Under the new mining tax, the Federal Government could well find itself responsible for the clean-up of old mines. This is one of the possible outcomes of the policy shifts and proposed new resources tax now being debated.

Abandoned mines pose unique and often complex challenges because rehabilitation has either been inadequate or absent, leaving negative impacts such as;

• safety and health hazards for humans and other animals;
• negative environmental impacts, including on water quality;
• neglected mining heritage and other assets; and
• depressed communities.

Abandoned mines have no company managing those impacts after the minerals have been extracted and governments either accept, or inherit by default, these liabilities. ‘Derelict’, ‘orphaned’ and ‘legacy’ are also terms used by different government jurisdictions to describe abandoned mines.

Sustainable development is sometimes difficult to associate with mining unless we quantify the range of socio-economic benefits which flow from mining during the life of a mine. Some of these include;

• royalties and rents paid to governments which fund public projects such as roads and hospitals;
• expanded employment and skills;
• strengthening of small town services, sometimes providing additional services eg. recreational facilities;
• funding /sponsorship of projects and businesses which continue after mining.

There are also beneficial post-mining land uses such as mining heritage tourism or new land uses which can contribute economically to communities after the mine has closed. For abandoned mines, sustainable development requires the current generation to prevent the negative environmental and socio-economic legacies which remain long after the mine originally closed.

For historic mines, neither the standards of environment protection nor community expectations were as high as they are now. Mining companies did not have to rehabilitate mines or set aside funds for rehabilitation. But in the early 1990s there was a step change in legislation in many jurisdictions An example is Queensland, where rehabilitation requirements have been included in environmental policy, legislation and supporting guidelines. These changes included the requirement for ‘financial assurance’ in the form of a bank guarantee to cover the costs of rehabilitation should the mine close prematurely, without the resources to properly remediate the site. Hence, most of Australia’s abandoned mines are historic.

In the past, the Commonwealth has been very clear that the role of abandoned mine management in Australia belongs to the State and Territory Governments as they are the primary environmental regulators of mining.

Scientists working on abandoned mines know that resources for cleaning up old mines within government are very limited. Many attempts to remediate an abandoned mine are reactive - for example, when someone falls down a mine shaft and is killed, or when the local river is polluted by acid rock drainage or an unstable tailings dam collapses. Some jurisdictions in Australia have greater high level support for such programs while others have no coordinated program and no specific team of personnel working on abandoned mines. South Australia has an organised program as well as a heritage trail network linking historic minesites throughout the state and providing information for tourists.

Australia has not held a national forum on the subject of abandoned mines for seven years. In 2003 a meeting by the Australian Centre for Mine Extension and Research in Brisbane recommended national coordination of abandoned mines and a national strategy to provide guidance for the States/Territories. Australia has a mines safety national strategy to provide consistency across state boundaries.

After quite a delay, the Ministerial Council for Mineral and Petroleum Resources established an Abandoned Mines Working Group, in 2006. During April 2010 a ‘Draft Strategic Framework for the Management of Abandoned Mines’ to “encourage a strategic approach to abandoned mines management which promotes efficiency, sustainability, innovation and consideration of the unique assets and community values for each mine.”

This is a step in the right direction, however it is only a framework – not a plan of action. It is not clear how such a strategy will change the current state of neglect of abandoned mines in Australia. There are some fundamental gaps such as;

• the need for each jurisdiction to fully cost and pay for the clean-up of its abandoned mines;
• an implementation plan with actions, timelines and responsibilities assigned, and
• the need for governments to report on how much money has been spent on abandoned mine rehabilitation and how successful it has been - performance reports.

During 2008 an International Legacy Mine Roundtable was held in Toronto. Despite our major involvement in mining, no government representatives from Australia was represented at this forum. Australia simply does not have an active point of contact on abandoned mines or any way to address public or environmental concerns regarding them.

For Australia to take responsible action on this issue there are a number of pre-requisites.  We must:

• map, describe and quantify all abandoned mines,  including open cut pits, waste dumps, tailings dams, heap leach piles, remnant infrastructure and underground workings;
• identify information gaps for unstable or polluting sites
• address water quality impacts – surface and groundwater - on downstream aquatic ecosystems and water users,
• assess the stability and risk of failure of dumps or dams,
• plan remediation works to a standard required of today’s society,
• engage stakeholders to ensure needs are understood, and
• have robust risk assessment and external review to prioritise the sites and works.

Once the full liability is known there will need to be a nationwide commitment to cleaning-up and making safe these sites, so that;

• there are sufficient resources to address the historic legacies this generation,
• rehabilitation plans consider future mining opportunities as well as other beneficial alternative land uses,
• sites assets and heritage values are conserved for both site management and future business opportunities for the community, and
• performance reporting is undertaken to demonstrate the reduction in liability over time.

Once the Commonwealth has a more accurate estimate  of the cost of remediating abandoned mines in all States and Territories, then it will be possible to set aside dedicated funds, write the policies and implement the necessary programs.

So far no connection has been made between any part of this ‘Resource Super Profits Tax’ and abandoned mines - yet the announcement of these changes implies a greater interest by the Commonwealth in the issue of delivering greater benefit to Australia from its mineral resources. This benefit includes protecting the public and environment from the consequences of historic mining and mineral processing.

Abandoned mines while mainly the responsibility of governments also have a negative effect on public perceptions of mining in Australia and of the behaviour of mineral companies. A clear national policy, supported by government and the industry would significantly enhance the image of mining and consequently the level of public support it receives.

Proactive programs and successful case studies in other developed nations provide valuable benchmarks for Australia. An overseas study of ‘Leading practice abandoned mine rehabilitation and post-mining land use’ (Churchill Fellowship) last year has highlighted a significant difference between Australia and Austria, Germany, United Kingdom and Canada. Overseas, abandoned mine programs were tackled proactively with a sense of urgency and transparency.

A major turning point in the Canadian abandoned mine programs occurred when audits were undertaken by the Canadian Federal Auditor-General and Provincial Auditors-General of abandoned mine and contaminated land programs. These highlighted how much public money was spent, on what and the outcomes.

All Auditors-General in Australia need to audit their jurisdiction’s abandoned mine program. This would provide high-level scrutiny as well as support to those individuals on the ground managing abandoned mines.

Abandoned mines often mean abandoned communities and it is equally vital for programs that deal with the mine to help create beneficial post-mining land uses such as mining heritage tourism, recreational uses and alternative businesses.

If Australia is to deal safely, efficiently and successfully with its abandoned mines  we need better leadership at all levels of government. Only then will other stakeholders such as the mining industry, researchers and non-government organisations support these programs.

Instead of a hazardous and unproductive legacy for the future, abandoned mines represent the opportunity for diverse and novel partnerships creating new economies, new jobs and new futures.

Corinne Unger is an environmental consultant specialising in sustainable mine rehabilitation and closure planning.