SUITABILITY CRITERIA

FOR MINING

Dhaval Modi
August 2017
 Suitability Criteria for Mining

Places considered for No-go criteria across the world (non-exhaustive list):
Criteria Authority
World Heritage sites ICMM, Bank of America, Citi Group, JP Morgan, Shell,
AIIB
Watershed catchment areas, Rivers India, Philippines, USA1 , Nova Scotia, Qubec, El
Salvador
National parks India, Philippines, USA, Sweden, Ecuador, Canada,
Colombia
Primary forests Philippines, India, Canada
Migratory Birds Sanctuary Philippines, India
Biological and Cultural diversity Philippines, India, AIIB
Ramsar Wetlands Colombia, HSBC, AIIB
Sacred natural sites/ sacred groves India
Affects Indigenous people, local communities Canada, Afghanistan
Local communities overwhelmingly reject the proposal Colombia
in a referendum
Indigenous burial grounds, cemeteries USA (NAGPRA)
Large relocation JP Morgan
Finances an ongoing Conflict Total, Soco, Norway Oil Fund
Small Islands and Mountain tops JP Morgan (mountain top), Indonesia (small Islands)
Artic / Antarctic Protocol on Environmental Protection to the
Antarctic Treaty
Deep Sea floor mining UNCLOS
Pollution due to deadly by-products and toxic reagents Costa Rica, El Salvador, Germany, Turkey, Hungary,
used (Mercury, Cyanide, Arsenic etc.) Czech Republic
Already has a heavy pollution load present in the India
environment
Damage due to secondary pressures (increased
urbanisation, infrastructure etc)
Agricultural Lands Philippines, British Columbia
Administrative and Defence reservations, bridges, Philippines
highways, railroads, dams, other infrastructure projects
Annual Tourism income exceeding certain amount Philippines
Active Seismic zones (considered in Peru)
Places prone to natural disasters like landslides, (considered in Peru, Indonesia)
flooding and hurricanes

1
Wild and Scenic Rivers
Name Description Source/Comments
Multilateral Conventions, Treaties and Organizations:
UNESCO ----
In 1998 World Heritage Center, IUCN and ICOMOS World Heritage and Extractive Industries
initiated discussion with ICMM regarding effect of
mining on World Heritage sites.
UNESCO welcomed ICMMs pledge on not mining in
World Heritage sites in 2003.
In 2015, UNESCO identified 59 out of 203 protected
sites that face threat from extractive industries.2
International IUCNs position is that mineral and oil/gas exploration IUCN World Heritage Advise Note: Mining
Union for and exploitation (including associated infrastructure and Oil/Gas Projects (2013)
Conservation of and activities) is incompatible with the Outstanding
Nature (IUCN) Universal Value of World Heritage Sites and should
not be permitted within these sites.
All exploration and extraction of mineral resources in
protected areas corresponding to IUCN Protected
Areas Management Categories I to IV should be
prohibited by law, and that such projects in Category
V and VI sites should undergo thorough
Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA).3

International ICMM with World Heritage Center and IUCN reached No-Go Commitment (2003)
Council on No-Go Commitment from major mining corporations
Mining and in 2003: *Prohibits mining within the UNESCO World
Metals (ICMM) 1. Respect legally designated protected areas Heritage sites, but does not insist on a buffer
2. Not explore or mine in World Heritage zone thus leaving the site vulnerable to
properties. transboundary damage.
Protocol on Art 7: Any activity relating to mineral resources, other Protocol on Environmental Protection to
Environmental than scientific research, shall be prohibited. the Antarctic Treaty (1991)
Protection to Art 25: Article 7 ban on mining may not be repealed
the Antarctic unless a future treaty establishes a binding regulatory
framework for such activity
Treaty
(Madrid
Protocol)
United Established the marine environment beyond national United Nations Convention for Law of
Nations jurisdictions (The Area) as the common heritage of Sea (UNCLOS)
Convention mankind.
for Law of Sea Mineral Resource Exploitation in The Area would be
under The International Seabed Authority and
(UNCLOS) Polymetallic nodules, polymetallic
exclusively for peaceful purposes, and aligned with
sulphides and cobalt-rich

2
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mining-heritagesites-idUSKCN11B1YD
3
Category I Strict Nature Reserve or Wilderness Areas for scientific purposes or wilderness protection
Category II National Parks for ecosystem protection and recreation
Category III Natural Monuments for conservation of specific natural features
Category IV Habitat or Species Management Areas for conservation through management intervention
Category V Protected Landscape or Seascapes for landscape protection and recreation
Category VI Managed Resource Protected Areas for the sustainable use of natural ecosystems
 UN Charter and other rules of international law in the ferromanganese crusts are mineral ores
interests of maintaining peace and security. mined.
Art 149: All objects of historical nature will be
preserved.
Art 145: Prevention, reduction and control of
pollutionto the marine environment, including the
coastline and of interference with the ecological
balance of the marine environment.
Protection and conservation of the natural resources
of the Area and the prevention of damage to the flora The regions under exploration are:
and fauna of the marine environment. 1. Clarion Clipperton Fracture Zone
Art 147: Activities in Area shall be carried out with 2. Indian Ocean
reasonable regard for other activities in the marine 3. Mid Atlantic Ridge
environment 4. Pacific Ocean
Art 150: Orderly, safe and rational management of 5. South Atlantic Ocean
resources of the Area in accordance with sound
principles of conservation, the avoidance of
unnecessary waste.
Art 194: States shall take all measures that are
necessary to prevent, reduce and control pollution
using best practicable means at their disposal in
accordance with their capabilities.
Industry Standards:
Equator Discusses process for managing Environmental and Equator Principles
Principles Social Risk; but does not indicate any no-go criteria. It
only states that industry should follow national law or
international standards and best practices.
International For mining projects in legally protected areas as well IFC Sustainability Framework 2012
Finance as World Heritage sites, IFC requires company to
Corporation meet stringent performance standard in order for the
(IFC) project to be financed by IFC.
Financial Institutions:
World Bank In 2003 Extractive Industries Review recommended Extractive Industries Review (2003)
that World bank take leadership role and not finance
any mining projects affecting World Heritage
properties and mining sites within critical natural
habitat zones.
World Bank has not made any official policy.
World Bank does keep an internal list of areas that
fulfil the critical ecosytems and precludes investments
that involve their significant conversion.
Asian Bank will not knowingly finance projects that involves Environmental and Social Framework (2016)
Infrastructure activities prohibited by legislation of the country in (Exclusion List)
Investment which the Project is located or by international
Bank (AIIB) conventions relating to the protection of biodiversity
resources or cultural resources, such as, Bonn
Convention, Ramsar Convention, World Heritage
Convention and Convention on Biological Diversity.
J.P. Morgan Prohibits any transactions for resource development Environmental and Social Policy Framework
within UNESCO World Heritage sites.
Enhanced review for projects in key biodiversity areas,
Ramsar wetlands, legally protected IUCN I-VI, critical
 habitats of endangered species and migratory species,
and high conservation value forests.
Prohibits development of any greenfield mines and
mountain top coal mining.
Citi Group Citi will not directly finance new mining projects 2015 Environment and Social Policy
within the boundaries of a World Heritage Site. Framework
For following Areas of High Caution and Special
Focus it shall follow after judicious assessment of
impacts and risks:
a) Critical Habitat, Areas of High Conservation
Value and Significant Cultural Heritage Value
including World Heritage Sites, RAMSAR
wetlands, national parks, or other areas of
significant cultural heritage value
b) Indigenous Peoples Land
c) Large scale resettlement
d) Company Community Conflict Risk
Bank of Prohibits natural resource extraction within UNESCO 2016 Environment and Social Policy
America World Heritage Sites. Framework;
Bank of America will use due diligence measures to Forests Practices Policy
assure that lending proceeds are not used to finance
commercial projects or operations that result in
resource extraction from, or the clearing of:
a) Primary tropical moist forests;
b) Intact forests as defined by the World
Resource Institute (WRI);
c) Primary forests in temperate or boreal forest
regions that are not managed using
sustainable forestry practices as verified by an
independent third party audit; and
d) High conservation value forests5 unless under
approved conservation plans verified by an
independent, third party audit with necessary
permits granted by applicable
governmental/regulatory authorities.

HSBC HSBC does not wish to support projects which could HSBC World Heritage Sites and Ramsar
result in: Wetlands Policy (2014)
a) World Heritage Site being placed on the In
Danger list
b) The special characteristics of a Ramsar
Wetland being threatened
Sovereign Norwegian Oil Funds Ethical Council established in
Wealth Funds 2004, has divested and blacklisted companies dealing
in coal mining, arms production, severe
environmental degradation and gross human rights
violations. Some of the companies it has blacklisted
for environmental degradation include Barrick Gold
Corporation, Freeport McMoran, Norilsk Nickel, Rio
Tinto, Vedanta Resources, Volcan and Zijin Mining. It
has also divested from 53 coal companies including
 Peabody Energy, Arch Coal, Coal India and China Coal
Energy.

Sovereign funds of Kuwait, UAE, China, Singapore,

South Korea and etc. do not consider ethical
ramifications in their investments.
International Conservation Organisations
World Wildlife WWF suggests that mineral activity should not take To Dig or not to Dig
Fund (WWF) place in the following places:
a) Highly protected areas (IUCN categories I-IV,
marine category I-V protected areas, UNESCO
World Heritage sites, core areas of UNESCO
biosphere reserves, and Natura 2000 sites in
European Union countries);
b) Proposed protected areas within priority
conservation areas selected through eco-
regional planning exercises;
c) Areas containing the last remaining examples
of particular ecosystems or species even if
these lie outside protected areas; or
d) Places where mineral activities threaten the
wellbeing of communities including,
particularly, local communities and
indigenous people
WWF proposes a decision tree consisting of three
filters, focusing on:
(i) protection status
(ii) potential threats to biodiversity and the
environment at both the site and landscape
(downstream) level
(iii) potential threats to vulnerable human
communities

WWF believes that before any mineral activity

including initial prospecting and exploration takes
place, a full environmental and social assessment
should be carried out and further action halted if the
assessment suggests that subsequent activity is likely
to damage environmental or human wellbeing.

We suggest criteria for

(i) a veto on mineral activity,
(ii) a veto on mineral activity unless maintenance of
critical ecological and social values can be maintained
at site and landscape level
(iii) conditions in which mineral extraction and related
activities could proceed under conditions of
responsible management

Extractive Industry:
International ----
Petroleum
Industry
 Environmental Recommends best practices to deal with any disputes
Conservation with indigenous communities or mining in biodiversity
Association hot spot.
(IPEICA)
Shell 1. Shell will not explore for, or develop, oil and gas Shell.com
resources in natural World Heritage Sites;
2. It will further improve the way it operates in
International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN) Category I-IV protected areas, and areas of
high biodiversity value;
3. It will publicly report on its activities in IUCN
Categories I-IV; and
4. Shell will work with IUCN and others to help
safeguard protected areas.
Governments:
Government of Federal Land Policy and Management Act establishes Federal Land Policy and Management Act
USA policies for administration, development and (FLPMA), (1976)
protection of public lands. It states use of land along
with preservation of natural resources through
multiple use and sustained yield, i.e.
management of the public lands and their various
resource values so that they are utilized in the
combination that will best meet the present and
future needs of the American people.
It allows Bureau of Land Management to classify areas
as Wilderness Study areas for a period of 15 years.
Wilderness Study Areas are defined as undeveloped
United States federal land retaining its primeval
character and influence, without permanent
improvements or human habitation, and managed to
preserve its natural conditions4.
Secretary of Interior can protect federal lands to avoid
unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands
which is interpreted as substantial irreparable harm5.
This was upheld when Glamis Imperial Gold proposed
to mine within the California Desert Conservation
Area (CDCA).

National Landscape Conservation System Act allocates

35 million acres of federal lands in the American West National Landscape Conservation System
for conservation under BLM to conserve, protect, Act, (2009)
and restore nationally significant landscapes.
The lands were given 10 different conservation
designations National Monument, National
Conservation Area, Wilderness Area, Wilderness
Study Area, National Wild and Scenic River, National
Scenic Trail, National Historic Trail, Cooperative

4
Characteristics of Wilderness Study Area:
(a) Size Roadless areas of at least 5,000 acres (20 km2) of public lands or of a manageable size;
(b) Naturalness Generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature rather than human activity;
(c) Opportunities Provides outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined types of recreation.
5
https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/uploads/M-37007.pdf
 Management and Protection Area, Forest Reserve and
Outstanding Natural Area.

The Endangered Species Act was legislated to carry

out the provisions outlined in The Convention on Endangered Species Act (ESA), (1973)
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES) and requires that all federal
agencies- before they do anything that may affect a
threatened species- consult with either the Fish and
Wildlife Service at the Department of Interior or
the Fisheries Service within the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration. According to the United
States Supreme Court, ESAs Section 7 consultation
reflects a conscious decision by Congress to give
endangered species priority over the primary
missions of federal agencies. The ESA applies only to
discretionary agency actions.

Religious Freedom Restoration Act prohibits Religious Freedom Restoration Act

governmental action that substantially burdens a
person's exercise of their religion unless the
government's action is the least restrictive means of
serving a compelling governmental interest. It is
often used by Native Americans to challenge
expansion of government projects onto sacred lands.

Executive Order 13007 imposes an obligation on the

Executive branch to accommodate access to and Executive Order 13007
ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian
religious practitioners avoid adversely affecting the
physical integrity of such sacred sites, on federal
lands.

Antiquities Act established historic landmarks, Antiquities Act (1906)

historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects
of historic or scientific interest on federal lands, as
national monuments. It forbade anyone from
appropriate, excavate, injure, or destroy any historic
or prehistoric ruin or monument, or any object of
antiquity, situated on lands owned or controlled by
the Government of the United States, without the
permission of the Secretary of Interior. President
Clinton in 1996, stopped the plans for a coal mine in
Utah by declaring Grand Staircase a national
monument6.

President Carter established 50 million acres of land in

Alaska as national monument, and an additional 40
million acres was further withdrawn under FLPMA,
resulting in widespread protest in Alaska. However

6
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90631198
 soon consensus was reached on ANCSA, also an
amendment in Antiquities Act required a
Congressional approval for any future allocation in
Alaska greater than 5,000 acres.

ANILCA provided varying degrees of special protection

to over 157,000,000 acres of land, including national Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation
parks, national wildlife refuges, national monuments, Act (ANILCA), (1980)
wild and scenic rivers, recreational areas, national
forests, and conservation areas7.

BLMs Regulation 3809 requires that all mining

operations have a Reclamation Plan, with a BLM Regulation 3809
description of the equipment, devices, or practices
intended to use including, where applicable, plans
for
(i) Drill-hole plugging;
(ii) Re-grading and reshaping;
(iii) Mine reclamation, including information on the
feasibility of pit backfilling that details economic,
environmental, and safety factors;
(iv) Riparian mitigation;
(v) Wildlife habitat rehabilitation;
(vi) Topsoil handling;
(vii) Revegetation;
(viii) Isolation and control of acid-forming, toxic, or
deleterious materials;
(ix) Removal or stabilization of buildings, structures
and support facilities; and
(x) Post-closure management;

3809.420: Reclamation shall include, but shall not be

limited to:
Saving of topsoil for final application after
reshaping of disturbed areas have been
completed;
Measures to control erosion, landslides, and
water runoff;
Measures to isolate, remove, or control toxic
materials;
Reshaping the area disturbed, application of the
topsoil, and revegetation of disturbed areas,
where reasonably practicable; and
Rehabilitation of fisheries and wildlife habitat.

7
The ANILCA Act provided for 43,585,000 acres of new national parklands in Alaska; the addition of 9.8 million acres to
the National Wildlife Refuge System; twenty-five wild and scenic rivers, with twelve more to be studied for that
designation; establishment of Misty Fjords and Admiralty Island National Monuments in Southeast Alaska; establishment
of Steese National Conservation Area and White Mountains National Recreation Area to be managed by the Bureau of
Land Management; the addition of 9.1 million acres to the Wilderness Preservation System, and the addition of 3,350,000
acres to Tongass and Chugach National Forests.
 Acid-forming, toxic, or other deleterious materials:
Mining operations must incorporate identification,
handling, and placement of potentially acid-forming,
toxic or other deleterious materials into operations,
facility design, reclamation, and environmental
monitoring programs to minimize the formation and
impacts of acidic, alkaline, metal-bearing, or other
deleterious leachate, including the following:
You must handle, place, or treat potentially acid-
forming, toxic, or other deleterious materials in a
manner that minimizes the likelihood of acid
formation and toxic and other deleterious
leachate generation (source control);
If you cannot prevent the formation of acid, toxic,
or other deleterious drainage, you must minimize
uncontrolled migration of leachate; and
You must capture and treat acid drainage, or
other undesirable effluent, to the applicable
standard if source controls and migration controls
do not prove effective. You are responsible for
any costs associated with water treatment or
facility maintenance after project closure. Long-
term, or post-mining, effluent capture and
treatment are not acceptable substitutes for
source and migration control, and you may rely
on them only after all reasonable source and
migration control methods have been employed.

3809.500-599: Reclamation Cost Estimate

Assumptions8-
The estimate must cover all relevant operation,
maintenance and administrative costs for all
reclamation required under the filed Notice or
approved Plan of Operations. The cost estimate may
however provide more reclamation details than is
specified in the Notice or Plan;
Costs must be estimated as if BLM were hiring a
third party contractor to perform all required
reclamation;
Costs must include the use of off-site equipment as
if the project area was vacated, and the estimate
must include all associated mobilization and
demobilization costs;
The estimate must include, when applicable, all
interim maintenance required to keep the area of
operation in compliance with applicable safety and
environmental requirements while reclamation
contracts are developed and executed;
The estimate must cover costs to construct and
maintain any long-term treatment facilities or post-

8
http://www.imcc.isa.us/Mitchell%20Leverette%20Bonding%20Presentation.pdf
 closure structures required by the filed Notice or
approved Plan of Operations; and
Where applicable, labor costs must be based on
federally mandated labor rates, as required by the
Davis-Bacon Act and the Federal Acquisition
Regulations (FAR) for contracts over $2,000.

Idaho Surface Mining Act

Idaho Surface Mining Act (1971) requires mining
operation using cyanide to provide financial assurance
that all closure activities protect the soil and
groundwater at site and surrounding region9. It
requires the lands to return to the original productive
state; reclamations involve lands being backfilled,
graded, topsoil replaced and stabilized with
vegetation. Water quality must be maintained and
affected lands and disturbed watercourses must be
reclaimed.
Montanas Initiative 137 (1998)
Montana ban on Cyanide heap and vat leach open-
pit gold and silver mining prohibited. (1) Open -pit
mining for gold or silver using heap leaching or vat
leaching with cyanide ore-processing reagents is
prohibited. (2) A mine described in this section
operating on November 3, 1998, may continue
operating under its existing operating permit or any
amended permit that is necessary for the continued
operation of the mine.
Canyon Resources Seven-up Pete project (estimated
$10 billion USD) tried challenging the ban but lost the
case.
Oregon's Heap Leach Mining Law
Oregon is the only state that has developed a specific
regulatory program for cyanide leaching operations
and facilities. It is carried out by the states
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Oregon
has an extensive regulatory plan for cyanide, but no
mines.

Wisconsin requires companies to show a metallic Wisconsins Prove It First Law (1997)
sulfide mine that can run for a decade without
polluting state waters and a sulfide mine has been
closed in the state for a decade without polluting the
water. The moratorium is actually a permit condition
required by the state.

Nevada leads the way in conforming to BLMs cyanide Nevadas NRS 445A
containment policy. Nevadas Bureau of Mining

9
http://www.e-mj.com/features/1656-the-current-status-of-cyanide-regulations.html#.WX9G_cbMwy4
Regulation and Reclamations policy is set out in
Preparation Requirements and Guidelines for
Permanent Closure Plans and Final Closure Reports
(NRS 445A). It applies to all mines on any property. It
primarily ensures that waters of the state are not
degraded after mining operations have ceased. BLM
will not consider approval of mine closure without a
satisfactory closure report. For individual sources
nearing closure, all heap leaching pads and tailing
impoundments must be neutralized; prior
detoxification historic chemical use and materials
characterization must be detailed in a closure report.
Californias Senate Bill 22
California legislature enacted Senate Bill 22, which
required complete backfilling and grading for mining
operations within 1 mile of Native American sacred
sites.
New Mexico Mining Act, (1993)
The Mining Act establishes standards for obtaining
mining permits of hard rock and industrial minerals
(coal, oil and gas and nuclear are excluded). The act
requires a close out plan to be submitted that
demonstrates the work to be done to reclaim the
permit area to a condition that allows for the
reestablishment of a self-sustaining ecosystem
appropriate for the life zone of the surrounding
areas; unless conflicting with a post-mining land use
(no other waivers allowed), that the proposed
reclamation is economically and technically feasible,
and that all environmental requirements can be met
without perpetual care.
Art 36- 12: If a prediction of an end date on which
treatment will no longer be required cannot be made
with a reasonable degree of certainty, then a
discharge should not be allowed to begin.
The Act also requires for the mining operator to
provide financial assurance, sufficient to assure the
completion of the performance requirements of the
permit, including closure and reclamation, if the work
had to be performed by the director or a third party
contractor. The act also prohibits the operator from
using any type or variety of self-guarantee or self-
insurance.

Michigan's Non-Ferrous Mining Regulations

In order to gain permit for mining in Michigan the
operators need to submit a reclamation plan that
details final land contours, proposed final land use
and relationship to surrounding land, provisions for
sloping and terracing banks or bottoms of open pit
surfaces, replacing top soil, revegetation and final
density of plants and disposition of all hazardous
wastes, refuse, tailing and other solid waste in a
 manner that protects environment. Also the mining
area and the affected area shall be reclaimed to
achieve a self-sustaining ecosystem appropriate for
the region that does not require perpetual care
following closure and with the goal that the affected
area shall be returned to the ecological conditions
that approximate pre-mining conditions subject to
changes caused by non-mining activities or other
natural events.
Government of 2010: Ministry classified coal mines into Category A
India (No go zones) and category B (Go zones). Blocks with http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/will-
more than 10% weighted forest cover10 or more than the--go-nogo--concept-hurt-india-s-growth-
30% Gross forest cover were no go zones. A third (203 ambitions-/730868/3
blocks) of total coal blocks, spread across 3000 sq km
fall under No Go category. This rule was vetoed by the
coal ministry.
2011: Violate and Inviolate Policy was introduced
instead that designated national parks, sanctuaries,
forests that served as catchments of perennial first
order streams or 250m from perennial rivers, storage
reservoir, wildlife protected areas, rare forest types,
and wetlands larger than 10 hectares as inviolate. https://scroll.in/article/761934/india-is-
To determine inviolate zones 1 km2 grid across the diluting-forest-protection-by-ignoring-this-
country was scored out of 100 points based on 6 one-vital-thing
parameters:
Forest type, Forest density, Biological richness,
Wildlife values, Landscape integrity and Hydrological http://www.business-
value11. Zone with score of more than 70 points were standard.com/article/economy-
inviolate. policy/inviolate-forest-policy-pared-down-in-
2014: This was further diluted by reducing it to a 4 limbo-114122000570_1.html
parameter criteria by eliminating the Hydrological
parameter and combining biological and wildlife
richness parameter. In the end only 39 mines were
inviolate.
Government of 2004 Supreme court of Canada ruling gave the
Canada aboriginal peoples the right to review land-use

10
Weighted Forest Cover = 0.85(Dense forest cover) + 0.55(Moderately dense) +0.25(Open forest cover). This is divided
by the total area of the block for the percentage.
11
* Forest type, based on Forest Survey of India data, would be scored based on extent, range and uniqueness of natural
vegetation types (giving high scores to very valuable or highly restricted forest types).
* Biological richness was to be scored based on the country-wide biodiversity characterization carried out by the Indian
Institute of Remote Sensing.
* Wildlife values were to be scored on the presence of wildlife protected areas, such as national parks and wildlife
sanctuaries and identified animal corridors.
* Forest cover was to be rated, using Forest Survey of India data, as an average of gross forest cover and weighted forest
cover, the latter giving greater weightage to areas with higher canopy density.
* Landscape integrity was to be assessed from satellite images and maps based on the degree of forest fragmentation
around the grid cell. Larger, more intact forest blocks would score higher than areas that had been fragmented by other
intervening land uses.
* Hydrological value of forests finally would be assessed based on whether they served as catchments for perennial
streams, hydro-power or irrigation projects, or water supply schemes, and in relation to their proximity to streams and
rivers.
 decisions by mining companies that might affect their
legal right to harvest, hunt and fish on lands they
dont own.
Government of All prospection, exploration, exploitation, extraction
El Salvador or processing of metallic minerals in El Salvador has
been banned, as indigenous groups prioritized human
rights, access to clean water and long term protection
of environmental resources.
European ----
Union The European Union (EU) has set the most stringent
cyanide limits for tailings ponds in the world
Adopted Directive 2006/21/EC, on the management
of waste from mineral extraction operations. Article
13(6) requires the concentration of weak acid
dissociable cyanide in the pond [be] reduced to the
lowest possible level using best available techniques.

All mines started after May 1, 2008, may not

discharge waste containing more than 10 ppm WAD
cyanide, and mines built or permitted before that
date are allowed no more than 50 ppm initially, falling
to 25 ppm in 2013 and 10 ppm by 2018.

Article 14 also requires that mine operators put in

place financial guarantees to ensure cleanup after the
mine has finished. In 2006, the EU rejected a proposal
to ban all cyanide use. The EU presumed that
stringent regulations already in place provide
adequate environmental and human health
protection.

Germany, Czech Republic, Hungary, Turkey have

cyanide bans.12
Government of Costa Rica has a national ban on open-pit gold mining
Costa Rica (2002).

Government of 2001 Mining Code in Colombia states no mining

Colombia activity could take place in national natural parks,
natural parks with regional character or forest
reserves.13 Mining in these places would only be
supported by studies that demonstrate mining
activities can adequately coexistence of mining
activities with the objectives of the forest areas Legislation 685 (2001)
Under the 2010 amended legislation, this prohibition
is extended to the paramo ecosystem and wetlands
designated under the Ramsar Convention.
Colombia successfully blocked development of an
open-pit gold mine in a sensitive high altitude wetland
that supplied water to million people. The
referendum held resulted in 98% vote for no mining.

12
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/world/americas/el-salvador-prizing-water-over-gold-bans-all-metal-mining.html
13
http://www.simco.gov.co/Portals/0/ley685_E.pdf
Government of NIPAS Act (1992) protects Strict Nature Reserve, National Integrated Protected Area System
Philippines Nature Park, Nature Monument, Wildlife Sanctuary, (NIPAS) Act
Protected Landscapes and Seascapes, Resource
Reserves and Natural Biotic Areas.

Philippine Mining Act of 1995 bans mining in these

areas:
Virgin forests, mossy forests, National Parks, Philippine Mining Act 1995
Provincial/Municipal forests, Tree parks, Green belts
Game Refuge, bird sanctuaries, Marin Reserves/Parks,
Tourist zones, Archaeological and Historic Sites, and
Cemeteries.

Executive Order 79 (2012) establishes no-go zones in Executive Order 79 (2012)

78 sites with following criteria:
Tourism development areas identified by the
National Tourism Development Plan (NTDP);
Prime agricultural lands such as plantations and
other properties devoted to valuable crops;
Fisheries development zones and marine
sanctuaries as declared by the agriculture
secretary; and
Island ecosystems to be determined by the
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) through mapping technology.