as MGB director, MGB issued a certification that the Intex’ project is outside the watershed, wherein fact the mine site is within the critical watershed,” exclaimed Fr. Gariguez.

“It’s a blatant statement of how Arroyo administration is pursuing pro-mining policy while undermining peoples opposition and sacrificing fragile environment to accommodate destructive investment,” added Fr. Gariguez.

Blas Tabaranza, Executive Director of the environmental group HARIBON said, “We are dismayed at his appointment as this threatens our conservation efforts but we hope that the appointment of Horacio Ramos will still keep the dialogue between civil society organizations and DENR open.”

From the Diocese of Tandag in Surigao del Sur, Sr. Lydia Lascano from the Social Action Center expressed her dismay. “The appointment of Horacio Ramos is unfortunate! It dashed to the ground all my hopes for the protection and preservation of the environment and natural resources in the Philippines”, she said.

ATM is convened by HARIBON, Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center – Friends of the Earth Philippines (LRC/FOEI) and PhilDHRRA. (30)

Bad News for the Environment?

2010-02-11T13:35:00.002+08:00

Mining bureaucrat is new DENR secretary
www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/

MANILA, Philippines - President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has named long-time Mines and Geosciences Director (MGB) Horacio Ramos as secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).

Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita announced the changes on Wednesday in a media briefing held in Malolos, Bulacan.

The erstwhile DENR secretary, Eleazar Quinto, has been appointed director-general of the Presidential Coalition Affairs Office.

Quinto replaced Maricar Imperial, who was appointed Cabinet secretary replacing Silvestre Bello III.

Bello resigned to run for senator under the administration party Lakas-Kampi-CMD.

Fish Catch Decline Continues to be Confirmed

2010-02-04T11:34:00.005+08:00

Yesterday, February 3, 2010 we were told by a fisherman from Santo Domingo, Albay (45-50 km northwest of Rapu-Rapu) that they set out to fish in Albay Gulf the day before. They caught nothing but 1 bañera of "bolinaw" (a species of fish popular among us for its small size and transparent flesh). It's among the poor man's food. Before 2005, they used to catch 20 bañeras of the species.

Reports like this are confirmatory of the complaint of fishermen from other areas around Albay Gulf. In Malobago, Rapu-Rapu, Albay, the Ibon Foundation research team gathered that fishermen there were experiencing a 93% decline in catch. In 2008, fishermen in San Carlos, Tabaco, Albay and Bigaa, Legazpi City reported that their fish catch declined from 50 to 3 bañeras per outing. This is a 94% decline. The report by the fisherman from Santo Domingo means a decline of 95%.

If we list down the figures, we have:

2007 - 93% decline
2008 - 94%
2010 - 95%

There is a trend here. As time passes, the decline is worsening. All these started in 2005 when the mining operation in Rapu-Rapu, Albay went full blast. The apologists of Lafayette may again defend by saying that the reports are not "scientific". We insist that the Ibon report was scientific. The complaints of fishermen received in 2008 and 2010 are merely confirmatory.

Moreover, between a scientist's study and a fisherman's actual experience, any sensible evaluator of the information coming from areas around Albay Gulf should lend serious consideration to the latter.

The declining fish catch is a major impact of Lafayette mining which no ISO certification can nullify. This is truth in its barest essence that would only disprove claims of responsible mining by Lafayette and put under a dark cloud of doubt the integrity of any standards organization. As we have reminded them, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Text Messages from the Island

2010-01-26T17:10:00.005+08:00

I received the following messages today, January 26, 2010 from someone attending the committee hearing of the Rapu-Rapu Municipal Council:

Today January 26, 2010 at 11 am concerned people of Poblacion and Morocborocan will be having a prayer rally/procession around Poblacion particularly in front of the Municipal Hall asking for the help of Our Lord not to let the mining (companies) operate in our (villages). Please help us pray.
09:20:15

I am here with Fr. Jay and people from the Social Action Center. Boring moment because the mining companies’ personnel are presenting . . . They are saying just one thing: they will mine the area. They say they will not mine yet but will only explore.
11:16:13

Somebody asked about the massive fishkill in November 2006 (sic). How would the companies explain it? The Mines and Geosciences Bureau responded in behalf of the miners.
12:10:18

The session is over. According to Councilor Galicia (Committee on Environment) and Councilor Baranda (Committee on Laws) they will follow the people’s will. They saw and know the previous impacts of mining. It’s election time. We hope they don’t sing a different tune afterwards. The people have only one clamor: no more exploration; no to mining!
12:47:00

BOYCOTT LG PRODUCTS !!!

2010-01-25T09:53:00.007+08:00

Because LG International Corporation owns 42% of the Rapu-Rapu mine (28% by Korea Resources Corporation and 30% by Malaysia Smelting Corporation) . . .

Because LG, Kores and MSC own Lafayette Philippines, Inc. which in turn owns Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. (RRMI) and Rapu-Rapu Processing, Inc. (RRPI), the local operators of the Rapu-Rapu mine . . .

Because the Rapu-Rapu mine continues to destroy the surrounding areas of Rapu-Rapu and Albay Gulf . . .

Because the Rapu-Rapu mine has caused the growing poverty among 14,000 fishermen dependent on Albay Gulf and 9,000 residents of the island while only a very small minority (918 as claimed) benefit from jobs it purportedly generates . . .

Because LG sells products in our locality . . .

We call for a boycott of all products with the LG mark – cellphone, washing machine, computer monitor, aircon, refrigerator, etc.!

Find ways to make Korea Resources Corporation and Malaysia Smelting Corporation accountable too!

Fight for our right over our natural resources against the greed of foreign big business and those in positions of political power who are their local junior partners!

MGB V Endorses RRMI Application to Explore Poblacion and Morocborocan

2010-01-20T14:35:00.006+08:00

In an endorsement dated September 22, 2009 which was acknowledged as received by the Rapu-Rapu municipal government on January 5, 2010, MGB V Regional Director Reynulfo A. Juan informed the LGU that RRMI may publicize its application to explore Poblacion and Morocborocan. Thirty (30) days are allotted to any interested party to raise its objection to the application. If there is no objection, RRMI can proceed to explore the areas.

The following excerpts from the Philippine Mining Act, DAO 1996-40 and DAO 2007-15 pertinent to the application for exploration permit serve to enlighten us on the prospects:

Philippine Mining Act of 1995

Section 20 Exploration Permit. - An exploration permit grants the right to conduct exploration for all minerals in specified areas. The Bureau shall have the authority to grant an exploration Permit to a qualified person.

Section 21 Terms and Conditions of the Exploration Permit. - An exploration permit shall be for a period of two (2) years, subject to annual review and relinquishment or renewal upon the recommendation of the Director.

Section 22 Maximum Areas for Exploration Permit. - The maximum area that a qualified person may hold at any one time shall be:

a. Onshore, in any one province
1. for individuals, twenty (20) blocks: and
2. for partnerships, corporations, cooperatives, or associations, two hundred (200) blocks.

b. Onshore, in the entire Philippines
1. for individuals, forty (40) blocks; and
2. for partnerships, corporations, cooperatives, or associations, four hundred (400) blocks.

c. Offshore, beyond five hundred meters (500m) from the mean low tide level:
1. for individuals, one hundred (100) blocks; and
2. for partnerships, corporations, cooperatives, or associations, one thousand (1,000) blocks.

Section 23 Rights and Obligations of the Permittee. - An exploration permit shall grant to the permittee, his heirs or successors-in-interest, the right to enter, occupy and explore the area: Provided, That if private or other parties are affected, the permittee shall first discuss with the said parties the extent, necessity, and manner of his entry, occupation and exploration and in case of disagreement, a panel of arbitrators shall resolve the conflict or disagreement.

The permittee shall undertake an exploration work on the area as specified by its permit based on an approved work program.

Any expenditure in excess of the yearly budget of the approved work program may be carried forward and credited to the succeeding years covering the duration of the permit. The Secretary, through the Director, shall promulgate rules and regulations governing the terms and conditions of the permit.

The permittee may apply for a mineral production sharing agreement, joint venture agreement, co-production agreement or financial or technical assistance agreement over the permit area, which application shall be granted if the permittee meets the necessary qualifications and the terms and conditions of any such agreement: Provided, That the exploration period covered by the exploration permit shall be included as part of the exploration period of the mineral agreement or financial or technical assistance agreement.

Section 24 Declaration of Mining Project Feasibility. - A holder of an exploration permit who determines the commercial viability of a project covering a mining area may, within the term of the permit, file with the Bureau a declaration of mining project feasibility accompanied by a work program for development. The approval of the mining project feasibility and compliance with other requirements provided in this Act shall entitle the holder to an exclusive right to a mineral production sharing agreement or other mineral agreements or financial or technical assistance agreement.

Section 25 Transfer or Assignment. - An exploration permit may be transferred or assigned to a qualified person subject to the approval of the Secretary upon the recommendation of the Director.

DENR Department Administrative Order 1996-40

Section 15 Areas Closed to Mining Applications. - Pursuant to the Act and in consonance with State policies and existing laws, areas may be either closed to mining applications or conditionally opened therefor.

a. The following areas are closed to mining applications:

1. Areas covered by valid and existing mining rights and mining applications subject to Subsection b(3) herein;

2. Old growth or virgin forests, proclaimed watershed forest reserves, wilderness areas, mangrove forests, mossy forests, national parks, provincial/municipal forests, tree parks, greenbelts, game refuge, bird sanctuaries and areas proclaimed as marine reserves/marine parks and tourist zones as defined by law and identified initial components of the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) pursuant to R.A. No. 7586 and such areas expressly prohibited thereunder, as well as under Department Administrative Order No. 25, Series of 1992, and other laws;

3. Areas which the Secretary may exclude based, inter alia, on proper assessment of their environmental impacts and implications on sustainable land uses, such as built-up areas and critical watersheds with appropriate barangay/municipal/city/provincial Sanggunian ordinance specifying therein the location and specific boundary of the concerned area; and

4. Areas expressly prohibited by law.

Mining applications which have been made over the foregoing areas shall be reviewed and, after due process, such areas may be excluded from said applications.

b. The following areas may be opened for mining applications the approval of which are subject to the following conditions:

1. Military and other Government Reservations, upon prior written clearance by the Government agency having jurisdiction over such Reservations;

2. Areas near or under public or private buildings, cemeteries, archaeological and historic sites, bridges, highways, waterways, railroads, reservoirs, dams or other infrastructure projects, public or private works, including plantations or valuable crops, upon written consent of the concerned Government agency or private entity subject to technical evaluation and validation by the Bureau;

3. Areas covered by FTAA applications which shall be opened for quarry resources mining applications pursuant to Section 53 hereof upon the written consent of the FTAA applicants, except for sand and gravel applications which shall require no such consent;

4. Areas covered by small-scale mining under R.A. No. 7076/P.D. No. 1899 upon prior consent of the small-scale miners, in which case a royalty payment, upon the utilization of minerals, shall be agreed upon by the concerned parties and shall form a Trust Fund for the socioeconomic development of the concerned community; and

5. DENR Project Areas upon prior consent from the concerned agency.

The Bureau shall cause the periodic review of areas closed to mining applications for the purpose of determining whether or not their continued closure is consistent with the national interest and render its recommendations, if any, to the Secretary for appropriate action.

Section 21 Publication/Posting/Radio Announcement of an Exploration Permit Application. - Within fifteen (15) working days from receipt of the necessary area clearances, the Bureau/concerned Regional Office(s) shall issue to the applicant the Notice of Application for Exploration Permit for publication, posting and radio announcement which shall be done within fifteen (15) working days from receipt of the Notice. The Notice must contain, among others, the name and complete address of the applicant, duration of the permit applied for, extent of exploration activities to be undertaken, area location, geographical coordinates/meridional block(s) of the proposed permit area and location map/sketch plan with index map relative to major environmental features and projects and to the nearest municipalities.

The Bureau/concerned Regional Office(s) shall cause the publication of the Notice once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks in two (2) newspapers: one of general circulation published in Metro Manila and another published in the municipality or province where the proposed permit area is located, if there be such newspapers; otherwise, in the newspaper published in the nearest municipality or province.

The Bureau/concerned Regional Office shall also cause the posting for two (2) consecutive weeks of the Notice on the bulletin boards of the Bureau, the concerned Regional Office(s), Provincial Environmental and Natural Resources Office(s) (PENRO(s)), Community Environmental and Natural Resources Office(s) (CENRO(s)) and in the concerned province(s) and municipality(ies), copy furnished the barangay(s) where the proposed permit area is located. Where necessary, the Notice shall be in a language generally understood in the concerned locality where it is posted.

The radio announcements shall be made daily for two (2) consecutive weeks in a local radio program and shall consist of the name and complete address of the applicant, area location, duration of the permit applied for and instructions that information regarding such application may be obtained at the Bureau/concerned Regional Office(s). The publication and radio announcements shall be at the expense of the applicant.

Within thirty (30) calendar days from the last date of publication/posting/radio announcements, the authorized officer(s) of the concerned office(s) shall issue a certification(s) that the publication/posting/radio announcement have been complied with. Any adverse claim, protest or opposition shall be filed directly, within thirty (30) calendar days from the last date of publication/posting/radio announcement, with the concerned Regional Office or through any concerned PENRO or CENRO for filing in the concerned Regional Office for purposes of its resolution by the Panel of Arbitrators pursuant to the provisions of the Act and these implementing rules and regulations. Upon final resolution of any adverse claim, protest or opposition, the Panel of Arbitrators shall issue a Certification to that effect within five (5) working days from the date of finality of resolution thereof. Where no adverse claim, protest or opposition is filed after the lapse of the period for filing the adverse claim, protest or opposition, the Panel of Arbitrators shall likewise issue a Certification to that effect within five (5) working days therefrom.

However, previously published valid and existing mining claims are exempted from the publication/posting/radio announcement required under this Section.

No Exploration Permit shall be approved unless the requirements under this Section are fully complied with and any adverse claim/protest/opposition thereto is finally resolved.

Section 203 Filing of Adverse Claims/Conflicts/Oppositions. - Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 21, 38 and 55 hereof, any adverse claims, protest or opposition specified in said Sections may also be filed directly with the Panel of Arbitrators within the prescribed periods for filing such claim, protest or opposition as specified in said Sections.

Section 204 Substantial Requirements for Adverse Claims, Protests and Oppositions. - No adverse claim, protest or opposition involving mining rights shall be accepted for filing unless verified and accompanied by the prescribed docket fee and proof of services to the respondent(s), either personally or by registered mail: Provided, That the requirement for the payment of docket fees shall not be imposed on pauper litigants.

Likewise, no adverse claims, protest or opposition shall be entertained unless it contains the names and addresses of the adverse party, protestant, oppositor and the respondent and their respective counsels, if any; a detailed statement of the facts relied upon; the grounds for adverse claim, protest or opposition; and an exhaustive discussion of the issues and arguments raised; together with all supporting plans, documents, data and other documentary evidences and affidavits of all witnesses.

Section 205 Period to Decide the Case. - The Panel shall render its decision within thirty (30) days, after the submission of the case by the parties for decision.

Section 206 Execution and Finality of Decision. - The decision of the Panel of Arbitrators shall become final and executory after the lapse of fifteen (15) days from receipt of the notice of decision by the aggrieved party, unless the latter appeals to the Mines Adjudication Board within the same period. Where an appeal is filed, the concerned Panel of Arbitrators shall transmit the notice thereof together with the records of the case within five (5) days to the Mines Adjudication Board.

Upon the finality of the decision of the Panel of Arbitrators, no appeal having taken therefrom, the Chairman of the Panel of Arbitrators shall issue a writ of execution directing the Sheriff of the Regional Trial Courts, with jurisdiction over the area, to implement and execute the writ.

DENR Department Administrative Order 2007-15

Section 3. Section 21. (PublicationlPostinglRadio Announcement of an Exploration Permit Application) is hereby amended, to read as follows:

"Section 21. PublicationlPostinglRadio Announcement of an Exploration Permit Application

Within five (5) working days from receipt of the necessary area clearances, the Regional Office(s) concerned shall issue the Notice of Application for Exploration Permit to the applicant for publication and radio announcement, and to the Offices concerned for posting. The Notice must contain, among others, the name and complete address of the applicant, duration of the permit applied for, extent of exploration activities to be undertaken, area location, geographical coordinateslmeridional block(s) of the proposed permit area and location maplsketch plan with index map relative to major environmental features and projects and to the nearest municipalities.

Within five (5) working days from receipt of the Notice, the Exploration Permit applicant shall cause the publication thereof once in two (2) newspapers: one of general circulation published in Metro Manila and another published in the municipality or province where the proposed permit area is located, if there be such newspapers; otherwise, in the newspaper published in the nearest municipality or province. The pertinent affidavits of publication shall be submitted by the Exploration Permit applicant to the Regional Office concerned within five (5) days from the date of publication of the Notice.

The Regional Office concerned shall cause the posting of the Notice on its bulletin board, and those of the province(s) and municipality(ies) concerned, or city(ies) concerned, for one (1) week, copy furnished the Bureau and the barangay(s) where the- proposed permit area is located. Where necessary, the Notice shall be in a language generally understood in the concerned locality where it is posted.

The radio announcements shall be made daily for one (1) week in a local radio program and shall consist of the name and complete address of the applicant, area location, duration of the permit applied for and instructions that information regarding such application may be obtained at the Regional Office(s) concerned. The publication and radio announcements shall be at the expense of the applicant.

Within five (5) working days from the last date of posting and radio announcement(s), the authorized officer(s) of the concerned office(s) shall issue a certification(s) that the posting/radio announcement have been complied with. Any adverse claim, protest or opposition shall be filed directly, within ten (10) working days from the date of publication or from the last date of posting/radio announcement, with the Regional Office concerned or through any PENRO or CENRO concerned for filing in the Regional Office concerned for purposes of its resolution by the Panel of Arbitrators pursuant to the provisions of the Act and these implementing rules and regulations. Upon final resolution of any adverse claim, protest or opposition, the Panel of Arbitrators shall issue a Certification to that effect within five (5) working days from the date of finality of resolution thereof. Where no adverse claim, protest or opposition is filed after the lapse of the period for filing the adverse claim, protest or opposition, the Panel of Arbitrators shall likewise issue a Certification to that effect within five (5) working days from receipt of the request of any concerned party.

XXX

No exploration permit shall be approved unless the requirements under this Section are fully complied with and any adverse claim/protest/opposition thereto is resolved with finality.

What is in store for the people of Rapu-Rapu and the entire province of Albay? If the mining operation in the southern villages is any indication, then we can only expect more heavy metal pollution and more economic injustice from the expansion of Lafayette mining. If the 180-hectare quarrying and processing activities resulted in fishkills, fish catch decline from 50 to 3 bañeras, severe contamination of the creeks, and poverty among the island residents, then what awaits us with the additional 608-hectare operation?

Lafayette might respond again by saying that the exploration does not necessarily mean full operation. Only when they find minerals will that happen. In reply, we say that this is like claiming that a father should not worry that his daughter was kidnapped because if the kidnappers find out that she is not good-looking, then they would not rape her!

Rapu-Rapu and the surrounding areas are reeling from the environmental damage and economic injustice brought about by Lafayette mining. The company wants to thrust its knife deeper into the bossom of our patrimony and the government is not coming to our aid; it is even cheering Lafayette in its rapacious onslaught on the island. The MGB V endorsement is nothing less than that.

Metals production surged to P107B in ’09 but what do Rapu-Rapu residents get?

2010-01-11T08:47:00.003+08:00

According to a Philippine Daily Inquirer business section article on December 30, 2009, “Metals production in the Philippines surged in 2009 as increase in metal prices coincided with expanded production of certain projects, according to officials at the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB).”

Moreover, “MGB director Horacio Ramos said in an interview that metal production was valued at P107 billion, ‘which was 39 percent higher than last year,’ he said.”

“ ‘Among those who (sic) pushed production were Filminera and CGA Mining for the Masbate gold project, Atlas’ Carmen Copper Corp. in Cebu, Philsaga in Agusan, line 2 of Sumitomo’s Coral Bay project, Rapu-Rapu, and TVI’s copper production,’ Ramos said” (boldfacing supplied).

We ask: How much of that P107 billion went to people directly affected by mining operations? Particularly, how much did the people of Rapu-Rapu and surrounding areas suffering from severe fish catch decline get? Have the creeks of Rapu-Rapu become clean? Are the people of Rapu-Rapu and surrounding areas more prosperous because of higher metal production from the island?

The mining operation in Rapu-Rapu, as in other areas, was endorsed and approved by the government and some vested interests with the prospect that it would bring development. Peter Wallace, an Australian mining advocate, once asked in his column, “Where’s the pot of gold?” Good for him because now he can have his answer. We, in turn, ask: But where is the development?

Rapu-Rapu is one evidence of the grossly mistaken economic policies opening our country to mining companies with lip-service attention to environmental protection, attracting foreign investors instead of nurturing local entrepreneurs, favoring the production of goods which are not the basic needs of our people but are the luxuries of aliens, and promoting junior partnerships between politically powerful Filipinos and foreign big business interests at the expense of millions of poor and marginalized sectors.

Indeed, metal production rose by 39%, but what’s in it for the masses? For a tiny minority, maybe there are some windfall benefits. For the vast majority, however, there is nothing but more poverty.

The Real Disaster in Albay

2010-01-09T12:04:00.006+08:00

The recent eruption of Mayon may be a disaster. It can be argued, however, that such event was not that disastrous, as the eruption ended soon. Mayon's eruption caused inconvenience for two weeks (and, yes, crop damage in some westside villages; four died in evacuation centers due to stress and poor sanitation and they could not have been worse had they remained in ther homes). The disaster in Rapu-Rapu and surrounding sea, however, is on its 5th year. Daily some 10,000 island residents are bearing the full brunt of the environmental damage and economic injustice. Some 14,000 fishermen around Albay Gulf have seen their fish catch decline by as much as 93% - all that since 2005 and it's ongoing.

Three important sets of evidences and testimonies validate this disaster:

1. The pictures of contaminated creeks – brown, yellow, orange and red in color – as shown in the side bar of this webpage - are evidences of this disaster. Lafayette has not shown its own shots of the creeks to prove the effectiveness of its mitigation measures. All that the company shows are drawings of their devices and photographs of structures inside the minesite in early phases of construction and which evidently were cleaned up before the pictures were taken.

2. The interviews with island residents complaining about the ongoing hunger and poverty in the island despite the huge income of LPI as reported in the press releases of MGB.

3. The decline in fish catch by as much as 93% since 2005, the same year when LPI started full operation.

Lafayette may contrive every means they can think of – from revising their website content, to producing Powerpoint presentations, to claiming ISO certification – but all those will never counteract the three evidences and testimonies listed above. Lafayette executives have ignored our challenge for them to bathe in the creeks if they want to prove that they are not polluting the water channels. Instead, Ms. Calleja cavalierly responds: Visit the minesite and see for yourself. In response, we have told her: we have been there and done that! What matters now is the proof of the pudding which is in the eating. Whatever assurances they may state about the excellent control measures they have devised, the polluted creeks, hunger and poverty, and severe fish catch decline which commenced in 2005 will refute their claims.

Be Responsible Creation Stewards - Message from Pope Benedict XVI

2009-12-12T11:31:00.007+08:00

Among the scores of emails I receive daily, one remained unopened until I did some cleanup today. One message caught my eye. Upon perusal, I concluded that this message could be the response of the Pope to the letter sent by Bicol bishops in December 2008 and to all other cries for help from people afflicted with the scorge of environmental degradation perpetrated by those who pay lip service to responsible mining, sustainable development and best practices yet, in reality, destroy the very communities that have provided them wealth, the very communities they have provided with token if not sham social development projects. The reference to "the scandal of hunger and human misery" in paragraph 4 is a bull's eye hit on the mining operations in Rapuy-Rapu Island.

BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE

Wednesday, 26 August 2009

I offer a warm welcome to all the English-speaking visitors present at today’s Audience, including the many altar servers, school pupils and choristers.

The summer holidays have given us all the opportunity to thank God for the precious gift of creation. Taking up this theme, I wish to reflect today upon the relationship between the Creator and ourselves as guardians of his creation. In so doing I also wish to offer my support to leaders of governments and international agencies who soon will meet at the United Nations to discuss the urgent issue of climate change.

The Earth is indeed a precious gift of the Creator who, in designing its intrinsic order, has given us guidelines that assist us as stewards of his creation. Precisely from within this framework, the Church considers that matters concerning the environment and its protection are intimately linked with integral human development.... In my recent encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, I referred to such questions recalling the “pressing moral need for renewed solidarity” (no. 49) not only between countries but also between individuals, since the natural environment is given by God to everyone, and so our use of it entails a personal responsibility towards humanity as a whole, particularly towards the poor and towards future generations (cf. no. 48).

How important it is then, that the international community and individual governments send the right signals to their citizens and succeed in countering harmful ways of treating the environment! The economic and social costs of using up shared resources must be recognized with transparency and borne by those who incur them, and not by other peoples or future generations. The protection of the environment, and the safeguarding of resources and of the climate, oblige all leaders to act jointly, respecting the law and promoting solidarity with the weakest regions of the world (cf. no. 50). Together we can build an integral human development beneficial for all peoples, present and future, a development inspired by the values of charity in truth. For this to happen it is essential that the current model of global development be transformed through a greater, and shared, acceptance of responsibility for creation: this is demanded not only by environmental factors, but also by the scandal of hunger and human misery (boldfacing supplied).

With these sentiments I wish to encourage all the participants in the United Nations summit to enter into their discussions constructively and with generous courage. Indeed, we are all called to exercise responsible stewardship of creation, to use resources in such a way that every individual and community can live with dignity, and to develop “that covenant between human beings and the environment, which should mirror the creative love of God” (Message for the 2008 World Day of Peace, 7)!

Thank you.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20090826_en.html

Unrepentant Lafayette

2009-11-06T15:39:00.006+08:00

“We are no longer called ‘Lafayette.’ We are now ‘Korea Malaysia Philippines Resources Corporation.” Mrs. Cecille A. Calleja, Vice-President for Public Relations of Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc., insisted on November 3, 2009 during the hearing of the Committee on Environment of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Albay. The hearing was the second called by committee chair Kinatawan Julio Tingzon. It focused on environmental impacts of the mining operations. The first was on October 20 which tackled tax payments and the Social Development Management Program.

The change of name, however, is superficial. There is official paper trail on the continuity of the juridical personality of Lafayette. The change of name is not occasioned by any change of heart of the very same persons still working for the companies.

The second hearing

Present during the second hearing were Lafayette officials and staff: Engr. Rogelio E. Corpus, Mrs. Cecille A. Calleja, Engr. Carmelita Borbe Pacis. From the DENR attendees included Dr. Eva Ocfemia of EMB, Engr. Buenaventura S. Dayao and Engr. Guillermo Molina of MGB, and Engr. Rodolfo Matusalem of PENRO. Kinatawans Julio Tingzon, Osty Calleja and Neil Montallana were present. I represented Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance as its Spokesperson and Aquinas University of Legazpi as its Secretary-General. On query of Kinatawan Montallana, I said that I was also there as a taxpayer.

Engr. Corpus introduced Engr. Pacis who presented “what happened in the past which everybody knows and therefore needs no further elaboration,” Lafayette’s AMD management and dam design. The latter also insisted that what happened in 2005 were not fishkills “as in tons and tons of dead fish; only two kilos of small fish died.”

No admission of guilt; no repentance

Engr. Pacis vehemently denied the fishkills, official documents submitted to the national environment agency notwithstanding. Those documents subpoenaed by the Rapu-Rapu fact-Finding Commission state that Lafayette privately admitted guilt for the October 2005 spills. In public pronouncements, the same personnel deny Lafayette responsibility. They do not call it a fishkill on account of only “2 kilos” of dead fish recovered. Mrs. Nida Bendal attests that she herself collected two sacks of dead fish along the shores of Binosawan. That does not include the dead fish that could not be collected far out into the sea and those that have sunk to the sea floor. The fishkill of 2006 is also denied by Lafayette in spite of the narrative on Pages 15 and 16 of the TWG report on the test runs of 2006 titled “Evaluation of the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project Under the Test Run Conditions.” They also deny the fishkills in October 2007 despite overwhelming documentation and testimonies of the residents of Rapu-Rapu.

This is the root of Lafayette’s failure to gain social acceptability. It cannot face its own ghosts. It would rather have a change of mask than a change of heart.

Impossibility of managing AMD in a small island

The first reason for objection to Lafayette mining in Rapu-Rapu is the presence of sulfide and pyrite rocks which are sources of acid mine drainage. Lafayette is adamant in refusing to admit that AMD cannot be managed in the small island of Rapu-Rapu. What Engr. Pacis admitted is that they cannot give 100% guarantee. “But there are other controls,” she quickly added. If those controls are effective the creeks would show.

On October 20, I showed them the photographs of the creeks from the ponds and gabions to the beach all tarnished with yellow, red and orange colors. They have no reply to that evidence. Lafayette failed to present their photographs of the creeks emanating from the mine site and flowing to the sea, some 400 to 500 meters from the tailings pond.

To oppositors, the short distance of the tailings pond from the sea is a consequence of second reason for objection to mining operations: the island’s small size. To Engr. Pacis, the 400 to 500-meter distance is safe enough. She forgets the third reason for objecting to the mining operations: the steep slopes. With short distance and flat terrain, there might be hope of retarding the flow of poisoned water to the sea. However, with short distance and steep slopes, the AMD easily reaches the fishing grounds of the poor fishermen.

All they showed were dam design drawings and photographs of canals around the ponds in the process of construction plus AMD management schematics. A slide was shown with a caption saying that a wild duck was swimming in the pond but the photo was so dark no duck could be seen and Engr. Pacis had to appeal to her audience to believe that there was indeed a duck in her photo. It can be granted for argument’s sake that there was a duck. I could even concede an elephant was there. What her claim proves is that there are species indeed like the wild duck which are at risk because of the mining operations. Kinatawan Osty Calleja commented that there could be no wild duck because Lafayette itself admits that the pond is poisoned.

The Lafayette measure for controlling AMD at source is to drown the tailings under two (2) meters of water column (www.rapu-rapumining.com/?req=environment). For a while the dissolved oxygen, they say, would react with the sulfide and pyrite wastes and produce acid. When all dissolved oxygen is consumed in the reaction, production of acid will stop. So they say. This is open admission that there is indeed acid in the pond.

Moreover, this method overlooks a vital scientific fact related to the fourth reason for objection to mining operations in the island: heavy rainfall. When a drop of rain falls from some 30,000 feet, it grows larger and larger and catches oxygen in its path. Hence, when the raindrop reaches the tailings pond, there is a fresh supply of dissolved oxygen for the chemical reaction to continue. With continued deposition of tailings, the production of more and more acid is assured.

Lafayette tries to make us believe that even if acid production continues in the tailings pond, the dam will contain the pollution. It was designed and is being built by a third party – Marcelo Bolaño and Associates – to withstand “one in a thousand years of rain.” Who would not be brave enough to make this claim? Nobody lives for a thousand years and prove thereafter that Lafayette is wrong. Moreover, even if they are indeed proven wrong, they would be too dead to care about any prosecution.

No government agency assures the public that the dam will sustain heavy rains and earthquakes

According to Engr. Dayao, in reply to Kinatawan Montallana, no agency of the government can give any assurance that the dam can serve the function for which it was designed. Not DENR, not Lafayette but only Marcelo Bolaño and Associates will bear the responsibility for any failure of the dam. From this arises our first objection to the dam: Lafayette has cunningly freed itself from responsibility for dam failure.

The second objection to the dam is the mistake committed by Lafayette in supposing that certain materials were non-potentially acid forming (NAF). They were found during the test runs to be actually potentially acid forming (PAF). This is documented on Page 36 of the report of the Technical Working Group on the test run. This mistake, according to Dr. Carlito Barril, retired geochemistry professor of UP Los Baños, is enough reason to close the Lafayette mine.

The third objection to the dam is the very possible development of cracks and seepages. This is warned about by Engr. Macario Apin II during the test runs and documented in the TWG report (Page 9). Cracks and seepages can result from groundshaking due to blastings done at the open pit. Worse, they can result from earthquakes originating from two fault lines: San Miguel Fault running northwest-southeast some 10 kms north of the mine site; and the Legazpi Lineament also running northwest-southeast some 2 kms south. The dam and the mine site lie between these fault lines. Several earthquakes occurred in 2008 and 2009 with epicenters near Rapu-Rapu. The Earthquake Database of the US Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center records seven (7) earthquakes from 1973 to 2007 with epicenters within 10 kms of the island.

AMD from settling and polishing ponds, exposed surfaces and waste rock dump

Sulfide and pyrite materials are not only in the tailings pond. They are also in the settling and polishing ponds which are allowed to flow to the wetland and then the sea. They are beneath the topsoil and when the latter is removed when mining is done, they are exposed to air and water to produce acid. The waste rock dump is also exposed to rainwater and air so acid will also come from it. Flowing with runoff water during heavy rains, this acid from exposed surfaces and waste rock dump reaches the sea.

Siltation

The other contaminant in the Lafayette mine is silt from exposed surfaces. Sprinkling with water, as allegedly Lafayette is doing everyday, will not remove the threat. As I have computed, they would need 4500 cubic meters of water every day for that purpose. There is no source in Rapu-Rapu that will give them that much water. Engr. Pacis said that they source it from the ponds. This compounds the problem of water scarcity. Even the exposed surfaces will have heavy metal contaminants! Silt and heavy metals then will flow to the sea during rainy days.

Silt alone clogs gills of fish and corrals and kill them. It also kills the plankton that produces 50 to 70% of the earth’s oxygen supply by consuming carbon dioxide.

Open Pit

Any open pit exacerbates global warming. Trees and other forms of vegetation (which produce a net supply of oxygen) are removed to dig the open pit. The silt of waste from the open pit is carried by rainwater to the sea and kills the plankton.

Moreover, the Lafayette open pit is a violation of the 7th commandment on climate change adaptation proclaimed by the Provincial Government of Albay in October 2007. The use of open pits is renounced by Al Gore in “An Inconvenient Truth”

Heavy metals, bioaccumulation and biomagnification

Heavy metals uncovered by mining kill mangroves and cause diseases among humans. Mercury naturally occurs in Rapu-Rapu as testified to by the MGB through its Factsheet dated February 2, 2006. Its effect on human health needs no elaboration.

Statements from DENR and Lafayette trying to calm people through assurances that the level of heavy metal contamination is within “tolerable limits” is belied when bioaccumulation and biomagnification are established. Bioaccumulation is the increase in concentration of a pollutant from the environment to the first organism in a food chain. Biomagnification is the increase in concentration of a pollutant from one link in a food chain to another

The surroundings may be within the ‘tolerable limit” for heavy metal contamination but the persistent presence of the contaminants in the air, water, sediments or even organisms plus the successive consumption through the food chain will increase their concentration in higher-order consumers like humans.

Excretion of mercury may be faster among lactating females because the contaminant goes out with the milk only to be sucked by the baby!

Heavy metals may be excreted but only to return to the environment and from there they will again be consumed by plants and animals which will then be consumed by humans. So heavy metals will keep on circulating in the environment and human body whereas they used to be covered by topsoil until unearthed by mining operations.

To all these rebuttals, the Lafayette representatives could only nod their heads.

Given all these information about Lafayette AMD management and its dam, one can easily understand why acid, silt and heavy metals flow to the sea. The final proof of this is the severely diminished fish catch in Albay Gulf. Engr. Pacis herself admitted during the November 3 hearing that they could see corrals but not fish. She adds, “as to the reason, we do not know.” The fishermen report the decline to have started in 2005, the very year Lafayette began full operations. Also, the RRMI advertisement over Home Radio in Legazpi City admits severe fish catch decline but blames it on the cutting of mangroves by the residents themselves. As we have rebutted, the island residents have not cut the mangroves in the scale that Lafayette wants the world to believe; they have made sustainable use of them for decades but no decline in fish catch happened until 2005 when Lafayette mining went full blast. The death of mangroves is caused by heavy metal contamination as two scientific studies show*. In Rapu-Rapu the mining operations have unleashed heavy metals that used to be buried under the topsoil.

(* http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1992824; http://marine-habitats.suite101.com/article.cfm/mangrove_deforestation_affects_coral_reefs)

In brief, three indicators show how ineffective Lafayette’s environmental management is: (1) the yellow, red, orange and brown coloration of the creeks as evidence of contamination that flows to the sea; (2) severe decline in fish catch in Albay Gulf since 2005; and (3) growing poverty and increasing incidents of disease in the island.

Up to this time, Lafayette executives do not accept the challenge which I gave on October 20, 2009 and repeated in front of them on November 3, 2009 for them to bathe in the mouth of the creeks or eat fish if any is caught in the area. This is further proof that they themselves are not convinced that their operations are clean.

The Lafayette representatives also cited their aesthetic standards for the mine site. In reply, we say that the mine site may look very beautiful but it does not take away the danger that lurks there. Something may be beautiful outside but deep inside it can be very dangerous.

Corporate structure

Mrs. Calleja asked to be given the floor while I prepared my laptop for the presentation. She claimed that while RRPI is 100% foreign-owned, RRMI is 60% Filipino-owned as mandated by law. Disputing the claim, I showed to the committee the corporate structure during the time of the Australians. In the diagram, RRMI’s Filipino shares are 60% of 60% and hence 36% only. She replied that it was the old structure. In reply, I showed the new diagram taken from the 2008 Annual Report of MSC. There, the percentages of ownership are the same. The only change was in the replacement of Lafayette Mining Ltd by the Kores-LGI-MSC group. F&N Holdings, Inc. is replaced by JV Calleja Group. Everything else, specially the percentages of shares held, is the same. Mrs. Calleja said that the report is for 2008 and, she implied, is therefore old. This is not a valid argument because the 2008 report of MSC is the latest. Even if corrections were made in 2009, still Lafayette has to account for those years when they did not comply with the 60% Filipino ownership requirement. It is already sad that our surroundings are messed up by Lafayette’s operations. It is more unfortunate that our own laws are being used to minimize the taxes they pay and gotten around with to our disadvantage.

Certification from ISO and recognition from PCAPI

Lafayette again brought up their ISO Certification 14001 and added the recognition from the Pollution Control Adjudicators of the Philippines, Inc. Our reply to these is simple:

These certification and recognition do not address the island’s small size, steep slopes, heavy rainfall, sulfide and pyrite rocks that produce acid, and use of cyanide which by experience has been shown to be prone to spills that killed fish and plankton. The certification and recognition do not absolve Lafayette from the confirmed fishkills on October 11 and 31, 2005; July 20, 2006; first week of October 2007; and October 26-29, 2007.

The certification and recognition do not address the use of the open pit technology which removes the topsoil and renders the land unarable for decades and reduces the population of plants that also consume carbon dioxide.

The certification and recognition do not address the PEZA exemption of Lafayette from taxes on income earned from production of precious and base metals.

We should also note that the certification and recognition do not solve the fishermen’s problem of diminished catch in fishing grounds near the island and their need to go far out into the Pacific Ocean facing gigantic waves using tiny boats just to pursue their livelihood.

We should also note that the certification and recognition do not cure the diseases related to heavy metal contamination suffered by residents of Rapu-Rapu and coastal towns of Sorsogon.

The ISO Certification is only for the needs of Lafayette. It is never for us.

Lafayette mining and Rapu-Rapu’s poverty

The situation in Rapu-Rapu Island is desperate, according to a group of environmentalists who conducted an ocular and immersion activity on May 11-13 in the island. Hunger, disease and ecological disasters are unabated and continue to worsen day by day. It demands the attention of local and national authorities.

Talking to residents of Carugcog, Tinopan, Buenavista, Viga and other villages, the ISM participants, according to Dr. Geneve Rivera of Health Alliance for Democracy, learned that children die of diarrhea and vomiting for lack of medical services. Respiratory problems are common. These cases, they confirm, never happened with the same frequency in the past as after the start of mining operations.

Fish is scarce in the waters offshore. Even “tagunason,” an edible marine organism that used to be abundant on the shorelines during low tide, is gone. They cannot bathe in the beaches because they experience skin itch and rashes. Mrs. Jeanny Balbin cries as she recounts how her three children almost died after eating shellfish.

The creeks are yellowish-red, an indication of acid mine drainage, and no longer host freshwater fish. The dap-dap trees along the banks are dead. Corrals still stand but are pale and likewise dead, according to Mr. Clemente Baustista of Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment. No fish can be seen around them. The residents estimate that 50% of the corrals near Buenavista are dead. This explains the observation that fish catch is down from 20 kilograms per outing to almost zero. The blue marlin used to be abundant in April and May and 20 could be caught in years past. This year, only 6 have been caught. For the entire island, fish catch decline is estimated at 80-90% since the mine started to operate, according to PAMALAKAYA national chair Mr. Fernando Hicap.There is severe scarcity of drinking water.

On August 21-23, 2009, Pangataman-Bikol, an environmental NGO, sent a relief mission to Mananao, Linao and Tinopan. The team saw extreme poverty. The near-zero fish catch was confirmed. They saw an old woman who earns her living by making hard brooms from coconut midribs. She makes four a day and sells each for P15. Her fingers have suffered cuts from the effort. But even her humble livelihood is under threat because the mining companies cut coconut trees (without permit according to the PCA in Legazpi) and are bent on expanding the mining area.

With the information on Page 21 of the 2008 MSC Annual Report that 5,218 hec is the mine area, 93.36% of the island, up from the previously known 82.5%, is under threat of destruction.

As in colonial times, foreigners are unbridled in their exploitation of our natural resources, leaving Filipinos destitute and robbed of their chance to rise from poverty. In the past, we had the Blood Compact. Today we have the Mineral Production Sharing Agreement and Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement. In the past we had the Encomienda System. Today we have the Mining Industry Liberalization Policy.

ang lahi ni Legaspi ay ating binubuhay sa lubos na kasaganaan, ating pinagtatamasa at binubusog, kahit abutin natin ang kasalatan at kadayukdukan
- Andres Bonifacio
“Ang Dapat Mabatid ng mga Tagalog”

Based on the monitoring of anti-mining liberalization alliance Defend Patrimony, there are already eight Provincial Governments that have declared moratorium on large-scale mining: Capiz, Western Samar, Northern Samar, Samar, Marinduque, Mindoro Oriental, North Cotabato and Palawan (http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/lgus-urged-follow-palawans-ban-mining). In addition, Nueva Vizcaya, Puerto Princesa City (https://www.yehey.com/news/Article.aspx?id=177393), Sitio Taocanga (Brgy Calinawan, Manay, Davao Oriental) followed suit.

Albay can do the same.

In closing, I declared during the committee hearing:

For a very long time after Lafayette is done mining in Rapu-Rapu the tailings deposit and contamination will hang like the sword of Damocles over the residents of the island. Throughout that period of thirty or more years, the land will yield no fruit and the sea, no fish. Future generations will ask: What did we do in our time to prevent it?

On our part we will continue to call for mine closure and document everything. The day will come when the history of Albay is read by our grandchildren, the names of those accountable will be forever condemned.

The personnel of Lafayette (yes I insist on calling that entity Lafayette) are unrepentant for all the environmental destruction and economic injustice they have inflicted on Rapu-Rapu. In due time, we believe, justice will be served.

November 3, 2009

WHILE RAPU-RAPU WEEPS

2009-10-29T11:07:00.005+08:00

On October 20, 2009, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Albay, upon the lead of Kinatawan July Tingzon, summoned the Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. to present information regarding tax payments and environmental impact of the latter’s mining operations. Mrs. Cecille Calleja claimed that the communication they received required them to present tax information only. They were not ready to present data on environmental impact so she asked for another audience with the Board. Two other representatives verbally informed the SPA on tax payments and social development projects. (Their Powerpoint presentation would not work.) Total tax payments from 2005 to 2008 as alleged by RRMI is over P500 million. The SDMP budget for 2008 was P16 million. As claimed by Ms. Lani Lanuzo, the money was given to village officials who then determined how it would be spent.

The representative from BIR Legazpi confirmed the claims of tax payments. She said that when RRMI became a big tax payer in 2008, the money then went to BIR national office. She pleaded to the SPA to support the effort of BIR Legazpi to have the payments made in the local revenue office. She was concerned about the tax collection performance of her office but not with the availment of tax windfall by the people of Rapu-Rapu. (Please read SARA response to claims about tax payments.)

A representative from the Philippine Economic Zone Authority confirmed the tax exemption privileges of Rapu-Rapu Processing, Inc. for four (4) years.

As SARA Spokesperson, I presented the video “Rapu-Rapu” made by Bikol Express showing the suffering of the people of Rapu-Rapu due to the previous fishkills and ongoing decline in fish catch. I also showed them the complex corporate structure relating RRMI, RRPI, LPI, Kores, LGI, MSC, Ungay-Malobago, Inc, and JV Calleja Group. I emphasized that the diagram was reliable because it came from the Annual Report of MSC in 2008. It was important to clarify the corporate structure because the RRMI representatives tried so hard to make the audience believe that they are not “Lafayette.” I asserted that they are still “Lafayette” as technically manifested by the continued ownership of the mine by “Lafayette Philippines, Inc.” Towards the close of the presentations, Mrs. Calleja insisted that they are not “Lafayette” anymore. Instead, they are “Korea Malaysia Philippines or KMP.” With the same people who were in “Lafayette”, this alleged “KMP” is a mere new name for the same juridical entity. If Satan is called Lucifer, he is the same devil.

The presentations of RRMI sounded like the SONA of President Gloria M. Arroyo. So much is claimed on paper but virtually nothing is seen on the ground. Notably the alleged accomplishments are mostly for the three "direct impact barangays" even as the damage of mining operations is felt as far as Barangay Mananao in the north; Rawis, Legazpi City in the west; and Prieto Diaz, Sorsogon in the south. While the island residents are in pain back in Rapu-Rapu, RRMI representatives were joyous in the session hall of the SPA. This, I believe, is the typical attitude of the Lafayette people. They refuse to see the issue from the viewpoint of the masses. They can afford to exhibit mirth while the people of Rapu-Rapu, as shown in the video “Rapu-Rapu” by Bikol Express, are weeping over the loss of their livelihood and patrimony.

Virgilio S. Perdigon, Jr.

Response of SARA to the Alleged Tax Payments of RRMI

2009-10-29T11:04:00.002+08:00

The Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance responds as follows to the statements of RRMI, BIR and PEZA re tax payments:

1. The environmental damage is much more than the benefits from alleged taxes. The current and future benefits from farming and fishing will be almost totally wiped out. The alleged taxes are in the millions; farming and fishing benefits are beyond quantification, being the source of sustenance for all generations of island residents.

2. There is no verification of actual payment. Government agencies and mining companies have been accused of collusion and cover-up.

3. There is no independent validation of income declared by RRMI; hence, there is no certainty that the amounts allegedly paid as taxes are correct.

4. The alleged taxes are from RRMI only. RRPI enjoys exemptions as PEZA privileges. This could be the reason for the separation of the two companies. RRPI is 100% foreign-owned; RRMI is 64% foreign-owned. The claim is that the privileges are for four (4) years. The PEZA law stipulates six (6) years which can be extended to eight (8) years (Special Economic Zone Act of 1995 Rule XV Section 6). It is not surprising then that the mine life is set at eight (8) years.

5. The local BIR office wants the taxes to be paid to them instead of BIR national office to improve the former’s tax collection performance. They did not express desire to ensure that the benefits accrue to the residents of the island.

6. There are discrepancies between taxes alleged by RRMI and those reported by MGB.

7. There is no visible benefit for the residents of the island in terms of roads, bridges, health services, and other projects and programs. For example, it still takes 7 hours for residents of Tinopan and Binosawan to carry on their backs the farm produce to Poblacion.

In the light of these considerations, the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance refutes the alleged payment of taxes as justification for the continued operation of the mine. We maintain our stand that the mine should be closed, and that the mining companies clean up the contaminated areas, pay for the damages, and leave the island. We also reiterate our call for the implementation of alternative options for the development of Rapu-Rapu such as land distribution, farm subsidies, potable water system, decent housing, fast transportation, environment-friendly roads, power generation, and preservation of the island’s ecosystem.

Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance
October 20, 2009

SARA Calls for Boycott of LG Products

2009-10-10T11:54:00.003+08:00

The mining operations in Rapu-Rapu have resulted in severe decline in fish catch in the waters around the island. Hunger and poverty are daily felt by the residents. Diseases like diarrhea and skin rashes have afflicted them. In the face of these scorges, the mining companies advertise over the radio that the decline in fish catch is the result of the destruction of the mangrove forests by the residents of Rapu-Rapu. This is insult added to injury! The miners overlook the scientific fact that mangroves are destroyed by contamination from metals like copper, zinc, cadmium and nickel. Copper and zinc are the object of mining operations, aside from gold and silver. In the process, they also unleash naturally occurring mercury and cadmium. In other words, the mining operations cause the destruction of the mangroves. Hence, the mining operations cause the decline in fish catch. On top of this, the scattering of silt around the island is killing the local fish species and driving away the migratory ones.

There are several companies involved in the mining operations: Lafayette Philippines Inc. (LPI) which owns Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. and Rapu-Rapu Processing, Inc.; Korea Resources Corporation (Kores); LG International Corporation; Malaysia Smelting Corporation which own LPI; and Rapu-Rapu Holdings, Inc.; JV Calleja Group; Ungay-Malobago Mines, Inc.; and Toronto Ventures, Inc. which have minor stakes in the mine. They are related in a complex arrangement but a graphical depiction on the right side of this page would help the reader understand.

In view of the unrepentant attitude of the mining companies, the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance launched a non-violent protest action plan. The first stage is the call for boycott of LG products – refrigerators, washing machines, cellphones, flat screens, airconditioners, etc. LG has retail outlets in the local economy. With the vital participation of our friends in other countries, the impact would be multiplied.

Through this non-violent protest action, we will make LG feel how it is to lose one’s income. An estimated 14,000 fishermen and their dependents have already lost theirs, from 60 to 93 %, according to a study by Ibon Foundation.

Should the mining companies not close the Rapu-Rapu mine, in 2010 we will expand our boycott call to cover other Korean products because Korea Resources Corporation is owned by the South Korean government which has turned a deaf ear to the plight of the island residents. Our fathers and grandfathers shed their blood in the Korean War to defend their freedom in the 1950’s. Today, a large number of their children and grandchildren are being oppressed by South Koreans through Kores and LG. What ingratitude!

So, to our friends the world over, we are seeking help. The suffering of the people of Rapu-Rapu island should not last any longer. Please come to their aid. Boycott LG products!

Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance

MSC Sells 30% Share in Rapu-Rapu Mine

2009-10-01T14:16:00.004+08:00

Published: 2009/09/04

MALAYSIA Smelting Corp Bhd (MSC) said it will sell its 30 per cent stake in the Rapu Rapu polymetallic project in Philippines which it bought on April 17 last year.

This is another non-tin asset that MSC is planning to sell apart from the recent proposed divestment of a 22.1 per cent stake in Australia 's gold mining company Beaconsfield Gold NL.

MSC told Bursa Malaysia the sale is in line with the company's focus to reduce cost and debt.

"The company has also decided not to proceed with the proposed bonus and rights issues in view of its decision to divest some of the group's non-tin assets," it said.

http://www.btimes.com.my/Current_News/BTIMES/articles/BURSMSC/Article/index_html

Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. Blames Island Residents for Decline in Fish Catch

2009-09-16T10:28:00.007+08:00

In a paid advertisement through Home Radio, an FM station in Legazpi City, RRMI states during the 3 pm commercial break:

In Forcus - coastal resource protection and conservation presented to you by Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc. The destruction of mangroves or bakawan forests are (sic) one of the major reasons for the declining fish catch in the municipality of Rapu-Rapu. More than 80% of mangrove forests have been cut down for firewood, charcoal, fish farming and residential settlements. In Focus – coastal resource protection and conservation presented to you by Rapu-Rapu Minerals Inc. Best practices are our guiding principle.

This adds insult to injury. This is not so different from the “Lollipop Affair” when a certain Joey Cubias said something to this effect:

The people of Rapu-Rapu cannot be satisfied with just one lollipop. They demand ten.

The mining company apologized to the local government of Rapu-Rapu and booted Cubias. The release of the advertisement on the decline in fish catch exposes the hypocrisy of the “new management” of the mine. After apologizing for the Cubias faux pas, they trample upon the dignity of the residents anew by blaming them for the loss of their livelihood – fishing.

The apologists of Lafayette mining have been groping for a convincing defense against the charge that contamination of the seawater around Rapu-Rapu is the actual cause of fish catch decline. First, they blamed the phenomenon on climate change. This was thwarted with the argument that open pit mining aggravates climate change. If climate change caused fish catch decline, then by transitivity, the mining operation caused the drastic fish catch decline! This reasoning is as simple as the logism that if A caused B and B caused C, then A caused C.

Second, the apologists of Lafayette mining blamed the decline in fish catch on illegal fishing. To this we have responded. There has been illegal fishing in the 1960’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. But no decline in fish catch happened. Moreover, the damage done by illegal fishing can easily be repaired by the natural process of fish rebreeding in one or two seasons. Today, the Bantay Dagat operatives (Sea Guards) have been patrolling Albay Gulf so that illegal fishing has been reduced. Since natural rebreeding can restore the fish population in a few seasons, how can illegal fishing be blamed for the drastic decline in fish catch? One fact is obvious but it seems Lafayette cannot see it: the rapid decline in fish catch started in 2005. That was also the year mining operations went full blast.

Third, the apologists of Lafayette mining blamed trawl fishing. In response, the fishermen themselves testify that trawl fishing cannot be done in Albay Gulf because the net would get entangled in the corrals and rocks. They themselves do not see any trawl ships entering Albay Gulf. They see them in the Pacific Ocean. Out there where trawls ply, the fish are abundant but the boats of Rapu-Rapu fishermen are too small for the big waves.

The fourth alibi of the apologists of Lafayette mining, namely the destruction of mangroves by the residents of the island, is also easily debunked by two scientific studies:

(1) M. W. Yim and N. F. Y. Tam; Department of Biology and Chemistry, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China

Effects of wastewater-borne heavy metals on growth of young plants (9-month-old Bruguiera gymnorrhiza) and soil microbial activities in mangrove microcosms were evaluated. During the 26-week loading period, each mangrove microcosm received 31.2 litres synthetic wastewater of three strengths: normal, medium (5 times of normal strength) and strong (10 times of normal strength). Normal strength wastewater had Cu, Zn, Cd, Cr and Ni concentrations of 3, 5, 0.2, 2 and 3 mg l−1, respectively. Plant growth and total plant biomass in wastewater-treated microcosms were lower than that in the control, and the maximum reduction was found in microcosms receiving strong wastewater. Alkaline phosphatase activity and ATP contents of the mangrove soils receiving wastewater were also reduced. More than 95% reduction in these two parameters was found in soils loaded with strong wastewater. Microtox test demonstrated that soil elutriates obtained from microcosms receiving strong wastewater were of the greatest toxicity (EC50 was 23%). These results show that high concentrations of heavy metals present in strong wastewater were toxic and posed negative effects to both mangrove plants and soil microbial activities. Microbial activities were generally more sensitive to the toxicity of heavy metals than plants. (boldface and italics supplied)

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6N-47XPGRF-W&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1012143229&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4df2f84202a26ded5d17680e180acaa3
20090915

(2) Megan Jugwi; Mangrove Deforestation Affects Coral Reefs; Aug 10, 2009

Although the leggy trees of a mangrove forest seem to have little in common with the clear blue waters of a colorful coral reef, these two ecosystems are closely connected to each other. Mangrove deforestation not only means loss of habitat for mangrove wildlife such as mudskippers, birds, and deer. Mangrove deforestation also affects coral reefs and this wider impact must be understood.

The Extent of Mangrove Deforestation
Twenty percent of the world’s mangrove forests have been lost since 1980, says the January 2008 report “Loss of mangroves alarming” from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO). The report goes on to say that mangrove deforestation is mostly due to shrimp and fish farming, agriculture, pollution, and tourism. Mangroves provide many ecosystem services including protecting the shore from erosion, providing wood and food to humans, and are a home to a wide range of animals.

Where Mangroves and Corals Interact
Mangrove forests and coral reefs do not always occur near each other. However, these two ecosystems are neighbors often enough that important biological and physical interactions have been observed. Places as disparate as Indonesia, Australia, and the Caribbean have mangrove coastlines not far from coral reefs. The placement of mangroves, coral reefs, and the sometimes-intermediary sea grass beds can be seen in the United Nations Environmental Program’s maps “Global Distribution of Coral, Mangrove, and Seagrass Diversity” at the UNEP/GRID-Arendal Site.

Mangroves Home to Baby Reef Fish
The loss of mangrove forests affect reef fish in a very direct way reports John Roach in the February 2004 National Geographic article “Mangroves Are Nurseries for Reef Fish, Study Finds”. Researchers found that coral reefs near mangroves had twice as many fish as those far from mangrove forests. Many fish are born in seagrass beds and live there until they are too big to hide from predators. They then move on to mangroves to grow a bit more before moving on to reefs. In areas without mangroves, the fish move to the reefs when they are smaller and are easier prey for predators. Mangroves are thus important to healthy, abundant reef communities.

Mangrove Loss Leads to Polluted Coral Reefs
The roots of mangrove trees do an important job of keeping the coastline’s soil intact and out of the ocean. Unfortunately, the loss of mangrove forests can lead to silt traveling out to sea. The eroding coastline is bad for land inhabitants, but it also leads to the siltation of coral reefs. This often means death for corals that are smothered by soil. As the FAO notes in its article, mangroves are important in protecting corals from erosion.

http://marine-habitats.suite101.com/article.cfm/mangrove_deforestation_affects_coral_reefs
20090915

The first study says: Copper, zinc, cadmium and nickel contamination severely reduced the growth of mangroves. High concentrations of heavy metals present in strong wastewater were toxic and posed negative effects to both mangrove plants and soil microbial activities.
In Rapu-Rapu, UP NSRI study identified the first three elements (Cu, Zn and Cd) as among the contaminants. We repeat: one fact is obvious but it seems Lafayette cannot see it: the rapid decline in fish catch started in 2005. That was also the year mining operations went full blast.

The residents of the island are not responsible for the release of heavy metals to the seawater around the island. The mining operators did that as proven in 2005, 2006 and 2007 fishkills. If no fishkill occurred in 2008 and 2009 that is due to the fact that there are no more fish to kill.

The second study says: Mangroves and coral reefs are interrelated.

The FAO report says: Mangrove deforestation is mostly due to shrimp and fish farming, agriculture, pollution, and tourism. Mangroves provide many ecosystem services including protecting the shore from erosion, providing wood and food to humans, and are a home to a wide range of animals.

The FAO itself acknowledges the legitimacy of tapping mangroves as source of fuel and food for humans. What is not legitimate is the mining of an island with a fragile ecosystem. The people of Rapu-Rapu have all the right to do these economic activities in their island and they have done them sustainably. RRMI, RRPI, RRPP, LPI, Kores, LGI, MSC and their host of apologists are intruders backed solely by the fiat of Malacañang. The radio advertisement blaming the destruction of mangroves on the people of Rapu-Rapu has neither scientific nor moral basis.

We do not see any shrimp and fish farming around Rapu-Rapu! Bicol University attempted a seaweed culture project there but the seaweed did not grow as attested to by Dr. Nimfa Pelea during the meeting of PATLEPAM on October 3, 2008. Agriculture in Rapu-Rapu is down because of the encroachment of the open pit on their farmlands and diversion of irrigation water from the farms to the mine site. Recall that the Secretary of the Rapu-Rapu Sangguniang Bayan, Mr. Allan Asuncion, wrote a letter to Engr. Rogelio E. Corpus (then LPI General Manager for Operations and currently RRMI Senior Vice-President for Mine Operations) dated September 12, 2007 to convey the complaint of the Pagcolbon Barangay Captain about the “drought and scarcity or total absence of potable water supply” in his barangay. No reply was reported.

There is no significant tourism industry to speak of in Rapu-Rapu. What is glaring in that island is pollution. The release of naturally occurring mercury; the contamination with copper, zinc, cadmium, lead and arsenic; and the scattering of silt have polluted the seawater around Rapu-Rapu. This is the only cause of the destruction of the mangroves and the corals. This is the result of Lafayette mining.

Lafayette must own up to its culpability for the environmental damage in Rapu-Rapu and to the economic injustice inflicted on the people. They should stop citing unscientific alibis. As the captain of the Greenpeace ship Esperanza told them: They should pack up, clean up, pay up and take off.

RRMI, RRPI, RRPP, LPI, Kores, LGI, MSC and their host of apologists should stop thinking that the people of Rapu-Rapu and the Bicol Region can be deceived by their lies! If the decline in fish catch is due to the destruction of mangroves by residents of the island and not to pollution, then we challenge all executives of RRMI, RRPI, RRPP, LPI, Kores, LGI, MSC and their host of apologists to swim for one hour every weekend in the mouths of the creeks where they discharge wastewater and eat fish if they can catch any. If they can do that then their radio advertisement can be believed. If they cannot, then it is “baseless, speculative and in no way supported by facts or evidence” to quote Engr. Corpus in his statement to the Business Mirror on June 9, 2009.

Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance
September 15, 2009

A Man Called Python

2009-09-03T09:31:00.003+08:00

Fact 1: On August 31, 2009 a man known as “Sawa” (pronounced /sah-HWA/) or “Python” was reported as having been pursued by the Philippine National Police Maritime Command for illegal fishing. He eluded the police by escaping upland to the barangay of Morocborocan but his equipment were confiscated. The report said his group was using a compressor. The fish they caught was 30 kgs.

Fact 2: A certain “Sawa” is known in Rapu-Rapu as a resident of sitio (a sub-unit of a village) Acal in the barangay (village) of Manano. He is also a member of the village council. The same person is known in the island as a pro-mining barangay kagawad (councilor).

Fact 3: The mining company that operates in Rapu-Rapu has completed its exploration of the Mananao area.

Fact 4: The mining company has been arguing that the decline in fish catch around the waters of Rapu-Rapu is due to illegal fishing.

Fact 5: Illegal fishing was rampant in the past decades but the fish catch never declined. Today, with Bantay Dagat (Sea Guards), illegal fishing is not as rampant.

Fact 6: The full scale operation of Lafayette Philippines, Inc. in Rapu-Rapu started in 2005. That was also the year when fish catch drastically declined.

Conclusion 1: From Facts 1 and 2 it can be concluded that the pro-mining kagawad is also an illegal fisher.

Conclusion 2: From Facts 2 and 3 it can be concluded that “Sawa” supports the mining operation being started in the Mananao area.

Conclusion 3: From Facts 3 and 4 it can be concluded that the mining company continues to dig for minerals in Rapu-Rapu because they do not acknowledge that the mining operation damages the fishing industry.

Conclusion 4: From the preceding it can be shown that miners and illegal fishers are in cahoots as they destroy the island and its surrounding waters.

Conclusion 5: From Facts 5 and 6 it can be concluded that the decline in fish catch cannot be attributed to illegal fishing but to the mining operation in Rapu-Rapu.

We, the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance, oppose illegal fishing. We point out, nevertheless, that the impact of mining is many times more damaging. Hence, we insist that the mine should be closed!

Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance
September 2, 2009

Pure lip service for environmental protection by DENR, MGB and CMP Part 1

2009-08-17T11:06:00.003+08:00

In the July 28, 2009 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, through an article written by Mr. Nikko Dizon titled “Purist ideas of environmentalists assailed”, Mr. Horacio Ramos of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau central office and the Chamber of Mines of the Philippines assailed “anti-mining” groups. Below is a rebuttal from Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance and Pangataman Bikol.

Lately, Mr. Horacio Ramos of MGB has resorted to labeling in his defense of mining companies that go around in the guise of “responsible mining” and “sustainable development.” Failing to present facts about mining impact on Philippine environment, Mr. Ramos cites motherhoods and calls his critics “purists” as if by casting such word like a magic spell all oppositors would vanish with a wave of his wand. Allow us to respond to him and the Chamber of Mines of the Philippines (CMP) point by point:

1. CMP: “The mining act has very stringent environmental protection measures and they have been complied with.”

We reply: The Mining Act became law in 1995. In 1996, the Marcopper mining disaster happened in Marinduque! The Mining Act of 1995 is favorable to mining companies and reads like it was written by them. If the Mining Act has very stringent provisions, then why are mining areas in such terrible shape? Rapu-Rapu, Aroroy, Larap, Marinduque, Mangkayan, etc are serious indictments of the “stringent” mining act.

2. CMP: “Even in the case of Rapu-Rapu, this was dealt with immediately . . . They have paid for their mistakes. Government and even civil society groups in the area monitor operations closely and do not confirm the disappearance of fish catch. This is hearsay.

We reply: These are the facts, not hearsay, about Rapu-Rapu mining. In Rapu-Rapu, five major fishkills have been noted. The Pollution Adjudication Board made Lafayette pay only for the October 2005 accidents. However, not a cent went to the people of the island. Rod Watt, the Australian manager during those spills was not penalized. He even received P16 million in salaries in 2006. The management team of Carlos Dominguez, taking over from the Australians, never improved the situation for the residents of the island. They earned over P 90 million during their stint. While Lafayette executives earn millions inside their airconditioned offices, the people of Rapu-Rapu are losing everything they need for present and future survival. The following data on their salaries are from the annual reports of Lafayette Mining Limited from 2001 to 2007 (the executives have varying periods of employment):

1. Antill, Mark, Asst. VP Mining; US$ 138,131.00; P 6,906,550.00; 1 year
2. Baker, David Lewis, Mng Dir and Chief Exec Offcr; US$ 1,197,884.00; P 55,433,075.00; 2 years
3. Benuik, VG, Asst. VP Metallurgy; US$ 115,714.00; P 5,785,700.00; 1 year
4. Campos, Marc A., Senior VP Prodn and Comrcl; US$ 179,276.00; P 8,159,970.00; 2 years
5. Culbert, Ian Edward, Executive Director; US$ 180,000.00; P 9,000,000.00; 1 year
6. Eckhof, Klaus Peter, Non-executive Director; US$ 21,600.00; P 1,080,000.00; 1 year
7. Geddes, Peter Jeffrey, Non-executive Director; US$ 30,000.00; P 1,500,000.00; 1 year
8. Gillard, Reginald Norman, Non-executive Chairman; US$ 360,759.00; P 17,731,385.00; 6 years
9. Hickman, Timothy James Bruce, Chief Financl Ofcr and Co Sec; US$ 784,008.00; P 39,200,400.00; 4 yrs
10. Mahony, David Ronayne, Executive Director/Non-ex Dir; US$ 768,837.00; P 38,441,850.00; 4 years
11. Marwood, Bradley WJ, Chief Operating Officer; US$ 177,840.00; P 8,892,000.00; 1 year
12. McIlwain, Andrew Ivor Bruce, Mng Dir and Chief Exec Offcr; US$ 1,950,138.00; P 97,506,900.00; 4 yrs
13. McMullen, Michael James, Technical Director; US$ 160,000.00; P 8,000,000.00; 1 year
14. Mitchell, James Scott, Non-executive Director; US$ 120,700.00; P 6,035,000.00; 3 years
15. Quartermaine, Jeffrey Allan, Chief Financl Ofcr and Co Sec; US$ 580,835.00; P 26,408,410.00; 2 years
16. Robinson, Kevin Peter, Non-executive Director; US$ 113,257.00; P 5,662,850.00; 3 years
17. Stevering, Michel GM, Group Finance Mgr/ Comp Sec; US$ 132,058.00; P 5,942,610.00; 1 year
18. Taylor, Paul Richard, Non-executive Director; US$ 50,582.00; P 2,529,100.00; 1 year
19. Thompson, AB, VP Operations; US$ 233,036.00; P 11,651,800.00; 1 year
20. Walker, Jurg, Non-executive Director; US$ 40,000.00; P 2,000,000.00; 2 years
21. Watt, Roderick, Country Manager – Philippines; US$ 915,172.00; P 45,758,600.00; 5 years
22. Widdup, Robin Anthony, Non-executive Director; US$ 46,250.00; P 2,150,000.00; 2 years
23. Wood, Steven C., Non-executive Director; US$ 12,630.00; P 568,350.00; 1 year

Total salaries = US$ 8,308,707.00 = P 406,344,550.00

We do not covet their money. In the first place, that money rightfully belongs to the people of Rapu-Rapu. We only lament that they have all the benefits while the people of Rapu-Rapu bear all the costs – environmental damage and loss of livelihood.

Civil society groups here from the academe, church, fisherfolks, NGOs, etc oppose the mine - Aquinas University of Legazpi, Ateneo de Naga University, Divine Word College of Legazpi, St. Agnes’ Academy, Social Action Center, Parish of Rapu-Rapu, Diocese of Legazpi, Diocese of Sorsogon, Archdiocese of Caceres, Diocese of Virac, Diocese of Libmanan, Diocese of Masbate, Diocese of Daet), the Governor of Albay, many city and municipal governments in Bicol, Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance, Pangataman Bikol, Sagip-Isla Sagip-Kapwa, Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment, Greenpeace, Oxfam Australia, Banktrack, Development and Peace of Canada, Center for Ecological Concerns Philippines, Health Alliance for Democracy, Community Medicine Development Foundation, Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas, Peace for Life, Philippine Collegian, Bulatlat, AGHAM, Redemptorist Baclaran, Takaki Citizen Science Foundation of Japan, Friends of the Earth Japan, BAYAN Bikol, KMP Bikol, Ugnayan ng mga Mamamayan Laban sa Pagmimina at Kombersyong Agraryo Camarines Norte, BAYAN Camarines Sur, PAMALAKAYA Masbate, KMU Bikol, ABAKA Catanduanes, KADAMAY Bikol, Camarines Sur People’s Organization, Bikol Express Multimedia, AMLDM, Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, radio stations DZGB and DWBS, etc. All the seven bishops of Bicol oppose the mine as manifested in their letter to the Pope dated December 25, 2008, after all appeals for mine closure fell on deaf ears of local and national authorities.

The fisherman around Albay Gulf (including Rapu-Rapu) and the International Solidarity Mission on May 10-13, 2009 all confirm the rapid decline in fish catch which started in 2005, the same year when Lafayette began operation.

In October 2005, July 2006, and October 2007 fishkills occurred. The Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding Commission recommended mine closure. Lafayette Mining Limited downplayed the impact of the 2005 and 2006 fishkills and does not accept responsibility for the 2007 fishkill. The CEC, UP College of Engineering and UP NSRI detected heavy metals in sediment, fish and water samples. Lafayette boasts that they are ISO 14001 compliant but the ISO certificate does not address the four reasons for objecting to Rapu-Rapu mining: small size, steep slopes, heavy rainfall, acid mine drainage. The ISO certificate does not address Lafayette’s failure to keep its promise to pay billions in taxes and implement social development projects. The ISO Certification does not address the PEZA exemption of Lafayette from taxes on income earned from production of precious and base metals. We should also note that the ISO Certification does not solve the fishermen’s problem of diminished catch in fishing grounds near the island and their need to go far out into the Pacific Ocean facing gigantic waves using tiny boats just to pursue their livelihood. In 2006, the Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding Commission submitted its recommendations to the President. Instead of following the recommendations, then DENR Secretary Angelo Reyes gave Lafayette a “second chance” through the test runs. A perusal of the report on the test runs shows that the readings of contaminants were so high and a fishkill happened during the period of the test run, in July 2006. Yet, permission to resume full operation was granted in February 2007. Indeed, what were conducted were not test runs but “tutorial runs.” There was already a prior decision to grant permission for full operation. The “tests” were mere motions to counter the calls for mine closure. Regarding the October 2007 fishkill, an investigation was promised by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Albay on December 12, 2007. For more than a year now, no investigation has been done. Is this their definition of “immediately”?

Rapu-Rapu mining is nothing but large-scale environmental damage and economic injustice as the following facts show. In response to a letter from the SARA Spokesperson in 2008, the regional office of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau declared the following information:

Metals extracted:

Gold – 159.80 kg = 5636.68 oz
Silver – 488.84 kg = 17,243.03 oz
Copper conc – 8841.60 dmt
Zinc conc – 17,148.50 dmt

Taxes paid – P 36,118,555.54

The following information is from Lafayette Mining Ltd.:

Commodity price forward position as of 30 June 2006

Average US$ price – forward maturity
Gold: 405.74 / oz (< 1 year)
Silver: 5.87 / oz (< 1 year)
(reference: Interim Report for the period ending 31 December 2006 Page 14)

Commodity price forward position as of 31 December 2006

Copper: 1817.00 / tonne (1-2 years)
Zinc: 946.00 /tonne
(reference: Interim Report for the period ending 31 December 2006 Page 13)

The following are the conservative estimate of average prices of the metals from London Metal Exchange website:

Gold – US$ 550 / oz
Silver – US$ 10 / oz
Copper – US$ 50
00 / dmt
Zinc – US$ 2500 / dmt

Putting these information together, we have the following calculation using conservative hedge prices:

Gold: US$ 2,287,028.29
Silver – US$ 101,216.61
Copper – US$ 16,065,187.20
Zinc – US$ 16,222,481.00

Total = US$ 34,675,913.10

At P40 = US$, the total is P 1,387,036,523.84. The taxes paid are therefore merely 2.604%. Using LME prices:

Gold: US$ 3,100,176.37
Silver – US$ 172,430.34
Copper – US$ 44,208,000.00
Zinc – US$ 42,871,250.00

Total = US$ 87,172,028.40

At P40 = US$, the total is P 3,614,074,268.08

The taxes paid are therefore merely 0.999%. This means that Lafayette paid merely 1% in excise taxes, not to Rapu-Rapu or Albay but to the BIR.

In 2008, Lafayette earned P847 million. On inquiry from the Regional Director of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau Region V, the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance obtained the amount of zinc and copper extracted from Rapu-Rapu in 2008 by LPI under the management of Koreans and Malaysians:

Zinc – 3583.77 dmt
Copper – 4267.94 dmt

At US$ 1100 (zinc) and US$ 3300 (copper) per dry metric ton and exchange rate of P47 per dollar, the total income was P 185,280,909.00 (zinc) and P 661,957,494.00 (copper) for a total of P 847,238,403.00.

Then LPI boasted through a local tabloid, Mayon Times, on December 3, 2008 that it “shared the bounty with the people of Rapu-Rapu. On verification, the amount spent was P270,000 or a measly 3% of 1% of their income in 2008, a pittance in exchange for posterity and patrimony!

Rice distributed:

900 families x 10 kg/family x P30/kg = P270,000.00

Ratio: P270,000 / P847,238,403 = 0.00032 = 0.032%

The true intention was not to share the bounty but to twist people’s arm into accepting the continued operation of the mine because on the same signature sheet where the recipients acknowledged receipt of 10 kgs of rice, it is written that the rice distribution was “Sharing of Bounty by the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project for the Continued Operation of the Mine.”

All the promises of social development projects, taxes, and mine rehabilitation fund are logically to be funded from the income of Lafayette from its operation in Rapu-Rapu. It does not need a brilliant mind to realize that the company is frying the island in its own fat. Lafayette is so bold in announcing that they have reserved, for example, P157 million for mine rehabilitation. Three things are very clear: (1) that huge amount is from the natural wealth of the island which is owned, in the first place, by the residents; (2) that amount is so big while the rice that they distributed is such a pittance; (3) if Lafayette did not destroy the island, then there is no need to rehabilitate it. They wound the island, then boast that they applied bandage on it!

The situation in Rapu-Rapu Island is desperate. Hunger, disease and ecological disasters are unabated and continue to worsen day by day. Children on the Pacific side die of diarrhea and vomiting for lack of medical services. Respiratory problems are common. These cases, residents confirm, never happened with the same frequency in the past as after the start of mining operations. Fish is scarce in the waters offshore. Even “tagunason,” an edible marine organism that used to be abundant on the shorelines during low tide, is gone. They cannot bathe in the beaches because they experience skin itch and rashes. The creeks are yellowish-red, an indication of acid mine drainage, and no longer host freshwater fish. The dap-dap trees along the banks are dead. Corrals still stand but are pale and likewise dead. No fish can be seen around them. The residents estimate that 50% of the corrals near Buenavista are dead. This explains the observation that fish catch is down. The blue marlin used to be abundant in April and May and 20 could be caught in years past. This year, only 6 have been caught. For the entire island, fish catch decline is estimated at 80-90% since the mine started to operate. There is severe scarcity of drinking water. “We continue to suffer from the adverse effects of mining operation of Lafayette. Foreign mining companies have grabbed our lands, poisoned our seas and destroyed our environment. Worse, the Arroyo government, instead of helping, has abandoned us and is stubbornly forcing us to accept the destructive operation of Lafayette mining,” said Antonio Casitas, leader of the local organization Sagip-Isla Sagip-Kapwa.

3. CMP: Mining activities which are undertaken in the hinterlands have become catalysts to rural development. It is illegal and unlicensed mining that have caused destruction and we enjoin Mr. Bautista and other environmentalists to help the government catch them.”

We reply: We challenge Mr. Ramos and the CMP to name these “hinterlands” that have been catalyzed to “development.” On our part, we do not know any. The following are facts: Aroroy, Masbate has been a mining town since 1837 yet it is only a 2nd Class municipality. Masbate is the poorest province of Bicol with a poverty incidence level of 62.8% according to the NSCB survey in 2000. Paracale, Camarines Norte has been a mining town since 1939 and yet it is only a 3rd Class municipality. Camarines Norte is the second poorest province of Bicol, with a poverty incidence level of 52.7% according to the NSCB survey in 2000. Both Masbate and Camarines Norte are listed as among the country’s ten (10) poorest provinces per NSCB survey in 2000. Rapu-Rapu, Albay has been mined since the 1930’s but it is only a 4th Class municipality, the poorest in the province. In its 2000 survey, the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) identified the top ten poorest provinces. Most of them are mining provinces. On the other hand, the top ten richest provinces or congressional districts are all non-mining areas. In his testimony before the Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding Commission on April 6, 2006 Heherson T. Alvarez stated that the mining communities of the Cordilleras, Canada, and Australia “have become miserable patches of poverty after the gold or the mineral ore was extracted.” What they call legal and licensed mining are those quarrying and processing operations owned by big business. Small-scale mining done by lowly entrepreneurs are “illegal and unlicensed” because they have no connections to the powerful political leaders. The destruction in Rapu-Rapu, Aroroy, Larap, Marinduque, Mangkayan, etc was caused by “legal and licensed” miners. We enjoin the government to declare how big business really operates in these devastated areas.

4. Ramos: Perlas had a “different definition of sustainable development . . . He wants a purist environment action versus (an action) with economic activity,” pointing out that this was the mindset of a politician . . . There’s no sustainable development without economic activity. We can’t live in a very pure environment but we die of starvation.

We reply: Labelling Mr. Perlas as purist does not win the argument. Mr. Ramos only reduces it to cheapness. Mr. Ramos also fails to see the environment as an important political issue. Moreover, whatever he means by “pure environment” he alone knows. On the other hand, it is clear to us that the economy cannot prosper if the environment is destroyed. All the inputs of production come from the environment. Distribution and consumption, as the other two basic economic activities, presuppose the preservation of the environment. Otherwise, how will goods be transported to reach the consumer if there is no sustainable source of energy, roads and railways whose design conform to ecological requisites? No one will consume the goods if people are stricken by disease in a polluted environment. Al Gore says it so well in “An Inconvenient Truth.” If we don’t have a planet, gold bars are worthless.

5. Ramos: “The Arroyo administration had to take the middle ground between the purists and those pushing the mining industry from an “economic point of view . . . There’s the extreme left and the extreme right. Government has to take the middle ground... We have obligations to the Filipino people which have to be done in a very responsible way.”

We reply: We do not see the Arroyo administration in the middle ground. Perhaps Mr. Ramos means “muddled ground.” As taxpayers, we see the Arroyo administration on the extreme side of big business. Rapu-Rapu mining, Arroyo’s flagship, is a clear case showing where this administration stands – with Lafayette. Otherwise, the people of the island would not have suffered from increasing hunger and poverty.

6. Ramos: Since the 1996 Marcopper mining disaster, the government and the mining industry had taken steps to prevent a repeat of this catastrophe.

We reply: The Mining Act of 1995 became law a year before the Marcopper disaster in 1996. That law never prevented the tragedy in Marinduque. The Mining Act of 1995 is useless in restoring the original condition of that island province. As of March 2009, “The people of Marinduque continue to suffer the destructive effects of mining in their province even as justice continues to elude them. The Marinduque case demonstrates our government’s failure to protect its citizens from large scale mining companies (that) violate our laws and environmental safety standards with impunity.” (Ronald Gregorio of the Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center in a statement to the Mindanao Examiner) Where is the Mining Act of 1995? Until today, Barrick Gold Corporation which bought Placer Dome cannot be made accountable for its irresponsibility. Indeed, how can a Philippine law be used against a juridical person outside the country? Yet, it is this same law that provided lavish benefits to Placer Dome and other mining companies. If a repeat of Marcopper is to be avoided, we must scrap the Mining Act of 1995 and replace it with a People’s Mining Policy.

7. Ramos: Both the government and mining companies had set in place business models that “balance and integrate economic, social, and environment objectives that aim for sustainable development and not just mining at all cost.”

We reply: This is a motherhood statement that has been observed more in the breach. There are no facts to substantiate this as well as other statements of Mr. Ramos.

8. Ramos: The DENR had also put in place a 24/7 monitoring on all mining activities.

We reply: This is not true. In Rapu-Rapu, the residents learned of the toxic spills long before DENR personnel did. Not even the Multi-partite Monitoring Team took the lead in reporting the spills. Instead, it kept quiet until the damage could no longer be hidden from the public.

9. Ramos: Aside from the environmental compliance certificate, the DENR also required mining companies to rehabilitate mine areas as well as follow a clearly defined final land use.

We reply: This is another motherhood statement. When mining companies are done, they just pack up and leave the clean up to the next mine owner or the government. This is what Lafayette Mining Limited did in Rapu-Rapu. This is what Placer Dome, the mother company of Marcopper Corporation, did in Marinduque. Today, Kores, LGI and MSC would not take responsibility for the mistakes of Lafayette Mining Limited. Barrick Gold Corporation which bought Placer Dome does not accept responsibility for the Marcopper disaster. It has been observed that mining companies would do a “rigodon” in order to escape from their responsibilities.

10. Ramos: The $2.1-billion mining industry has an existing 600,000 direct and indirect employment. By 2013, it is projected that the industry would be worth $13 billion.

We reply: This figure is out of the blue and has no evidence to back it up. In Rapu-Rapu, the mining company under the Koreans and Malaysians distributed rice to 900 families at 10 kgs per family. Their income in 2008 was P847 million. Simple arithmetic shows that at P30 per kg, Lafayette doled out a mere 3% of 1% of their income! They claim to employ 875 workers. The fishermen suffering from loss of livelihood due to the sudden decline in fish catch since 2005 are around 14,000. The company prospects to earn $1.54 billion. The wages and social development projects it promised to give amount to just around ½ of 1% (0.594%). In exchange, the people of Rapu-Rapu will lose 100% of their island. Lafayette invested $40 million. This means that for every dollar put in, Lafayette targets to gain $38.5! The gain of $37.5 comes from the sweat of lowly paid workers and the minerals extracted from our land. The Philippine government and the CMP allows this because of their junior partnership with foreign investors.

11. CMP: The industry was only given impetus by the government in late 2003 and it was only in 2005 when the Supreme Court finally resolved and affirmed the constitutionality of the Mining Act when the industry was resurrected.

We reply: The Mining Act was first declared unconstitutional. We can only surmise how it came to be constitutional later. With the resurrection of the mining industry came the death of agriculture in mining areas. Our food supply was diminished. We do not have to argue about the constitutionality of our diminished food supply!

Pure lip service for environmental protection by DENR, MGB and CMP Part 2

2009-08-17T10:57:00.010+08:00

12. CMP: Following several investment promotions road shows, the sector has gained investor confidence, making substantial contributions to the economy

We reply: With only 2% of income to be paid as taxes required under the law, with 8 years of tax holiday, with damaged environment, with diminished fish catch, it is hard to see how the CMP could claim such “substantial contributions to the economy.” They are more credible if they say mining contributed substantially to their incomes.

Mining companies have devious ways to diminish their contributions to the economy. Look at the corporate structure of Lafayette in Rapu-Rapu. Even the DENR is confused.

The (Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding) Commission reported that there is a confusing corporate set-up, that is, that there are at least two corporate entities (RRMI and RRPI) holding mining-related permits and operating inside the Rapu- Rapu Island.

Upon closer scrutiny of the existing records of these companies, the DENR agrees with this finding. (Please see previous blogs.)

Reference: DENR Assessment of the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project, 2006; p.23

How are RRMI and RRPI related? They are the two “hands” of Lafayette Philippines, Inc. RRMI digs the ground for ores and “sells” them to RRPI which in turn crushes the ores and extracts the metals by using cyanide and sulfuric acid. In effect, the left hand “sells” to the right hand. LPI owns 100% of RRPI and 64% of RRMI. The remaining 36% of RRMI is owned by a law firm called Fortun Narvasa Salazar Creenola. LPI is owned by three foreign companies: Korea Resources Corporation (Kores), 26%; LG International Corporation (LGI), 44%; and Malaysia Smelting Corporation (MSC), 30%. Neither RRMI or RRPI is owned by Filipinos.
Reference: DENR Assessment of the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project, 2006; p. 27

The tax incentives provided to mining companies further reduce their contribution to the economy. Rapu-Rapu, again, is an example. The total cost of social development and livelihood program of Lafayette was made attractive to the people of Rapu-Rapu and even the entire Bicol Region with promises made through a press release titled “Simbag kan Lafayette Philippines, Inc. (LPI) sa mga Isyus Unong sa Operasyon Kaini sa Banwaan kan Rapu-Rapu” (Response of LPI on Issues About its Operation in the Town of Rapu-Rapu) in the Albayano Examiner in its November 19-25, 1999 issue, among which was the payment of taxes to the local government unit.

In a sudden and treacherous turnaround, Lafayette reneged on its promise to pay taxes. The company applied for exemption from local taxes under the government’s PEZA program. It went through a dubious process as the documents show. (Please see previous blogs.)

Lafayette is not even among the top ten (10) tax paying corporations in the Bicol Region as a letter from the BIR Regional Office V dated February 18, 2008 proves.

When Lafayette Mining Limited studied the feasibility of Rapu-Rapu mining, it obtained information on the total amount of metal in the Ungay and Hixbar deposits as presented on its website:

Copper – 103,885 tons
Zinc – 161,724 tons
Gold – 718,245 oz
Silver – 7,028,797 oz

In its quarterly reports Lafayette quoted the prices of the metals it mines in Rapu-Rapu. In the Lafayette Quarterly Report for the period ending March 31, 2007 page 6 it is stated that:

“During the quarter, the average LME copper price was US$ 5,965 per tonne while the average LME zinc price was US$ 3,458 per tonne. Precious metal prices were US$ 649.41 per ounce for gold and US$ 13.26 per ounce for silver.”

In the Lafayette Annual Report for the Period Ended June 30, 2007 page 5 it is stated that:

“During the quarter, the average LME copper price was US$ 7,636 per tonne while the average LME zinc price was US$ 3,666 per tonne. Precious metal prices were US$ 666.84 per ounce for gold and US$ 13.33 per ounce for silver.”

There is sufficient reason to project that these prices will continue to prevail. Owing to the great demand for metals in China over the next years, it is reasonable to expect that the prices would remain close to the higher values shown in the graphs. (http://www.lionselection.com.au/investors_centre/documents/aus_ar/AR-2006.pdf; January 19, 2008)

Nevertheless let us temper our estimation by choosing relatively lower prices as shown below:

Copper – US$ 6,000 / ton
Zinc – US$ 2,000 / ton
Gold – US$ 700 / oz
Silver – US$ 13 / oz

If we multiply the total deposit by the unit prices, we can compute the total amount that Lafayette prospects to haul:

Copper – US$ 6,000 / ton x 103,885 tons = US$ 623,310,000
Zinc – US$ 2,000 / ton x 161,724 tons = US$ 323,448,000
Gold – US$ 700 / oz x 718,245 oz = US$ 502,771,500
Silver – US$ 13 / oz x 7,028,797 oz = US$ 91,374,361

Total = US$ 1,540,903,861 x PhP 40 / US$ = P 61,636,154,440

With P 61,636,154,440 one can spend P 1M every day and will use up the amount in 169 years – the same period from the Mayon eruption that buried Cagsawa in 1814 . . . to the Aquino assassination in 1983 !

Or one can buy 61,636 boats worth P 1M each. If the width of each boat is 4 meters, then they can be lined up widthwise from Rapu-Rapu Pier 45 kms to Legazpi Port in 5 rows and still have an excess of 5,400 boats!

One may buy cars worth P1M each and line up 61,636 of them sideways from Legazpi 90 kms to Naga and still have an excess of 1,636 cars lined over 2.45 kms.

How much does Lafayette promise to give back to Rapu-Rapu? On May 9, 2007 during a conference of Pollution Control Officers in Casablanca Hotel in Legazpi City Lafayette’s Community Relations Department through Mr. Roy Cervantes, showed their plans for social development and actual employment. A close look reveals that several items had been planned for 2006 but as of May 9, 2007 P4,276,000 remained unaccomplished and only P2,244,688 were reported as accomplished.

It shows that even in Lafayette documents the total worth of alleged accomplished projects is only 34% while the unaccomplished is 66%.

In their Powerpoint presentation dated March 22, 2006, Lafayette promised P 10,246,060 in social development projects for Rapu-Rapu, P1M for Legazpi and P1.5M for Sorsogon. A day later, another presentation was prepared allotting only P 9,246,060 to the town.

Still, even the 34% implied as accomplished are refuted by the residents of Rapu-Rapu. In other words, they themselves say that Lafayette’s SDMP is a sham.

In the forum where these promises were presented, the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance (SARA) Spokesperson took the floor and informed the presentor that according to the Parish Priest of Rapu-Rapu via text messaging, there was no goat-raising in Tinopan. He replied, “Ah, oo, wala pa kasi parating pa lang!”

Recall that in the press release printed in the Albayano Examiner on November 19-25, 1999 this project had been promised. After eight years, the goats are “parating pa lang.”

It should be reiterated that the data used in these comparisons are all from the Lafayette website (http://www.lafayettemining.com/) and the company’s Community Relations Department. We assume that Lafayette’s rosy promises are true.

On November 10, 2007 the SARA Spokesperson showed to Rapu-Rapu residents the plan presented by Mr. Roy Cervantes on May 9, 2007. To each of the items, they responded with a loud cry “Buwa!”, their word for “Lie!”

On December 12, 2007 Joshua Martinez of DZLG Bombo Radyo Legazpi reported that the local government of Rapu-Rapu had asked Lafayette when the latter would fulfill its promised prjects under the Social Development Management Plan. It appears, therefore, that the mining company has not acted on the plan. It can be argued that the SDMP amounts to NEAR ZERO. Let us compute the total amount of the projects promised since 2000:

2000-05 Social Development Management Plan
Infrastructure - 6,240,463
Livelihood - 128,944
Health and Sanitation - 1,702,000
Education - 705,100
Capability Building - 114,365
Socio-cultural - 40,000
Total - 8,930,872

2007 Social Development Management Plan (Core Budget)
Socio-econ infra - 6,691,740
Education and training - 3,609,000
Health and sanitation - 3,350,000
Food security, employment and livelihood - 2,446,760
Capacity-building - 1,564,500
Socio-cultural assistance - 338,000
Power supply for 3 brgys - 2,400,000
Water supply for 3 brgys - 500,000
Total - 20,900,000

2007 Social Development Management Plan (Supplemental Budget)
Socio-econ infra - 5,000,000
Marine turtle conservation project - 500,000
Legazpi City/Albay community development assistance - 2,069,000
Total - 7,569,000

2000-13 Social Development Management Plan
2000-05 - 8,930,872
2006 - 9,420,688
2007 - 28,469,000

Assume that for the rest of the mine life the yearly SDMP budget would be the same as that for the entire province of Albay for 2007. Assume further that Lafayette will appropriate for 2008 to 2013 the same amount as for 2007. This is being generous to Lafayette and these assumptions are very optimistic. Information from MGB V submitted to the RRFFC cites a much lower SDMP budget for the entire mine life- P31,300,000.00

2008 - 28,469,000
2009 - 28,469,000
2010 - 28,469,000
2011 - 28,469,000
2012 - 28,469,000
2013 - 28,469,000
Total - 217,634,560

In a press release titled “Simbag kan Lafayette Philippines, Inc. (LPI) sa mga Isyus Unong sa Operasyon Kaini sa Banwaan kan Rapu-Rapu” printed in the Albayano Examiner November 19-25, 1999, the following were promised:

SDMP: P 7,000,000
Taxes: P2,800,000
Employment: 350 persons

In the Powerpoint Presentation titled “Ang Proyekto sa Rapu-Rapu” dated October 27, 2001, they promised:

Taxes: P 328,000,000
Employment: 1000 first year; 416 during normal operation
Monitoring and rehabilitation fund: P5,050,000

In the Powerpoint Presentation titled “Social Development Management Plan 2006” they promised P 9,246,060

In the Powerpoint Presentation to Pollution Control Officers on May 9, 2007 in Casablanca Hotel, Legazpi City, they reported that from 2001 to 2005 they spent P 8,930,872 for SDMP; that in 2006 they spent P2,244,688 for SDMP and employed 131 persons. No taxes were reported as paid because by then they had acquired PEZA privileges. In the same Powerpoint presentation they promised P 9,246,060 in 2006 and P 30,969,000 in 2007 for SDMP.

In its 2001 presentation, Lafayette promised 416 jobs. In its 2007 presentation, the company reported only 131 from Rapu-Rapu and 65 from the rest of Albay province (total 196). Mr. Carlos Dominguez would claim “thousands”; that Lafayette is the “number one employer in Bicol.” A letter from DOLE Region V dated March 9, 2009 shows that Lafayette was not even among the top ten employers in Bicol Region where the National Power Corporation with 486 employees is number one, followed by the University of St. Anthony in Iriga with 436. Tenth in rank is Bicol Hair Export Corporation in Legazpi City with 195.

Assuming that the promises would be fulfilled and the budget for 2007 would be continued until 2013, let us compute the amount of benefits for Albay.

Total employees from Albay = 196
Average monthly salary/month = P 8000.00
Total salary exp/month = P 1,568,000.00
Total salary exp/year = P 18,816,000.00
Total salary exp for 8 years = P 150,528,000.00
Total expense for SDMP = P 217,634,560.00
Total exp for SDMP and salaries = P 368,162,560.00

Let us compute the benefit-cost ratio:

Total expense for SDMP = P 368,162,560.00
Total Lafayette income = P 61,636,154,440.00

Expense as fraction of income = P 368,162,560 / P 61,636,154,440

= 0.597 %

Note that this is less than 1%.

The total cost for residents. - Being given a minuscule 0.597% is not all. The worse part is that Rapu-Rapu will lose everything. Gaining ½ of 1% of benefits while losing 100% in costs is hardly our idea of “substantial contributions to the economy.”

13. CMP: “The prospective entry of San Miguel Corp. into the industry as well as First Pacific indicates that the relatively untapped mining sector holds a lot of promise. With 7.1 billion tons of metallic minerals and 51 billion tons of nonmetallic minerals waiting to be unearthed, downstream processing and manufacturing remains an area of immense potential.”

We reply: With the entry of more companies into mining, the risk of environmental degradation is so great because big business can dictate to government functionaries. In Albay, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan declared in October 2008 that the board was helpless because the resumption of Lafayette’s operation was already approved on the national level. There will be “development” only for big business but not for the lowly Filipino!

14. CMP: “Mr. Perlas said civil society groups are not against mining per se but are against foreign investors investing venture capital in the industry. We’d like to believe this but what they say and do all point against the development of the mining industry.”

We reply: Foreign investment, as a driver of local progress is a farce. Again, Rapu-Rapu mining, the flagship of the Arroyo administration, is a concrete example. A foreign investor would not bring in one dollar and leave with 50 cents. What is logical and makes business sense is that he brings in one dollar and leaves with two or more. The increase in his money comes from the labor of our people and our natural resources, which ought to be reserved for Filipinos. With foreign investors enjoying tax reduction and holidays, the government coffers do not benefit much. Officials allow this to happen because they benefit as junior partners of foreign investors. They do not mind if foreigners get so much. They do not mind if millions of their own people partake of the very little that remains. What they do mind is the share they receive.

15. CMP: “They want government to recognize local resolutions on mining bans and moratorium against mining even if these are contrary to national laws and policies. We will salute them if they can stop illegal logging, illegal fishing and illegal mining operations.

We reply: The national laws they speak of were written by their friends in the legislature. The illegal logging they speak of are mostly done by friends of big business. The illegal fishing they talk about is a problem even environmentalists contend with. However, the magnitude of the impact of “legal” mining on fishing grounds is so much greater and should be addressed with higher priority. Mr. Ramos and the CMP must not unduly distort the impact of “illegal fishing” compared to that of so called legal big business. Even legal loggers destroy the environment. Legal in this sense means having patrons in the branches and agencies of government who protect them.

16. CMP: “If these environmentalists are keen in monitoring environmental concerns, they should have at least mentioned about the environmental laws that have been passed, proclamations on biodiversity and protected areas and other environmental protection measures. What are needed are facts to show how this administration has balanced economics and environmental concerns.”

We reply: The laws and proclamations are one thing. Implementation is another. The reality in the Philippines is that those in high places can work around the law and proclamations. We have all the “facts to show how this administration has balanced economics and environmental concerns.” These facts are about environmental destruction in Rapu-Rapu, Aroroy, Larap, Marinduque, Mangkayan, etc. and economic injustice to the local residents.

17. CMP: “Constructive criticisms are good when alternatives or options are being offered. Sad to say, in this case, no alternatives were offered.”

We reply: Alternatives have been offered but not within the confines of their idea of mining as the vehicle of economic growth. We have to keenly ascertain whether mining in a specific area will really yield development as viewed by the people (improved chances of access to food, clothing, shelter, livelihood, education, security and recreation). The premise that mining results in development in a place has to be studied. If that basic premise is faulty, then we ought to go somewhere else to mine while other industries such as agriculture, transportation, energy, etc. should be promoted in that area. In Rapu-Rapu, the basic question is not how to mine the island. The basic question is how to develop the place and mining has been proven to be not a feasible option from the point of view of the local residents. The islanders have only one island. The miners have many other places to do their trade.

Sad to say, Mr. Ramos and the CMP only think of development in terms of trickle-down economics much like the crumbs that fall on Lazarus from the table of Dives. While they can partner with foreign investors and are happy with a small share of the wealth from exploitation of our natural resources, millions of our own people have to partake of the tiny bits of their leftover otherwise called “development.”

Here, then, is the pure truth and nothing but the truth about mining in the Philippines. In our opinion, Mr. Ramos and the CMP are describing themselves when they use the word “purist.” They are doing pure lip service to “responsible mining” and “sustainable development.” We can cut the debate short. We challenge all defenders of the Mining Act of 1995, of Rapu-Rapu mining, and all their apologists to take a weekly swim in the mouths of the creeks of Rapu-Rapu where Lafayette discharges its “treated” waste water and to eat fish if they can catch one in the area. If they can do it in a month without fear of contamination or actual health effects, then we will rest our case. If they cannot do that then they ought to stop the labeling, stop mouthing pure motherhoods altogether, close certain mines specially Rapu-Rapu, pay for the damages, clean up and take off.

July 29, 2009

Facts about the October 26-29, 2007 fishkill

2009-08-10T16:19:00.011+08:00

Lafayette Philippines Inc. which operates the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project grudgingly admits responsibility for the October 11 and 31, 2005 spills. However, it denies the others. The July 20, 2006 spill is recorded in the Technical Working Group report on the test runs from July to December 2006. To this day it is unrepentant and continues to deny its culpability for the fishkill noted on October 26 to 29, 2007. On its website, LPI arrogantly defies reason and proudly denies that it is responsible. Once and for all, the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance sets the record straight and informs everyone on the facts of that tragedy, the fifth in our count.

1. They claim: The company could not be responsible for the fishkill because the tailings pond still had 11 meters from the water level to the top of the dam and the company was not operating at that time.

We reply: The 11-meter allowance is not a convincing defense because the dam should be inspected for possible cracks where poison could seep through. The document that attests to the possibility of cracks on the dam is the Technical Working Group Report on the "test" runs of July-December, 2006. Pages 8 and 9 state:

To ensure that transparency is maintained in the test run implementation, the following obereved the test run:

- The Philippine Institute of Civil engineers (PICE) Camarines Sur Chapter headed by Engr. Macario Apin II

Among the observations were:

Outside plant facilities like tailings pond / dam, catchment basin, etc. must be inspected and observed daily for any anomalies like cracks and seepages.

The operation or non-operation of the mine is irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that poison is impounded in the site at the mercy of heavy rains. Moreover, the normal management of cyanide (as presented by Ms. Carmelita Borbe Pacis through a powerpoint presentation dated March 22, 2006) consisted of detoxification at the tailings pond, flow of detoxified liquid to the settling and polishing ponds, and final discharge to the sea. Investigation of the incident should therefore include the detoxification process and the settling and polishing ponds.

We should also consider the finding of Dr. Carlito Barril that Lafayette used acid-forming rocks in the construction of its dam. The Mines and Geosciences Bureau Presentation to the Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding Commission acknoledges on Slide 71 the use of waste rocks as dam and road construction materials. Dr. Barril puts his expert's credentials behind the assertion that sich waste rocks could produce acid when rained upon.

Furthermore, the photographs taken from the seawater off Poblacion show a brownish coloration. This indicates the presence of silt. In the island of Rapu-Rapu, the major source of silt whenever there is heavy rainfall is the open pit and adjacent areas inside the mine site. The flow of silt indicates the flow of liquid that comes from the mine site. This liquid should have been investigated for the presence of toxic chemicals as well.

The Technical Working Group Report on the test runs confirms on Page 27 that seepage apparently come from the toe of the dam!

Daily samples are taken to determine pH, temperature, and conductivity. Metals and DO (dissolved oxygen)are also being undertaken (sic) on a weekly basis. The evaluation of the results indicates the presence of cadmium and lead in elevated levels from in (sic) Pagcolbon and Maypajo creeks. These metals apparently come from the adit and the seepage from the toe of the dam.

2. They claim: The level of cyanide in the dead fish was only 0.001 while the tolerable level is 0.002 (statement of DENR Regional Director in an interview on November 1, 2007 over Channel 11 in Manila.)

We reply: The DENR Regional Director declared this result merely three (3) days after their reported sampling on October 29, 2007. Our sources say that it takes at least 15 days to analyze a dead fish sample because the process requires incubation. How can a result, therefore, be obtained by the DENR in 3 days?

Moreover, the DENR reported only the results of marine water sampling. What is the result of their freshwater sampling? The analysis of water samples taken from the settling ponds, polishing ponds, wetland, and creeks should have been made with transparency and also reported. To this day the DENR and BFAR have not disseminated copies of their reports. They fear that their "report" when scrutinized will be found severely deficient.

3. They claim: The dead fish were observed only in Poblacion, some 7 kilometers from the mine site. So, Lafayette cannot be responsible for the fishkill.

We reply: The fishkill was reported from Pagcolbon where Lafayette is operating all the way to the Rapu-Rapu Port. Dead fish were seen off the shores of Sta. Barbara, Carugcog, and Malobago. Even the residents of Binosawan, Linao and Tinopan (Pacific side) reported the presence of dead fish off their shores.

It should be recalled that in the Ibon Foundation case study conducted on February 14-19 and released on April 23, 2007 it is reported that fish catch in Malobago declined as much as 93%. Since Pagcolbon and Malobago are adjacent barangays, it can be concluded that the remaining fish in the waters of these barangays are so few such that even if so much poison is poured into them, there will be less fish that will die. Once the poison is carried by the current to other areas where there are more fish, then can we observe also more dead fish.

On October 26 and 27, a typhoon was hovering over northern Luzon. This induced winds from the southwest. High tide flows from the east. The resultant of the southwest wind and the high tide from the east would be a current to the northwest owing to the same orientation of Rapu-Rapu Island. This current can carry to the waters off Poblacion whatever poison obtains in the Pagcolbon area. In reverse, upon the onset of low tide the direction of the current is from the west. This will carry the poison to the Pacific side of the southern tip of Rapu-Rapu. When the high tide returns, the current will take the poison back to the port area and the northern part of the Pacific side of the island. This is the scientific explanation for the presence of dead fish in several barangays (villages).

After the spills of October 2005, the arsenic and copper contamination reached Sorsogon, 12 kilometers from the mine site, as revealed in the study conducted by the UP NSRI in January 2006. In the oil spill off the shores of Guimaras, the contamination reached 200 kilometers. Therefore, seven kilometers is not enough distance to prevent contamination from reaching Poblacion.

4. They claim: The fishkill could have been caused by compressor fishing.

We reply: The method of fishing using a compressor does not necessarily entail the use of any poison. The compressor is the same equipment used to inflate rubber tires and balls. It is used by divers to supply themselves with air as they explore underwater for fish. To catch fish using a compressor, a diver uses an arrow. If ever a chemical is used, the amount is just low because he just wants to disable the fish and using a big amount would kill even the diver. Once a diver using a compressor has disabled the fish, he gathers and does not leave them to scatter over a wide area. Hence, the use of a compressor cannot lead to the death of so many fish or their scattering over a wide area.

Compressor fishing with spear is confirmed even by Lafayette in Slide 12 of its Powerpoint presentation titled "Project Baseline Data."

We do not condone compressor fishing that uses cyanide but neither do we inordinately blame ordinary people for the misdeeds of big business as we do not ascribe the Holocaust to common street thugs.

5. They claim: The fish died because of strong current (BFAR).

We reply: On September 27 and November 30, 2006, when Milenyo (185 km/hr) and Reming (270 km/hr) respectively passed through Albay, the sea waves were more turbulent but no fishkill was observed. The BFAR conclusion is contradictory to its advise to Rapu-Rapu residents through TV Patrol Bicol on November 7, 2007 that the latter should not yet eat fish. If the fishkill was due to strong current and not chemical contamination, then the fish would still be edible after a few hours. Why did BFAR advise the people not to eat fish?

6. They claim: The fish died of pollution from farm chemicals.

We reply: There is no significant runoff from parts of the island with thick vegetation. On the contrary, there is severe denudation in the mining area and runoff is evidenced by the presence of silt emanating from the mouths of creeks there. At the time of the fishkill, the farmers of Rapu-Rapu were harvesting and not planting so no farm chemicals were being used. Moreover, the farmers of Rapu-Rapu do not use any appreciable amount of fertilizers and pesticides, being largely poor and incapable of affording the price of these inputs. On the mainland, where chemical fertilizers and pesticides are used there is no report of any fishkill in rivers or shores. Fish in Yawa River, for example, still survive even with the obvious pollution indicated by a black contaminant and foams developing in the then existing Spillway.

7. They claim: The fish died of drowning.

We reply: People laugh aloud when they hear this Lafayette claim. In fairness, fish can drown if there is insufficient oxygen in water. Insufficiency of oxygen can be attributed to:

a. overcrowding of fish in a limited space
b. warming of temperature of the water
c. pollution

Overcrowding in a limited space cannot happen in Albay Gulf because fishermen report a precipitous decline in fish catch, indicating a decline in fish population. Moreover, the Albay Gulf is so wide. If Albay Gulf is too small for them, then there is the Pacific Ocean, the widest body of water in the world.

Warming of seawater could not have occurred because the fishkill happened during rainy days when temperature was lower than that of previous days.

The only explanation for insufficiency of oxygen is pollution. Around Rapu-Rapu, what is the most identifiable source of pollution? The open pit and access roads are major sources of silt. The sea current flows from the seawater off the area of the mine site to the Poblacion. The brownish color of the seawater in Poblacion indicates the presence of silt. Silt itself can kill fish by way of clogging their gills according to Dr. Emelina Regis of Ateneo de Naga University's Institute for Environmental Conservation and Research. If silt can reach the Poblacion, so can any chemical if it is emitted at the mine site.

8. They claim: Government agencies have cleared the company of any culpability for the fishkill.

We reply: Government agencies have refused to link Lafayette to the fishkill so they have not investigated the company. How can a government agency clear a suspect which has not even been investigated? The explanations cited by the government agencies have been rebutted. The DENR and BFAR have not publicized the documents containing their reports. These agencies together with Lafayette have not been cleared by the citizens of the doubt generated when they claimed that the fish died first of strong current, then of compressor fishing, and lastly of drowning. The people hearing about the results react with disbelief and ridicule.

9. They claim: A fishkill also happened in Catanduanes.

We reply: That the Rapu-Rapu fishkill cannot be attributed to Lafayette because a fishkill also happened in Catanduanes is a non sequitur. Different fishkills have different causes. The cause of fishkill in Catanduanes, assuming the report is true should be investigated. The fishkill in Rapu-Rapu has alleged causes that should be investigated also. Compressor fishing, water turbulence, farm chemicals and drowning have been refuted but pollution from Lafayette remains to be deeply investigated. It can even be argued that the October 2007 spill was so pervasive it reached the distant shores of Catanduanes aided by sea current. This has basis on the fact that there is a south-to-north current direction in our part of the Pacific Ocean as illustrated in "An Inconvenient Truth."

10. They claim: The death of the fish observed on October 26 to 29, 2007 cannot be considered as fishkill.

We reply: In 2005, the DENR and Lafayette acknowledged having collected about two kilograms of dead fish (in spite of the reports by residents that two sacks wer gathered in Binosawan alone). They called the event a fishkill. This time, about two sacks of dead fish were acknowledged as having been collected (DENR report to Kinatawan Celso Aytona who in turn reported ito the Provincial Board on November 7, 2007). If two kilograms indicated for them a fishkill in 2005, then why not two sacks in 2007?

11. They claim: In 2005, a hoax was perpetrated by anti-mining groups leading to a fish scare in Sorsogon.

We reply: The fishkill in 2005 was not a hoax. Documents submitted by Lafayette to the DENR and subpoenaed by the Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding Commission are evidences that the mining company admitted their culpability for the 2005 fishkills. The fish scare in Sorsogon should not be blamed on anti-mining groups but on Lafayette itself because the decision not to buy fish is a result of the cyanide spills caused by the mining company. The anti-mining groups did not have to tell people not to buy fish. The people themselves decided so.

12. They claim: The anti-Lafayette groups are destroying the livelihood of fishermen in Rapu-Rapu.

We reply: The livelihood of the fishermen is being destroyed by those who spill poison into the sea where Rapu-Rapu fishermen depend for a living. Anti-Lafayette groups do not have an open pit from where silt flows to the sea when it rains heavily. Anti-Lafayette groups do not use cyanide solution which is mixed with ore to extract gold. Anti-Lafayette groups do not unleash heavy metals from the rocks of Rapu-Rapu and let them flow through creeks to the sea.

The fishermen of Rapu-Rapu do not blame anti-Lafayette groups but Lafayette itself for the fishkills that have happened. The fishermen of Rapu-Rapu welcome with open arms anti-Lafayette groups who visit them while shouting when a boat arrives at the port that they do not want Lafayette personnel on their island. They say, “Bawal an taga-Lafayette digdi! An taga-Lafayette iuulog mi sa dagat.” ("Lafayette personnel are banned here. We will push them into the sea!)

The psychological effect of the fishkill on the residents of Rapu-Rapu comes after their own experience of being hospitalized subsequent to eating fish caught in the seawater off the shores of the island. The Sangguniang Bayan of Rapu-Rapu’s declaration of a state of calamity is proof that the fishkill, not the anti-Lafayette groups, damaged the livelihood of the fishermen.

13. They threaten: Those responsible for the hoax that is the October 2007 fishkill will be prosecuted.

We reply: We are ready to face Lafayette in court. The fishkill on October 26 to 29, 2007 is not a hoax. It is true. Even BFAR told the residents of Rapu-Rapu not to eat fish from their area. (TV Patrol Bicol November 7, 2007) This is proof that there is contamination among the fish. People who tell the truth should not be prosecuted but protected by the law.

14. Fact: On October 31. 2007 the Lady Jacqueline, a fastcraft used by Lafayette when it still had the services of Leighton, was docked at the farthest end of the Legazpi pier. On closer look, the boat held a big yellow machine. Asked about it, the security guard replied that it was a pump that was to be unloaded for repairs on the mainland. Beside the yellow machine were two boxes one measuring about 2m x 3m x 1m was open and contained some plastic sheets and green rubber mat. The other, measuring about 2 ft x 2 ft x 4 ft. was sealed with plastic sheets protruding from the edges. A photograph of the boat, the pump and the boxes are available for inspection. On November 11, 2007 the same fastcraft was docked closer to public view near the port entrance this time without the yellow machine and boxes.

This would have been a significant object of investigation. However, those in authority never conducted a thorough study of the October 2007 fishkill despite all claims of interest to do it. The DENR and BFAR merely announced alleged results of their inquiries but no official documents were released for public scrutiny. The Albay Provincial Board formed an investigation committee, according to radio news, too late in October 2008. No names were mentioned as to the members. A year and ten months later, the investigation is still an empty promise.

We are interested in the investigation of that “yellow machine” because it was a pump to be repaired. On October 11, 2005 the spill was caused by a faulty pump. On October 26-29, 2007, there was a fishkill and a damaged pump again. Were responsible authorities afraid to unravel their connection?

As we have been challenging them, if all these arguments do not convince the pro-Lafayette side, then we challenge them: every weekend they should dive in the beach near the mouth of creeks where their waste water is discharged, gargle the water and eat fish caught there. If they can do this, then we in SARA will rest our case. If they cannot, then they should stop all claims about their mine being safe and clean, close it, clean it, pay for the damages, pack up and leave the island.

SARA refutes RRMI allegations Part 4

2009-08-04T14:37:00.006+08:00

Confusing corporate structure and foreign ownership of RRMI and RRPI

The corporate structure of the polymetallic project is confusing even to the DENR.

The (Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding) Commission reported that there is a confusing corporate set-up, that is, that there are at least two corporate entities (RRMI and RRPI) holding mining-related permits and operating inside the Rapu- Rapu Island.

Upon closer scrutiny of the existing records of these companies, the DENR agrees with this finding. Under present circumstances, the concept of piercing the veil of corporate fiction is justified considering that the Supreme Court held that there are three (3) instances when piercing is allowed:

1. When the corporate entity is used to commit a fraud or to do a wrong (fraud causes);
2. When the corporate entity is merely a farce since the corporation is merely the alter ego, business conduit or instrumentality of a person or another entity (alter ego cases); and
3. When piercing the corporate fiction is necessary to achieve justice and equity

Additionally, the documents regarding F & N Property Holdings, Inc. reflected that there are only four (4) incorporators of this company. Clearly, this is a violation of a very basic requirement of The Corporation Code which under Section 10, Title 11 thereof, requires not less than five (5) incorporators to form a company.

Furthermore, records submitted by the Project to the DENR would show that these companies involved in the Rapu-Rapu Project are structured in a manner that is so complicated, hence the need to pierce the corporate fiction.

Reference: DENR Assessment of the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project; p. 23

How are RRMI and RRPI related?

They are the two “hands” of Lafayette Philippines, Inc. RRMI digs the ground for ores and “sells” them to RRPI which in turn crushes the ores and extracts the metals by using cyanide and sulfuric acid. In effect, the left hand “sells” to the right hand. LPI owns 100% of RRPI and 64% of RRMI. The remaining 36% of RRMI is owned by a law firm called Fortun Narvasa Salazar Creenola. LPI is owned by three foreign companies: Korea Resources Corporation (Kores), 26%; LG International Corporation (LGI), 44%; and Malaysia Smelting Corporation (MSC), 30%.

Simplified, the structure shows that RRPI is 100% foreign-owned and RRMI is 36% owned by Fortun, Narvasa and Salazar law firm.

The DENR assessment also states:

Foregoing, another indication of seeming farcity and fraud that the DENR had observed is the use of common corporate addresses, office building and facilities of these companies. RRPI and LPI use a common business address as indicated in the General Information Sheet they submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), at 178 Salcedo St., Legaspi Village, Makati. Upon verification, RRMI is also holding office in the same address, while RRMI, RRHI and F & N Holding, Inc., use the common business address at 23/F Multinational Bancorporation Centre, 6805 Ayala Ave., Makati, which is actually the Law Office of Fortun, Narvasa and Salazar.

The DENR therefore has endorsed the issue of the corporate structures of the five companies to the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), the SEC and the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) for proper investigation and if warranted, the filing of appropriate charges.

Reference: DENR Assessment of the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project, 2006; p. 27

Poverty has reached calamitous proportions

On May 10-13, 2009, an International Solidarity Mission went to Rapu-Rapu to have an ocular inspection. The group was composed of NGO’s in Bicol, Manila and Japan. The situation in Rapu-Rapu Island is desperate, according to the ISM. Hunger, disease and ecological disasters are unabated and continue to worsen day by day. It demands the attention of local and national authorities.

Filipino and Japanese participants went to the island and walked through the mining area but were escorted by armed company guards who restricted them to footpaths away from the facilities. In its previous pronouncements, Lafayette Philippines, Inc. vouched for transparency of its operations with claims that interested parties are welcome to visit the site. However, as experienced by other before, unscheduled visits are banned. The company, indeed, would want enough time to clean up the areas before any visitor can see the pollution.

Talking to residents of Carugcog, Tinopan, Buenavista, Viga and other villages, the ISM participants, according to Dr. Geneve Rivera of Health Alliance for Democracy, learned that children die of diarrhea and vomiting for lack of medical services. Respiratory problems are common. These cases, they confirm, never happened with the same frequency in the past as after the start of mining operations. Fish is scarce in the waters offshore. Even “tagunason,” an edible marine organism that used to be abundant on the shorelines during low tide, is gone. They cannot bathe in the beaches because they experience skin itch and rashes.

The creeks are yellowish-red, an indication of acid mine drainage, and no longer host freshwater fish. The dap-dap trees along the banks are dead. Corrals still stand but are pale and likewise dead, according to Mr. Clemente Baustista of Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment. No fish can be seen around them. The residents estimate that 50% of the corrals near Buenavista are dead. This explains the observation that fish catch is down from 20 kilograms per outing to almost zero. The blue marlin used to be abundant in April and May and 20 could be caught in years past. This year, only 6 have been caught. For the entire island, fish catch decline is estimated at 80-90% since the mine started to operate, according to PAMALAKAYA national chair Mr. Fernando Hicap.

There is severe scarcity of drinking water. In fact, as early as September 12, 2007, in a letter to the mining company, Municipal Council Secretary Allan L. Asuncion complained about the total absence of drinking water in Pagcolbon, one of the direct-impact villages. No reply was reported.

There is no end in sight for the suffering of the people of Rapu-Rapu. In Mananao, exploration is complete and full-scale operations may start anytime. That village is on the northeast end of the island while the current mining operations are in the south and southeast.“We continue to suffer from the adverse effects of mining operation of Lafayette. Foreign mining companies have grabbed our lands, poisoned our seas and destroyed our environment. Worse, the Arroyo government, instead of helping, has abandoned us and is stubbornly forcing us to accept the destructive operation of Lafayette mining,” said Antonio Casitas, leader of the local organization Sagip-Isla Sagip-Kapwa.

The residents are calling for the immediate closure of the mine. They believe that the local government units have the power to do so but refuse. They also urge authorities to investigate the marine degradation in the area and provide food and financial assistance to the poor communities of the island. “Once and for all, the Arroyo government should listen to the people and immediately stop large-scale mining in our beloved island,” said Mr. Casitas.

One of the Japanese participants, Ms. Shoko Murakami of Takaki Citizen Science Foundation, vowed to disseminate the information they obtained in international fora.The International Solidarity Mission was joined by Kalikasan, People’s Network for the Environment, Center for Ecological Concerns Philippines, Health Alliance for Democracy, Community Medicine Development Foundation, Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas, Peace for Life, Philippine Collegian, Bulatlat, AGHAM, Redemptorist Baclaran, Takaki Citizen Science Foundation, Friends of the Earth Japan, BAYAN Bikol, KMP Bikol, Ugnayan ng mga Mamamayan Laban sa Pagmimina at Kombersyong Agraryo Camarines Norte, BAYAN Camarines Sur, PAMALAKAYA Masbate, KMU Bikol, ABAKA Catanduanes, KADAMAY Bikol, Camarines Sur People’s Organization, Bikol Express Multimedia, AMLDM, Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, and Sagip-Isla Sagip-Kapwa.

Like the early conquistadors who promised so much to our ancestors, these foreigners are promising many benefits from their operations. As Andres Bonifacio wrote in his “Ang Dapat Mabatid ng Mga Tagalog”, our people only reaped enslavement and oppression:

Dumating ang mga Kastila at dumulog na nakipagkaibigan. Sa mabuti nilang hikayat na diumano, tayo’y aakayin sa lalong kagalingan at lalong imumulat ang ating kaisipan, ang nasabing nagsisipamahala ay nangyaring nalamuyot sa tamis ng kanilang dila sa paghibo.

Gayon man sila’y ipinailalim sa talagang kaugaliang pinagkayarian sa pamamagitan ng isang panunumpa na kumuha ng kaunting dugo sa kani-kanilang mga ugat, at yao’y inihalo’t ininom nila kapwa tanda ng tunay at lubos na pagtatapat na di magtataksil sa pinagkayarian.

Ito’y siyang tinatawag na “Pacto de Sangre” ng haring Sikatuna at ni Legaspi na pinakakatawanan ng hari sa Espana.

Buhat nang ito’y mangyari ay bumubilang na ngayon sa tatlong daang taon mahigit na ang lahi ni Legaspi ay ating binubuhay sa lubos na kasaganaan, ating pinagtatamasa at binubusog, kahit abutin natin ang kasalatan at kadayukdukan.

As in colonial times, foreigners are unbridled in their exploitation of our natural resources, leaving Filipinos destitute and robbed of their chance to rise from poverty. There are Filipinos who assist foreigners in the exploitation and oppression of their countrymen. During the Japanese Occupation they were called “Makapili” and “collaborators."

Radio Veritas Legazpi organized a debate on April 29,2009 between the SARA Spokesperson Virgilio S. Perdigon, Jr. and Ms. Cecille Calleja, VP for Community Relations of Lafayette. Ms. Calleja accepted the invitation. One day before the schedule, Mr. Corpus sent a letter to the organizers that they could not come to the debate with no reason cited. Said Mr. Corpus in his letter to Ms. Meg Alcantara dated April 27, 2009:

We very much want to see a continuing communication process that will give an accurate and in-depth understanding of the mining industry. Unfortunately we will not be able to participate in the program. Rest assured, however, that we remain interested in opportunities that will promote genuine dialogue and effectively share factual information particularly about Rapu-Rapu polymetallic project since its resumption of operation last October 2008.

Rogelio E. Corpus
President, RRMI

In a letter to Ms. Alcantara dated April 29, 2009, Mr. Perdigon wrote:

The scheduled program was one of their "opportunities that will promote genuine dialogue and effectively share factual information particularly about Rapu-Rapu polymetallic project since its resumption of operation last October 2008." Yet they were a NO SHOW. So much about their remaining interest. They did not even accord you the courtesy of citing any reason for their last-minute back-out after initially accepting your invitation. Next time they say anything, virtually anything, we do not have to believe. This development only confirms our observation that they have neither the heart nor the mind to defend what they claim to believe in.

Virgilio S. Perdigon, Jr.
Spokesperson

In summary, SARA has shown the evidence, facts and bases. The preceding information reveals it is Mr. Corpus who utters statements that are “baseless, speculative and in no way supported by facts or evidence.” If he does not accept that, then we challenge him, Ms. Cecille Calleja, Ms. Carmelita Pacis, Mr. Christopher Flores or any of their colleagues and apologists to take a weekly dip in the mouths of the creeks where Lafayette discharges its allegedly “treated” waste water and eat any fish caught in the area. If they can do that, then all else is moot and academic. Only then can Mr. Corpus use such words as “baseless, speculative and in no way supported by facts or evidence.” If they cannot do that, then they should shut up, close the mine, clean the area, pay for the damages, pack up and leave Rapu-Rapu.

Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance

SARA refutes RRMI allegations Part 3

2009-08-04T14:24:00.006+08:00

The Rice Distribution

In response to a letter from the SARA Spokesperson, the regional office of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau declared the following information:

Metal extracted:

Gold - 159.80 kg
Silver - 488.84 kg
Copper concentrates - 8841.60 dmt
Zinc concentrates - 17,148.50 dmt

Taxes paid: P36,118,555.54

Note: 159.80 kg = 5,636.68 oz; 488.84 kg = 17,243.03 oz

The hedge prices of these metals are available from Lafayette Mining Ltd. The market prices are posted in the London Metal Exchange website. Putting these information together, we have the following calculations:

Gold
Extracted : 5,636.68 oz
Hedge pr : 405.74 / oz
Total sales : $ 2,287,028.29

Silver
Extracted : 17,243.03 oz
Hedge pr : $ 5.87 / oz
Total sales : $ 101,216.61 10

Copper
Extracted : 8,841.60 dmt
Hedge pr : $1817.00 / dmt
Total sales : $ 16,065,187.20

Zinc
Extracted : 17,148.50 dmt
Hedge pr : $ 946.00 / dmt
Total sales : $ 16,222,481.00

Grand total in dollars: $34,675,913.10
Exchange rate= P 40.00/$
Grand total in pesos : P 1,387,036,523.84

Taxes P 36,118,555.54

Taxes as % of sales 2.604%

Hedge prices, however, are very conservative and do not reflect the actual market values. If we use average market prices, we have the following calculations:

Gold
Extracted : 5,636.68 oz
Hedge pr : $ 550 / oz
Total sales : $ 3,100,176.37

Silver
Extracted : 17,243.03 oz
Hedge pr : $ 10 / oz
Total sales : $ 172,430.34

Copper
Extracted : 8,841.60 dmt
Hedge pr : $ 5000 / dmt
Total sales : $ 44,208,000.00

Zinc
Extracted : 17,148.50 dmt
Hedge pr : $ 2500 / dmt
Total sales : $ 42,871,250.00
Grand total : $ 87,172,028.40
P 3,614,074,268.08

Taxes : P 36,118,555.54

Taxes as % of sales 0.999%

This means that Lafayette paid merely 1% in excise taxes, not to Rapu-Rapu or Albay but to the BIR.

In 2008, Lafayette earned P847 million. Then it boasted through a local tabloid, Mayon Times, on December 3, 2008 that Lafayette shared the bounty with the people of Rapu-Rapu. On verification, the amount spent was P270,000 or a measly 3% of 1% 0f their income in 2008! Yet, the company had the gall to boast that it shared the bounty. Moreover, the true intention was not to share the bounty but to twist people’s arm into accepting the continued operation of the mine because on the same signature sheet where the recipients acknowledged receipt of 10 kgs of rice, it is written that the rice distribution was “Sharing of Bounty by the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project for the Continued Operation of the Mine.”

Income from metals:

Zinc
Extracted :3583.77 dmt
Ave mrkt pr : $1100 / dmt
Total sales : $ 3,942,147.00
Exch rate : P47 / $
Total sales : P 185,280,909.00

Copper
Extracted : 4267.94 dmt
Ave mrkt pr : $ 3300 / dmt
Total sales : $14,084,202.00
Exch rate : P47 / $
Total sales : P 661,957,494.00
Grand total sales: P 847,238,403.00

There is no report on gold and silver. According to Mr. Christopher Flores, the Australian Lafayette Mining Limited had carted all they could before leaving.

Rice distributed among the residents:

900 families x 10 kg/family x P30/kg = P270,000.00

Ratio: P270,000 / P847,238,403 = 0.00032 = 0.032%

The amount of rice they distributed was a measly 3% of 1% of their 2008 income. In exchange, Lafayette solicited the signatures of the recipients as proof that the latter were in favor of the continued mining operations in Rapu-Rapu, a pittance in exchange for posterity and patrimony! In the Mayon Times issued on December 3, 2008, the news article was titled: Rapu-Rapu mining firm shares 'bounty' with barangays.

In the acknowledgment sheets for the rice Lafayette distributed, the heading states: Biyayang Hiras kan Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project sa Pagpadagos kan Pagdalagan nin Minahan (Sharing of Bounty by the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project for the Continued Operation of the Mine). The next line states: An Saimong pirma minapatunay na naresibe mo an bagas. (Your signature attests that you received rice.)

Frying Rapu-Rapu in Its Own Fat

All the promises of social development projects, taxes, and mine rehabilitation fund are logically to be funded from the income of Lafayette from its operation in Rapu-Rapu. It does not need a brilliant mind to realize that the company is frying the island in its own fat. In the local language, piggigisa kan Lafayette an Rapu-Rapu sa sadiri kaining mantika. Mr. Corpus is so bold in announcing that they have reserved, for example, P157 million for mine rehabilitation. Three things are very clear:

(1) that huge amount is from the natural wealth of the island which is owned, in the first place, by the residents;
(2) that amount is so big while the rice that they distributed is such a pittance;
(3) if Lafayette did not destroy the island, then there is no need to rehabilitate it; they wound the island, then boast that they applied bandage on it!

(Please see continuation.)

SARA refutes RRMI allegations Part 2

2009-08-04T14:05:00.005+08:00

Other issues not addressed by Corpus

There many other issues not addressed by Mr. Corpus. Among these are the following:
1. Unfulfilled SDMP promises; the “lollipop affair" indeed was characteristic of Lafayette mentality towards the people of Rapu-Rapu
2. Employment of members of a government-paid paramilitary unit, Civilian Armed Forces for Geographical Units, (CAFGU) as company guards
3. Continued employment of personnel directly involved in the 2005, 2006 and 2007 toxic spills
4. Implausible explanations for the toxic spills and fishkills
5. Assumption of management by a minor shareholder, Kores and LGI, after the former owner, LML, ran away from its responsibilities; unwillingness of Kores and LGI to assume responsibility for the mistakes of LML; the management change is only a ploy to deflect penalties
6. Token employment of locals with very low salaries and preference for non-residents with higher salaries
7. The island’s small size
8. The steep slopes of its hills thus any poisonous spill will immediately contaminate the creeks and the seas;
9. Heavy rainfall in our area (8-12 inches monthly average from July to December) which will easily fill up any tailings pond
10. Lafayette’s use of the open pit method
11. Turnaround on the promise to pay taxes

The Open Pit

Any open pit exacerbates global warming for the following reasons:

Trees and other forms of vegetation (which produce a net supply of oxygen) are removed. The silt from the mine site is carried by rainwater to the sea and kills the plankton which produces 50 to 70% of the earth’s oxygen supply by consuming carbon dioxide.

The following quotation from EMB V Regional Director Gilbert Gonzales is insightful:

Mining industries are a major source of greenhouse gases which pollute the environment, as Gilbert Gonzales, regional director of the Environment Management Bureau (EMB) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources in Bicol explained. “Mining operations are major emitters of greenhouse gases to the environment because of the chemicals they’re using,” Gonzales said.

Reference: Mining emits greenhouse gasesBy Rhaydz B. Barcia, Correspondent, Manila TimesMonday, October 22, 2007

http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2007/oct/22/yehey/prov/20071022pro1.htmlApril 21, 2008

The Turnaround on the Promise to Pay Tax

The total cost of social development and livelihood program of Lafayette was made attractive to the people of Rapu-Rapu and even the entire Bicol Region with promises made through a press release titled “Simbag kan Lafayette Philippines, Inc. (LPI) sa mga Isyus Unong sa Operasyon Kaini sa Banwaan kan Rapu-Rapu” in the Albayano Examiner in its November 19-25, 1999 issue, among which was the payment of taxes to the local government unit.

In a sudden and treacherous turnaround, Lafayette reneged on its promise. The company applied for exemption from local taxes under the government’s PEZA program. It went through a dubious process as the documents show. In December 2003 Lafayette applied for tax exemption under the Philippine government’s PEZA program. On May 4, 2004, the application was approved by the President of the Philippines through Proclamation No. 625.

A certain Resolution 150-2003 purportedly passed by the Rapu-Rapu Sangguniang Bayan (municipal council) on November 19, 2003 was flaunted by Lafayette as evidence that the former had consented to the declaration of the mine site as a Special Economic Zone. The document was fake and its source is unknown up to this time.

In a letter Mr. Allan Asuncion, Secretary of the Sangguiang Bayan, pointed out that a closer look at the document reveals the following:

1. The signature of Councilor Batas is rubberstamped as indicated by the doubling of strokes.
2. The signature of the Mr. Asuncion is also fake as it is different from those appearing in other documents he truly signed.
3. The date of adoption of the resolution is ONE MONTH LATER than its date of approval.
4. The resolution does not have a letter of transmittal from the Sanggunian Secretary.
5. The resolution is printed not on the official stationery of the Sanggunian.
6. The resolution is not dry sealed.

According to Proclamation No. 625, Lafayette will pay:

the government share of two percent (2%) of “the actual market value of the gross output thereof at the time of removal, in the case of those locally extracted or produced” under the Mineral Production Sharing Agreement (Memorandum from Atty. Marwil N. Llasos of the Office of the President to the Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding Commission dated May 2, 2006)

the tax of one percent (1%) of gross income to be remitted first to the national government before it is distributed to the local government unit (Section 24 of R.A. No. 7916)the tax of one percent (1%) “for the establishment of a development fund to be utilized for the development of municipalities outside and contiguous to each ECOZONE” (Section 24 of R.A. No. 7916)

Ordinary citizens of the Philippines are taxed based on GROSS INCOME. For some taxpayers, the amount of income tax is about two months of their annual earnings. The remaining ten (10) months of income is subjected to EVAT of 12%. As a result, an ordinary taxpayer pays an equivalent of three (3) months of his annual income. In effect, the 13th month pay is merely for taxpaying purposes. All considered, the tax paid is 3/13 or 23.08% of GROSS INCOME while Lafayette pays 7% of NET INCOME (5% under RA 7916, 2% under the MPSA). Of the 7%, only 2% purportedly goes to the local government unit. However, this 2% is further reduced through the labyrinthine operation of our taxation system.

Non-mining corporations pay as much as 32% of NET INCOME as required under the National Internal Revenue Code. The lowest tax rate on other corporations is 15% as stated in Chapter V Section 27 paragraph 4 of the Code.

But there is more . . .Lafayette will never have to pay any income tax because under the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Special Economic Zone Act (RA 7916) they have six (6) years of tax holiday extendable to eight (8) years.

RULES AND REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7916, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE ACT OF 1995”Rule XV Section 6A. Income Tax Holiday

1. Period of Availment - New ECOZONE Export or Free Trade Enterprises shall be fully exempt from income taxes levied by the National Government for the period as follows:

a. New Registered Pioneer Firms - Six (6) years from commercial operations.
b. New Registered Non-Pioneer Firms - four (4) years from commercial operations.
c. Expanding Firms - Three (3) years from commercial operation of the expansion.

6. Additional Period of Availment - For ECOZONE Export or Free Trade enterprises, the income tax holiday incentive may be extended for an extra year in each of the following cases but in no case to exceed a total period of eight (8) years for pioneer registered enterprises:

a. If the ratio of the total imported and domestic capital equipment to the number of workers for the project does not exceed US$10,000.00 to one worker, or as prescribed by the Board;
b. If the average cost of indigenous raw materials used in the manufacture of the registered product is at least fifty percent (50%) of the total cost of raw materials for the preceding years prior to the extension unless the Board prescribes a higher percentage;
c. If the net foreign exchange savings or earnings amount to at least US$500,000.00 average annually during the first three (3) years of operations to be determined by the Board at the end of such three-year period:

Provided, That the foregoing foreign exchange savings criterion shall apply, as a general rule, to ECOZONE Export or Free Trade Enterprises whose products are totally imported into the country at the time of registration and duly indicated as imports substation in firm’s approved project proposal.

For the purpose of availment of this incentive, the ECOZONE Export or Free Trade Enterprise shall apply in writing to PEZA for the additional period and shall submit proof of compliance with the criteria above-mentioned.

7. Determination of Pioneer / Non-Pioneer Statusa. Investment Priorities Plan - As a general policy, the basis for determining whether an area of economic activity may be considered pioneer or non-pioneer shall be the Investment Priorities Plan prepared yearly by the Board of Investments. In the absence thereof, the applicable criteria shall be formulated by PEZA.

In a press release, Lafayette announced the extension of the mine life from six (6) to eight (8) years. No wonder Lafayette has programmed its operations for a mine life of (guess what) EIGHT YEARS !

In the light of all these information, what is Lafayette saying?

LAFAYETTE VOWS TO PAY MORE IF TAX LAWS AMENDED

Lafayette's Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic project has been paying its taxes religiously and is ready to pay more if Congress amends the law to raise taxes on mining companies.

This statement deviates from the core of the accusation against Lafayette re tax payment. THE COMPANY PROMISED TO THE PEOPLE OF ALBAY IN 1999 AND 2001 TO PAY BILLIONS OF PESOS IN TAXES BUT IN 2004 IT APPLIED FOR TAX EXEMPTION UNDER THE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE ACT. The issue is not the law but the sincerity of the company. Lafayette may be legal in its much reduced tax payments but it is immoral in making the Albayanos expect billions of pesos and then use the law to break the promise. It is also immoral in using a perjured document to apply for exemption.

Lafayette is not even among the top ten (10) tax paying corporations in the Bicol Region as a letter from the BIR Regional Office V dated February 18, 2008 proves.

We asked BIR Legazpi office for the list of the top ten taxpaying corporations in 2008 but this time the regional director replied that issuing such a document is against the law on divulgence of trade secrets!?

(Please see continuation.)

SARA refutes RRMI allegations Part 1

2009-08-04T13:39:00.003+08:00

According to a news item that appeared in the Business Monitor on June 9, 2009, “Rapu-Rapu Minerals refutes allegations vs mining operations.” In what follows, the Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance (SARA) presents the bases, facts and evidences that will demolish the allegation of RRMI President, Mr. Roger Corpus, that the statements of oppositors to Rapu-Rapu mining are mere allegations and “speculative.”

Mr. Roger Corpus: Allegations against the project are baseless, speculative and in no way supported by facts or evidence.

SARA:

Mr. Corpus speaks about Rapu-Rapu Minerals, Inc., the company responsible for the blasting and quarrying of ores. It operates the open pit. Open pits are contributors to climate change as Al Gore cites in “An Inconvenient Truth.” RRMI cannot wash its hands of the responsibility for the siltation of creeks and the surrounding seawater. Silt clogs the gills of fish and kills them. Silt also kills corrals, the habitat of fish. When corrals die, the fish dependent on them are deprived of food and shelter.

Mr. Corpus cannot speak for Rapu-Rapu Processing, Inc., the company responsible for the use of chemicals used to treat the ores so that the metals can be extracted. He does not defend the processing company against the charges of spills. In fact, the Pollution Adjudication Board (PAB) slapped RRPI with more than P10 million in fines for violation of the Clean Water Act. The report of the Technical Working Group formed after the October 2005 toxic spills shows exceedingly high values of heavy metals yet the company was allowed to resume operations.

Corpus: Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic is continuously strengthening measures to safeguard the people of Rapu-Rapu Island and their environment.“The project can only be successful if we protect local residents and the environment for the long term.”

SARA:

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Under the Koreans and Malaysians, Lafayette Philippines, Inc., which owns RRMI and RRPI, bears responsibility for the lapses of the Australian Lafayette Mining Limited. The rapid decline in fish catch commencing in 2005 is evidence of the culpability of the mining companies which started their quarrying and processing operations also in 2005. Korea Resources Corporation and LG International Corporation were minority shareholders during the watch of the Australians. Therefore, they also bear responsibility for the toxic spills in 2005, 2006 and 2007. Mr. Corpus has been with Lafayette since 2002. He is also responsible for the lapses.

Nowadays, it is said that there will no longer be any fishkill with the Koreans and Malaysians in charge. That is so because there are no more fish to kill. Continuously, everyday, silt, heavy metals and acid flow through the creeks to the sea. No control measure under the new management has stopped the pollution.

Corpus: If the project were to have any adverse impact on people’s health, the 875 personnel at the mine and processing plant would be affected first before nearby residents, but there has been no such health impact from the Rapu-Rapu operations.

SARA:

This argument of Mr. Corpus is very similar to that of Atty. Julito Sarmiento in 2006 that if Lafayette poisoned the sea, then his relatives in Legazpi would also be "matitigbak" (killed). As events unfolded in 2007 people who ate fish arund Rapu-Rapu got sick while the relatives of Atty. Sarmiento would not dare eat fish from the same area!

There are over 14,000 fishermen who have lost their incomes because of the pollution of the sea around Rapu-Rapu. The alleged 875 workers are well oriented on the exact location of danger. They are protected by helmets, garments and other devices. On the other hand, the people of Rapu-Rapu are bare against the contaminants that pass through their areas of work and residence. Workers of Lafayette do not earn their living by fishing in the sea around the island. The fishermen of Rapu-rapu are the ones exposed to the contaminants that have scattered in the former fishing grounds.

Corpus: The mine’s tailings storage facility (TSF) has been strengthened and developed further to a capacity of 1.4 million cubic meters, of which 540,000 cubic meters are currently available.

SARA:

The pertinent ECC requirement is stated in condition number 23:

The tailings dam with an impounding capacity of five million (5,000,000) metric tons of tailings produced over the mine operations must be constructed strictly in accordance with its design criteria and largely from waste rocks excavated from the open pit. It must be provided with sufficient freeboard and spillway capacity to ensure that it can withstand the maximum probable storm event. Its outer slope must be stabilized and protected against progressive erosion.

Five million metric tons over the mine life of 8 years (2005-13) would mean that by 2009, Lafayette ought to have developed a TSF for 2.5 million metric tons. The figure cited by Mr. Corpus of 1.4 million is in cubic meters. Mr. Corpus has to reconcile his figure with the ECC condition.

Regardless of the dam capacity, the diagram submitted by Lafayette to the Rapu-Rapu Fact-Finding Commission in 2006 shows that waste water is “treated” then discharged to the sea. Any claim of high capacity of a TSF is immaterial if the waste water discharged is not actually clean like what happened in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when major fishkills happened. The photographs shown on this website give the reader a good look into the quality of water that flows from Lafayette’s detoxification system. The mining company says anyone may visit the mine site and see for himself. The catch is that such a visit has to be pre-arranged. No surprise visit is allowed. Why? Obviously, the mining company wants sufficient time to clean up the area before any visitor arrives. This was the experience of the team of Dr. Emelina Regis of INECAR in November 2007. They were held up in the office for an hour and when they were summoned to be guided to the target spot, Dr. Regis saw white marks on the soles of the worker's boots indicating that he stepped on acidic substance. Moreover, any ocular inspection by an outsider is to be guided within restricted areas. A visitor cannot go anywhere he pleases.

Corpus: The TSF embankment is designed with technical specifications to properly contain tailings, including an impermeable clay section to prevent penetration by stored tailings and tailings water.

SARA:

Dr. Carlito Barril, retired professor from UP Los Baños, attests that Lafayette committed a major mistake when it used potentially acid forming (PAF) rocks as dam material. Dr. Barril emphasizes that this mistake alone is enough reason to close the mine! Such blunder by Lafayette is terrible because the dam, instead of preventing poison from going to the surroundings, by itself when rained upon produces acid which flows to the surroundings. The analogy is that of a person required to wear clothes because it is cold. Yet, the apparel given to him is wet.

Corpus: The tailings are kept underwater to render them inactive. While best practice calls for a cover of two meters of water, the TSF now has a depth of 10 meters of water covering the tailings.

SARA:

According to the Chemistry Department of Aquinas University of Legazpi, mine tailings when immersed in water will still produce a toxic solution. Such toxic solution cannot be covered with water if the intention is to prevent the evaporation or spillage of toxic solutes. Even common sense would tell a layman that a glass of water in which a solid poison is immersed and toxic solute is dissolved cannot be contained by pouring more water into the same glass. The poisonous solution will just mix with the added water, the solid poison will just emit more poisonous solute and the whole glass will still contain poison.

Corpus: In the event of any overflows during heavy rains, the spillway from the TSF has been lined with concrete to prevent soil erosion that may cause turbidity in the run-off. The spillway is linked to the environmental ponds to ensure the company’s compliance with standards set by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for water quality, which is constantly monitored.

SARA:

The danger during heavy rains primarily comes from the overflow of poisonous liquid from the tailings storage facility (TSF). This liquid alone will destroy the creeks and the sea. In like manner, poison made to flow through gold-plated tube will still destroy whatever organism comes in contact with the liquid.

The evidence that silt still flows to the sea (despite the claim by Corpus that “the spillway from the TSF has been lined with concrete to prevent soil erosion that may cause turbidity in the run-off”) is the brown-yellow-red-orange color of runoff water in creeks and near their mouths.

Without the mine, runoff water will minimally cause silt to flow because of vegetation cover. With the mine, increasingly large areas become bare and exposed to rain so that more silt and acid are released to the sea. The claim of constant monitoring is baseless because this is not verifiable considering that no third-party inspector or visitor will stay on the site 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. Nobody can verify this claim of Mr. Corpus.

Corpus: Environmental monitoring is integral to its operations, including continuous monitoring of water quality covering an extensive area within and outside the project site.

SARA:

This is a motherhood statement that can never be verified because they do not allow unannounced visits. As previously mentioned, nobody external to the mining companies will ever stay on the island to check such claim 24/7.

Corpus: The project’s approved Environmental Protection and Enhancement Program specifies a total of 26 water-quality monitoring stations. On its own initiative and as the project develops, Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic has established additional monitoring stations to cover a much bigger area, so there are now 37 stations.

SARA:

Regardless of the number of water monitoring stations, the sudden drop in fish catch starting in 2005 is evidence of severe pollution. When the toxic spills of 2005 were being investigated Lafayette already claimed the same number of monitoring stations. Yet, the 2006 and 2007 fishkills happened. This time, Mr. Corpus still cites the same number of monitoring stations. It is said that there will no longer be any fishkill because there are no more fish to kill, with contaminants flowing daily through the creeks and to the sea.

Corpus: Since July, 2008, the new shareholders of the company have deposited P50 million in an escrow fund for its Final Mine Rehabilitation and Decommissioning Plan (FMRDP). Corpus said the advance deposit is the first ever to be made by any mining operation in the country before approval of its FMRDP. When the plan is approved, regular deposits into the fund will continue on a stipulated schedule. The fund will cover the costs of rehabilitating the site and decommissioning the mine at the end of extraction operations.

SARA:

The mine rehabilitation fund will not make up for lost income of the people as it is intended for clean up. It will take a long time after mining is stopped and cleanup begins for the sea to recover. Continued operation of the mine only delays the recovery of the island and its surrounding sea. Lafayette boasts of P50 million deposited in the bank for mine rehabilitation but according to Mr. Christopher Flores, the mediator between the Koreans and some “Filipino authorities,” the new owners are not willing to increase the benefits they provide to the people of Rapu-Rapu; that is, 3% of 1% is all they are willing to share!

Corpus: Safeguarding the people and the environment is a priority which we are actively pursuing.

SARA:

This is another typical Lafayette motherhood which is “baseless, speculative and in no way supported by facts or evidence.”

Corpus: The project has successfully passed the surveillance audits for its ISO 14001 certifications for environmental management systems. The ISO 14001 certifications signify that the environmental management systems of Rapu-Rapu adhere to globally recognized standards, and that the project is environmentally compliant.

SARA:

Again, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The zero fish catch in the sea (where fishermen used to obtain 50 bañeras before mining started) strongly belies any claim of compliance and only puts the ISO certification in question. The ISO certification can never justify the large income of Lafayette against the meager benefits and heavy costs reaped by the people of Rapu-Rapu. We have rebutted this allusion to ISO. We have said:

The Save Rapu-Rapu Alliance refutes the relevance of this certification to the fundamental reasons why mining in the island cannot be responsible and the three factors that make current mining operations in the island a threat to sustainable development.

The ISO Certification does not address the island’s small size which makes the management of tailings possible only through hollow promises. The tailings ponds are still only a few meters from the sea and any accident will readily spill poison into fishing grounds.

The ISO Certification does not address the heavy rainfall in our locality which would lead to the scattering of heavy metals and cyanide and the death of marine life and destruction of the fishing industry.

The ISO Certification does not address the steep slopes of the hills which will engender the speedy flow of poisonous chemicals to rivers, farms and ultimately the sea.

The ISO Certification does not address the presence of sulfide rocks which are being exposed to air and water thus forming acid that will also kill plants and animals on land and in the sea.

The ISO Certification does not address the use of cyanide which by experience has been shown to be prone to spills that cause fishkills, kill the plankton that consume carbon dioxide or evaporate to form carbon and nitrogen compounds that directly contribute to global warming. The ISO Certification does not absolve Lafayette from the confirmed fishkills on October 11 and 31, 2005; July 20, 2006; and October 24-29, 2007.

The ISO Certification does not address the use of the open pit technology which removes the topsoil and renders the land unarable for decades and reduce the population of plants that also consume carbon dioxide.

The ISO Certification does not address the PEZA exemption of Lafayette from taxes on income earned from production of precious and base metals.

We should also note that the ISO Certification does not solve the fishermen’s problem of diminished catch in fishing grounds near the island and their need to go far out into the Pacific Ocean facing gigantic waves using tiny boats just to pursue their livelihood.

We should also note that the ISO Certification does not cure the diseases related to heavy metal contamination suffered by residents of Rapu-Rapu and coastal towns of Sorsogon.

The ISO Certification is only for the needs of Lafayette. It is never for us.

Remembering all these is enough to make anyone realize that the ISO certification obtained allegedly by Lafayette is nothing but another attempt at what the company does best: to hide the truth about its evil design for Rapu-Rapu.

(Please see continuation.)

From Lafayette Mining Limited to Voyager Resources Limited

2009-07-01T14:37:00.005+08:00

The “resurrection” of the financially failed Lafayette Mining Limited is almost complete.

The “New” Company will be called “Voyager Resources Limited”, if it is allowed to be formed and installed on the Australian Stock Exchange with an initial capital recapitalization of $1,775,000-00!

The General Meeting will be held at Level 24, St Martins Tower, 44 St Georges Terrace, Perth, WA 6000 on 20 July 2009 commencing at 11am (WST).

BDO Kendalls Corporate Finance (WA) Pty Ltd
Level 8, 256 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000
PO Box 7426 Cloisters Square Perth WA 6850
Phone 61 9360 4200
Fax 61 9481 2524
bdo@bdo.com.au
www.bdo.com.au
ABN 27 124 031 045
AFS Licence No. 316158

5 June 2009

The Administrators
Lafayette Mining Limited
c/o Ferrier Hodgson
Level 29
600 Burke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000

Dear Sirs

INDEPENDENT EXPERT'S REPORT – LAFAYETTE MINING LIMITED

1. INTRODUCTION
Lafayette Mining Limited (“Lafayette” or “the Company”) proposes to undergo a capital restructure (“the Proposal”) that includes the following events:

issue of 90 million shares to Trident Capital Pty Ltd and/or its nominees (including Tim Flavell and Matthew Wood or their nominees) at an issue price of $0.005 per share (“Trident”);

acquisition of Voyager Resources Pty Ltd (“Voyager”) for the consideration of 105 million shares;

Lafayette’s current issued capital is consolidated on a 1 for 100 basis;

the issue of up to 190 million shares via a prospectus at an issue price not less than $0.01 per share (“the Prospectus”); and

the potential for Tim Flavell, Nick Lindsay and Matthew Wood (“the Directors”) to subscribe for shares under the Prospectus.

As all the resolutions which effect the above are interdependent we will refer to them collectively as the Proposal in this report.

...

2.3 Opinion

We have considered the terms of the Proposal as outlined in the body of this report and have concluded that the Proposal is fair and reasonable to Shareholders.

In arriving at out opinion we have placed particular reliance on Lafayette’s position being such that if the Proposal is not approved then it is likely that Lafayette will be liquidated.

We believe that the Directors would be justified in recommending that Shareholders vote in favour of the Proposal

2.4 Fairness

In Section 11 we determined that the current value of a Lafayette share compares to the value of a Lafayette share if the Proposal is approved, as detailed hereunder.

Value prior to the Proposal
Ref: 9 Low: - Preferred: - High: -

Value following the Proposal
Ref: 10 Low: 4 cents Preferred: 4.5 cents High: 5 cents

The above pricing indicates that, in the absence of any other relevant information, and a superior offer, the Proposal is fair for Shareholders.

2.5 Reasonableness

We have considered the analysis in Sections 12 and 13 of this report, in terms of both

advantages and disadvantages of the Proposal; and

alternatives, including the position of Shareholders if the Proposal is not approved.

In our opinion, the position of Shareholders if the Proposal is approved is more advantageous than the position if the Proposal is not approved. Accordingly, in the absence of any other relevant information and/or a superior proposal we believe that the

Proposal is reasonable for Shareholders.

The respective advantages and disadvantages considered are summarised below:

Advantages:
14.1.1 The Proposal is fair
14.1.2 Early return to trading
14.1.3 Eliminates uncertainty of value
14.1.4 Elimination of debt
14.1.5 Shareholders can participate in capital raising

Disadvantages:
14.2.1 Dilution of Shareholder interest
14.2.2 Loss of control

...

4. OUT LINE OF PROPOSAL

Lafayette has entered into a reconstruction deed (“the Reconstruction Deed”) with Trident. The Reconstruction Deed proposes the following:

Trident or its nominees will acquire 90 million shares in Lafayette in consideration for $450,000.

The issue of up to 190 million shares via a prospectus at an issue price not less than $0.01 per share.

Trident will pay for all necessary requirements for the reinstatement of Lafayette to the ASX.

The current directors of Lafayette will resign.

Trident will appoint three new directors.

The Reconstruction Deed is conditional on the following:

The variation of the current Deed of Company Arrangement (“DOCA”) to reflect the resolutions included in the Notice of Meeting.

ASX confirming that the Reconstruction Deed will not prevent Lafayette from retaining its ASX listing and that the ASX will not impose any requirements on the Company under Listing Rule 11.1.3.

The following resolutions being passed at a meeting of Shareholders:

o Lafayette’s current issued capital is consolidated on a 1 for 100 basis.
o Lafayette’s capital is reduced by applying a portion of the accumulated losses of the Company against the share capital of the Company which is considered permanently lost.
o Lafayette issues the 90 million shares to Trident and its nominees and performs the capital raising as noted above.
o The Company changes its name to Voyager Resources Limited.

At completion Lafayette will pay $500,000 to the Administrators. As a result of the payment to the Administrators, the Administrators must provide all relevant documentation to release Lafayette of all charges, security and any other encumbrances over, affecting or relating to the Company and the DOCA will be terminated.

Lafayette will also acquire all the issued shares of Voyager through the issue of 105 million shares in Lafayette.

Lafayette Mining Limited bought out by Trident

2009-07-01T14:11:00.006+08:00

LAFAYETTE MINING LIMITED
(SUBJECT TO DEED OF COMPANY ARRANGEMENT)
ACN 076 390 451

On 4 December 2007, the securities of Lafayette Mining Limited (Company) were suspended from official quotation at the Company's request.

On 18 December 2007, the Directors of the Company appointed Peter McCluskey and Roderick John Sutton of Ferrier Hodgson, Level 29, 600 Bourke Street, Melbourne, as joint and several Administrators of the Company.

At a meeting of the Company’s creditors on 18 March 2008, the creditors resolved to approve the execution of a Deed of Company Arrangement (DOCA) which was subsequently executed on 9 April 2008.

The Deed Administrators have sold the Company’s shareholding in Lafayette Philippines Incorporated which owned 74% of the Rapu Rapu polymetallic project to the minority holder.

The DOCA contemplated the recapitalisation of the Company with a view to having the securities of the Company reinstated to official quotation.

To this end, on 26 May 2009, the Deed Administrators entered into a Reconstruction Deed with Trident Capital Pty Ltd ACN 100 561 733 (Trident), a party experienced in undertaking corporate reconstructions.

Trident is currently working through the necessary steps to recapitalise the Company and to have the securities of the Company reinstated to official quotation. A Notice of Meeting proposing the required resolutions to give effect to the recapitalisation of the Company will be forwarded to shareholders shortly.

For all inquiries please contact Ian Morton on (03) 9604 5131.

Resignation of the "Old" Lafayette Board

2009-07-01T14:04:00.006+08:00

LAFAYETTE MINING LIMITED
SUBJECT TO DEED OF COMPANY ARRANGEMENT) (“THE COMPANY”)
ACN 076 390 451

We announce the resignation of the following officers of the Company. The resignations took place on 12 June 2009.

Director
DAVID LEWIS BAKER
Date of Birth: 07-03-1956
City/town of Birth: SYDNEY
State: NSW

Director
JEFFREY ALLAN QUARTERMAINE
Date of Birth: 27-03-1957
City/town of Birth: TULLY
State: Qld

Director
ROBIN ANTHONY WIDDUP
Date of Birth: 16-06-1952
City/town of Birth: HUDDERSFIELD
Country of Birth: UNITED KINGDOM

Director
CARLOS DOMINGUEZ
Date of Birth: 16-09-1945
City/town of Birth: MANILA
Country of Birth: PHILIPPINES

Director
STEVEN CLARK WOOD
Date of Birth: 31-01-1963
Country of Birth: UNITED STATES

Secretary
MICHEL GRADUS MARIA STEVERING
Date of Birth: 12-07-1973
City/town of Birth: WISCH
Country of Birth: NETHERLANDS

The following persons were appointed officers of the Company on 12 June 2009

Director and Secretary
TIMOTHY JAMES FLAVEL
Date of Birth: 23-01-1970
City/town of Birth: Perth
State: WA
Country of Birth: Australia

Director
MATTHEW GADEN WESTERN WOOD
Date of Birth: 17-03-1969
City/town of Birth: Melbourne
State: Vic
Country of Birth: Australia

Director
NICHOLAS MARK LINDSAY
Date of Birth: 20-11-1958
City/town of Birth: Dunedin
Country of Birth: New Zealand

For all inquiries please contact Ian Morton on (03) 9604 5131.

Lafayette Mining management moves

2009-06-29T20:57:00.000+08:00

hmm, interesting...

Business Spectator
12:20 PM, 17 Jun 2009
Source: News Bites

Lafayette Mining Ltd directors David Lewis Baker, Jeffrey Allan Quartermaine, Robin Anthony Widdup, Carlos Dominguez, Steven Clarkwood and company secretary Michel Gradus Maria Stevering resigned on June 12, 2009.

The company appointed Matthew Gaden Western Wood and Nicholas Mark Lindsay as directors and Timothy James Flavel as director and company secretary on June 12.

Mining contract for coal area in Masbate sought

2009-06-26T07:43:00.007+08:00

As if DENR's pandering to Lafayette-RRPP mining is not enough, here comes the DOE, with its PECR and pseudo-moral posturing, offering among other Bicol places, Rapu-Rapu as mine site for coal... whew!

To quote from the article: “PECR is a public bidding round aimed at encouraging companies to invest in the country's energy sector... Coal block system that was offered under PECR 2009 was in the municipality of Cataingan. Five other areas in Bicol that were offered under the same PECR were Caramoran, Panganiban and Viga, all in Catanduanes; Gubat in Sorsogon and Rapu-Rapu in Albay.”

Coal mining especially in adjacent Batan Island in the municipality of Rapu-Rapu is nothing new. But for the DOE to expand and further legitimize its hated polluting operation… this government's insensitivity to the environment and affected communities knows no bounds!

...

PIA Masbate
by EA Delgado

Masbate City (24 June) -- Because of its coal deposits, a town in Masbate is one of the sites in the country being sought out for exploration and development by mining companies.

The Department of Energy (DOE) said Cataingan, 80 kilometers from the capital city of Masbate, is among 18 areas in the country which are subjects of 25 contract proposals to explore and develop prospective coal sites.

Energy Undersecretary Ramon Allan Oca said the proposals were submitted under the fourth Philippine Energy Contracting Round (PECR) 2009 for coal.

At least 13 local companies submitted the proposals, Oca said in a statement quoted by the energy department website www.doe.gov.ph.

It was reported that the DOE intended to finish the technical, legal and financial evaluation of the proposal within a month.

"I don't want to take this long to avoid any doubts as to what we're doing," Oca added.

PECR is a public bidding round aimed at encouraging companies to invest in the country's energy sector. These contracting rounds, which showcase the country's potential areas for exploration and development, are expected to spur investments and help cut costly oil imports as well.

Coal block system that was offered under PECR 2009 was in the municipality of Cataingan. Five other areas in Bicol that were offered under the same PECR were Caramoran, Panganiban and Viga, all in Catanduanes; Gubat in Sorsogon and Rapu-Rapu in Albay.

The DOE had earlier assured prospective investors that the government had "undertaken a thorough process of resource evaluation to yield high exploration success that is in line with our shared goal of efficient development and production of the coal area." (PIA Masbate)

Ecological Terrorism in Philippines

2009-06-24T20:58:00.003+08:00

Protesters shout slogans opposing the reopening of Lafayette mining during a rally in front of the South Korean Embassy in Manila , June 11. / AP-Yonhap

By Kevin Griffith
The Korea Times

06-15-2008 16:09

A picture appeared on the front page of The Korea Times on June 12 concerning a protest in front of the South Korean Embassy in Manila over a planned reopening of a mining operation on Rapu-Rapu Island , the Philippines.

This article is to inform the Korean public about why people are protesting against Korean chaebol which are trying to reopen the mining operation, and also expose the ongoing humanitarian and ecological crisis on the island.

Earlier in April, Korean corporations ― LG International and Korean Resources Corp. (Kores) ― gained majority control of an Australian firm Lafayette Philippines Inc. (LPI).

LPI has been operating a highly controversial Polymetallic Mining Project on the once pristine island of Rapu-Rapu in the Republic of the Philippines .

LG and Kores have taken control of the operation; therefore, the details of this affair are now the business of the Korean people.

Rapu-Rapu is no longer pristine because the environmentally damaging practices of mining have incurred severe ecological damage to Rapu-Rapu's ecosystem. In the process of mining, LG and Kores use toxic chemicals to retrieve the minerals.

In November 2005, LPI was found liable for many damaging cyanide and mine tailings spills which resulted in massive fish kills, environmental destruction, community displacements, human rights violations and livelihood loss to the local people.

While I was there, I saw the fish kills with my own eyes. I even saw a dead whale shark there in 2003. I served as an American Peace Corps volunteer and lived on Rapu-Rapu Island from 2002-04.

I lived and worked hand-in-hand with the 20,000-plus Rapu-Rapuhon and personally know the hardships the local people have faced.

The local people were given false promises from LPI that their lives would be improved by allowing a mine to remove the valuable gold, copper, silver & zinc deposits.

The exorbitant mining profits resulting from the mining operation have gone to LPI and the Philippine government; meanwhile, the fisher folk are losing their livelihood and the local population is losing their most important source of protein, fish.

When I visited the island during Christmas festivities last December 2007, the Rapu-Rapuhon could not eat fish caught from the sea because the risk of illness was too great. People lived in fear of their food, and the fishermen couldn't sell their fish on the mainland.

The local Catholic Church has a sign on the steeple that says, `` Lafayette thinks this is a hoax. Rapu-Rapu is suffering for real.'' Children can be seen naked on the streets, dogs with mange run wild and the local high school's computer lab remains damaged from a super typhoon; meanwhile, LPI profits by exploiting Rapu-Rapu Island 's minerals.

Kalikasan, the people's network for the environment, said that the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) ordered LPI to pay 134 million peso (3.1 billion won) to rehabilitate the damages caused due to the mining. However, I have been unable to find any report confirming this payment has ever been made.

Kalikasan reports, `` Lafayette 's income during its operation was estimated at 3.487 billion peso (80.94 billion won).'' This is just another case of a mining operation being more concerned about profits and shareholders than environmental and social responsibility.

A press release from Kalikasan's Web site quotes their national coordinator Clemente Bautista as saying, ``There is no reason to continue the Lafayette mining project. Its three-year operation in Rapu-Rapu Island has brought enormous environmental destruction, community displacements, human rights violations and livelihood loss to the local people.''

An LG press archive states that once Rapu-Rapu operations stabilize, the Korean firm and Lafayette will be embarking on other mining projects in the Philippines.

Are we to believe that the catastrophic impact of mining on Rapu-Rapu Island is going to change now that Korea 's LG is in control? Bikolanos have been protesting LPI's mining operation for over six years now; I'm afraid that operations will not stabilize.

There has been a long history of exploitation of the Rapu-Rapu people, which dates back to Japanese occupation during World War II. The Imperial Japanese had a base on the island because it provided a valuable lookout point for the Albay Gulf.

The locals told me that the Japanese would rape local women and sometimes shoot them and their families. They employed forced labour during the occupation to plunder the minerals from the island.

Now, LPI is profiting from the purchase and exploitation of land on the island; meanwhile, the local population once again suffers.

Who should be responsible for the ecological and humanitarian catastrophe brought on by LPI's mining operation?

The Australian investors apparently feel comfortable selling their stake, taking their profits, and washing their hands of the whole affair.

Now, LG and Kores are the major shareholders; therefore, they are responsible. They have made a big mistake and underestimate the veracity and the fortitude of the Filipino people.

LPI must pay the fines and reparations demanded by the Philippines and stop the mining operation on Rapu-Rapu Island indefinitely. People matter, even if those running the operation consider these people to be nothing more than ``peasants,'' The people of Rapu-Rapu Island want their livelihood, food source, and island returned.

If you're interested in learning more about this crisis, watch Greenpeace's ``Undermining Paradise'' at http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=EnVg3nywXNQ.

Kevin Griffith is currently working as an English teacher trainer at the Gyeonggi-do Institute for Foreign Language Education (www.gifle.go.kr) near Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province . He worked as an English teacher trainer with the U.S. Peace Corps in the Philippines from 2002-04. He can be reached at intrepidkev@yahoo.com