Mining leads to deforestation and destruction of natural habitats of great apes and other species, negatively impacting their populations.
Mining-derived raw materials such as lithium, nickel and cobalt are currently used to produce various technological products. New research shows that more than a third of the continent’s gorilla, bonobo and chimpanzee populations face mining-related risks.
Mining in Africa is expanding to extract resources and produce everything from electronics to aircraft engines to large-scale transitions to cleaner energy. This practice leads to deforestation and destruction of natural habitats of great apes and other species, affecting their populations.
A study published in the journal Scientific advances confirms that the consequences for these living organisms are more serious than previously thought.
“We document the largest spatial overlap between mining areas and important monkey areas in West Africa.
Particularly in the countries of Liberia, Sierra Leone, Mali and Guinea, where areas have high chimpanzee densities and overlapping exploitation, including population quarantine zones within 10 and 50 km.” reports Jessica Junker from the German Center for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv). Other leading institutions in this work are the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (MLU) in Germany and the non-profit environmental organization Re:wild.
For example, Guinea is the country with the largest overlap between mining projects and chimpanzee habitat, which will directly or indirectly affect more than 23,000 individuals, with potential impacts on up to 83% of Guinea’s chimpanzee population.
It is estimated that more than a third of all great ape species (almost 180,000 gorillas, bonobos and chimpanzees) are threatened across Africa.
Direct and indirect influence on great apes
The team used data from active and pre-mining sites in 17 African countries, recording distances of 10 km to calculate direct impacts such as habitat destruction and light and noise pollution.
In addition, given the increasing human activity near these mining operations, they have identified an additional 50 km of indirect impacts: new roads and infrastructure are being built to reach areas that were once inaccessible, and many people are migrating to find work.
All of these activities increase pressure on great apes and their habitats through increased hunting, habitat loss and increased risk of disease transmission.
By combining all the great ape density data, the researchers examined how many people might be negatively impacted by mining and mapped these areas.
In general, the most sensitive areas with relatively high great ape densities and mining activity are not protected. “One of our biggest challenges is that we don’t always know which species are affected by these projects because their impacts are not always well documented. We therefore encourage mining companies to keep records of the plant and animal species present in the affected area before mining and to monitor them regularly during operations. In this way, they can reduce their impact on the environment more effectively.said the researcher.
More transparency in mining companies
In the article, the research team points out that the real impact of mining on biodiversity, and particularly great apes, could be even greater because mining companies are not required to publish biodiversity data.
“There are a number of incentives for companies to reduce their environmental and social impact. However, a persistent problem is that mining companies tend to only deal with direct impacts and ignore indirect impacts or those that do not occur during exploration.said Juncker.
The researcher emphasized that the available information does not provide a complete picture: “We support greater transparency in the mining sector and call on lending banks, including the World Bank, to ensure the availability of environmental data. Specifically, we demand that World Bank-supported projects make data from monkey studies transparent on a central platform such as the APES database.”
According to this expert, companies may limit the impact of their operations within the boundaries of the mining lease, ignoring environmental considerations. In addition, they often underestimate the timing of implementation of mitigation strategies, which can hinder population recovery.
“We urge companies, lenders and countries to reconsider investments in exploring biodiversity areas, emphasizing the importance of protecting wildlife areas. Furthermore, social change is necessary to re-evaluate our habits. It is important that everyone adopts a consumption reduction mindset and that policymakers adopt more effective recycling policies to promote sustainable reuse of metals.“, he emphasized.
Compensation plans are not long-term
The compensation for what these mining projects destroy is imprecise and underestimated by researchers: currently they are developed as long as they last (typically 20 years), while in the case of great ape habitats the effects are permanent.
“Mining companies should focus as much as possible on avoiding impacts on great apes and use compensation as a last resort” explains Genevieve Campbell, principal investigator of Re:wild, because there are currently no effective case studies on great apes.
This problem adds to existing problems with agricultural activities such as palm oil and avocados, which are subject to separate regulations and certifications from the Rainforest Alliance. “However, as with mining regulations, shortcomings such as lack of transparency, limited scope and enforcement limit their effectiveness.“Uecker condemned.
“Scientific collection of baseline biodiversity data and data monitoring are essential to any development project. Avoiding fossil fuels is good for the climate, but it must be done in a way that does not harm biodiversity. In its current form, it may even be at odds with the environmental goals we strive for.“, summarizes the expert.
Reference:
Jessica Junker et al. “Mining Threat to African Great Apes.” Scientific advances
With information:
