Canatuan mine
Two more feasibility studies were carried out in 2004 and 2006 – the first examined mining only the gold and silver bearing oxidized portion of the deposit, the second examined mining of the sulphides (copper, zinc, gold and silver) underlying the oxide portion of the deposit.
The MPSA has a term of 25 years (starting from 1996), renewable for another period, and grants the contractor the "exclusive right to explore, develop, and utilize for commercial purposes gold, silver, copper, zinc and other minerals existing within the contract area.
Water quality data is collected by a Multipartite Monitoring Team (MMT) at 14 locations on streams and rivers in and around the project area.
Current progressive rehabilitation also includes closure of an overburden stockpile by establishing erosion control, coverage with non-acid drainage (NAG) material, and revegetation; and rehabilitation of parts of the Phase 1 mining area through erosion control, soil conditioning and revegetation.
[7] Both forestry operations and the earlier artisanal mining both removed ground cover and likely increased sediment content in rivers The principal community is the local indigenous people, known as the Subanon.
The Apu Manglang sub-tribe inhabits the area around the Canatuan mine, and are represented in the ancestral domain claim.
The MPSA held by TVI requires payment of a royalty of 1% of the market value of the minerals produced to the indigenous people who had a valid ancestral domain claim.
TVI agreed to pay the royalty to the Siocon Subanon Association Inc. One source of disagreement regarding the mining activity is that the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim for the Subanon with respect to the mining area was issued after the MPSA was issued to TVI.
Similarly, TVI's agreement gives status to a Council of Elders, initially formed in 2002 at the instigation of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, but whose legitimacy is rejected by the traditional leadership group of the Subanon, the Gukom.
An additional complication is that the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim was awarded a named group of Subanon individuals, not to a representative organization.
The 2007 Rights & Democracy report states that, subsequent to the agreements, The Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines investigated the matter of consent and concluded that the company had not obtained true prior consent from the indigenous people for the mine (the source referenced for this statement is unpublished and has not been confirmed).
The compensation package – 8 to 12 times higher than those prescribed by the provincial ordinance governing real properties – was meant to provide the families a good opportunity to earn a decent and lawful living and have a fresh start outside Canatuan.
Some of them opted for a smaller multiplier but with a housing package, while others chose to be paid an amount similar to those received by migrant SSMs.
Large-scale mining, after many years of practically being dormant, was being “reintroduced” by the Philippine government and being put forward as an industry that can be an engine of economic growth.
Consequently, civil society organizations and church groups took it upon themselves to raise emerging issues generated by the evolving, often confusing, milieu.
One source of controversy is the view held by some that the Subanon of the southern peninsula consider Mount Canatuan to be a sacred place.
[9] In May 2007, Rights & Democracy (R&D) issued a report titled “Mining a Sacred Mountain: Protecting the human rights of indigenous communities Environmental Management” which was critical of a number of aspects of the impact of the mine and actions of TVI, but also noting a history of conflict between groups in the area that preceded the TVI's presence in the region.
The principal findings of the report were that the TVI operation created some jobs in an impoverished area and generated revenues for the indebted national government.
However, that it also displaced many families; divided the local indigenous people; deprived thousands of small-scale miners of their livelihood; negatively affected rice farmers and fishers living downstream; and that it is located on the peak of Mount Canatuan, which the Subanon living in the area consider to be sacred.
The report made recommendations for action both by the Philippine Government and TVI - including that the mining operation be halted until an independent monitoring procedure is in place.
TVI objected that the report provides no information on the positive benefits of the mining operation, and that “We expect it is more than simple coincidence that the conclusions and recommendations set out in the Philippines Case Study coincide with positions advocated by members of the "research team" over the past decade".
[10] TVI offered clarifying information in a separate document detailing specific biases and inaccuracies in the R&D report.
Among others, the six page "open" letter is addressed to Christian Aid, MiningWatch Canada, the DIOPIM Committee on Mining Issues (DCMI), Tebtebba, KAIROS, Survival International, "LRC-KSK" (the Legal Rights and Natural Resources Kasama sa Kilikasan/Friends of the Earth Philippines).
