The Centre for Trade Policy and Development (CTPD) has followed with keen interest the events unfolding in relation to the intended Kangaluwi Copper Mining Project in the Lower Zambezi National Park.
The Kangaluwi Project is an initiative of Mwembeshi Resources Limited, which was granted a large-scale mining license for a period of 25 years in March of 2011.
The site of the intended mining activities is the Kangaluwi area situated in the Lower Zambezi National Park, which covers about 977 km (roughly 25 percent of the national park).
However, the open-pit mining activities will likely occupy a larger area to accommodate employees, storage equipment and piling of tailings or the earth in order to reach copper ore.
Environmental and mining experts predict that full-scale mining activities could cover up to 50 percent of the Lower Zambezi National Park, which is an ecologically sensitive area. As an extractive industry, mining activities will inevitably cause severe damage to the environment and disrupt the ecosystem of the Lower Zambezi National Park.
Lower Zambezi National Park is a priority tourist destination with its abundance of wildlife species and vegetation as well as conservation value being that it is considered to be the western arm of the East African Rift Valley.
Tourism is one of the fastest-growing sectors of the Zambian economy and vital to the government’s economic diversification policy.
CTPD Executive Director Isaac Mwaipopo is concerned about the intended mining activities and urged the government to cancel or revoke all pending and existing licenses in the Lower Zambezi National Park.
Mr. Mwaipopo says CTPD is encouraged by the statement that was issued by the Minister of Tourism and Arts, Ronald Chitotela to the effect that the mining operations by Mwembeshi Resources were still subject to an environmental impact assessment report and that no mining activities were currently permitted.
“CTPD has however taken note of the sentiments expressed by Senior Chief Mburuma of the Nsenga-Luzi people. Chief Mburuma urged the government to allow the mining activities in order to create jobs and secure livelihoods for his people. As an organization focused on the development of pro-poor trade and development policies, CTPD is concerned primarily with the well-being of the communities and the impact that various policies and government decisions have on the day to day lives of Zambians, “Mr. Mwaipopo said.
He stressed that the concerns raised by the traditional authorities are valid in the wake of the decline in the country’s economic growth which between 2016 and 2018 averaged 3.5 percent per year compared to 7.4 percent between 2004 and 2014.
“According to the World Bank, Zambia has one of the highest inequality gaps in the world such that the economic growth has characteristically benefitted a small segment of the urban population,” Mr. Mwaipopo said.
Mr. Mwaipopo noted that Rural communities remain largely marginalized, bearing the brunt of the unemployment rate currently at 7,15 percent and susceptible to promises from unqualified investors, issues which must be addressed.
He said that whilst CTPD maintains its stance against mining activities in the Lower Zambezi National Park, all stakeholders, and interested parties should continue to engage in dialogue and reach a mutually beneficial consensus.
“CTPD concurs that whilst tourism should be the primary economic driver in relation to the Lower Zambezi and other national parks, efforts should be made by the government to ensure that the industry is driven by Zambians and in so doing guarantee a trickledown effect to the local communities,” He added.
Mr. Mwaipopo also observed that the National parks in Zambia are spotted with secluded luxury camps managed by foreign multinationals and private individuals.
“The luxury resorts and camps cost upwards of USD 500 a night on average, making the facilities largely inaccessible to the majority of Zambians and hindering local tourism. This is itself an impediment to the growth of the industry and a loss of revenue and potential employment creation”, he noted.
Mr. Mwaipopo strongly urges the government to firstly continue engaging with traditional authorities and develop effective strategies that strike a balance between sound investment and opportunities for rural communities.
“In addition, there is a need (through consultation and dialogue) to develop interventions aimed at increasing local participation in the tourism sector”, he said.
Good statement. The tourism in that area doesn’t benefit the locals. The chiefs, who sit with the locals, prefer mining which would benefit a larger portion of people there. But the environmental hazard is also a reality. A stricter environmental control on this particular mine perhaps?? Like Mwaipopo has put it, consultations and dialogue amongst all affected and a common consensus is key.
If a story doesn’t go away easily, money has exchanged hands – alot at stake
There is gold at statehouse, lets go mine it. Everyone wants gold.
Mining it will create jobs for 15 years.
Someone will have to overrule Zema report in this instance.
No no no no actually it will be a smart technology mining activity. People around state house will not negatively be affected
besides they want jobs. We may have secret mines in those secluded National Parks frequented by whites and cost prohibitive to Zambians.
Name the infestor involved. In his country do they turn National parks into mines?
One wonders if its AfNat Resources Ltd or Zambezi Resources Ltd or Mwembeshi Resources Ltd. Too many names or are they shareholders.
No mining at Lower Zambezi National Park mulikunvwa?
Excellent statement. Zambian Leadership should understand that as a Country, we cannot survive on mining alone. We should diversify and Tourism is the fastest growing industry in the world. We should thank God that we have abundant Wildlife. If we have a proper Tourism strategy, the local people and chiefs will benefit. Cancel all the mining Licenses, it’s not good for the environment and will not benefit Zambians anyways, because all mining companies are Foreign owned, and they keep the money in their countries.
There will be no mining there. Maybe we should begin to mine in the 1000 Hectares NAMWALA land the Tax evasion thief got from his tribo chiefs.
We don’t need that mine, I wish these PF charlatans can comprehend that and listen to the people. Mining has only brought misery to us. Those people will just swipe all your minerals, leave with huge profits while leaving you with desolate land you cannot do anything with later on. So far the damage outweighs the benefits, let them go prospect some other places either than a game park.
We want mining but not in the game park.
No mining
These chiefs are only thinking of themselves and not their people! Let’s just say for argument sake that the mine operationalized and run it’s full life of mine (LOM) and finally closed. What next? Tourism would be dead in that area! The chiefs making too much noise now would be dead also. Agriculture would be dead because of pollution. Technically speaking, the Lower Zambezi would be a wasteland and Ghost town! The benefits from mining would be as temporal as the temporary effect of DOPE and then reality would set in! The poverty we are talking about now would be nothing compared to that after mining is over! Moreover, that Copper will benefit the mine owners 80% or more compared to the tax, Loyalties and CSR anticipated to our country! Why not concentrate on developing the Mwinilunga…
Why not concentrate on developing the Mwinilunga Gold Mine and increase our Gold reserves to help stabilize our Kwacha? Why can’t we increase employment in Lower Zambezi through Tourism and Agriculture as more sustainable development vehicles? Greed should not be allowed to overpower common sense!
Those Luangwa chiefs must first of all visit Chief Nkana’s palace, and his subjects, to see for themselves whether or not mining benefits chiefdoms and subjects. Chief Nkana has hosted several mines, including those that extract precious minerals like emeralds for more than woo years. But the poverty of Chief Nkana and his subjects is so distressing. Luangwa chiefs shoild not live in fantacy. Mining will not benefit them in any way. Seeing is believing. Tourism has benefited Senior Chief Mukuni. The same formula could be used on tourism in Luangwa.
“The luxury resorts and camps cost upwards of USD 500 a night on average, making the facilities largely inaccessible to the majority of Zambians and hindering local tourism. This is itself an impediment to the growth of the industry and a loss of revenue and potential employment creation”, he noted.”
And here the jealousy shines through Marxist dribble. No one stopping you from running a lodge at K50 a night, good luck with business !
Both these two issues, Lower Zambezi mining & bill 10 have proved to be unwanted for the majority of Zambians. Unfortunately, the few who have vested interests in these two issues will stop at nothing to see these two matters tilt in their favor. Forest reserve No. 27 is one good example, where someone has paid a deaf ear. I miss Mwanawasa
The next government must encourage the formation of trusts in the rural communities such that part of the profits from the tourism activities are plowed back into the communities. You have to sympathize with the traditional leaders who are preferring mining instead of tourism. The formation of Trusts have been tested and is working well in some countries.
Tikafa tiipeze copper pansi. Ndiye pillow yatu. Ndiye doti yatu.
Imwe bazungu tisiyeni seka tisauke na copper yatu.
Chiputa bati!
Actually if you think about it the cities of Kitwe, Luanshya, Ndola, Kabwe were all created by mining money, it is mining that paid for these cities up to now – they would not be there if mining was not there. The economy would collapse instantly without mining because there is no other major earner. That doesn’t mean Lower Zambezi should be mined, no! But it is easy to forget Zambia was almost at first world wealth levels in the early 1970s, because of mining. Chiefs have a duty to their subjects, and it’s their land too so they should not be dismissed as “ignorant” by some here who have other jobs and futures already
@Atase
Good point. However, the cities you have mentioned arose from the thinking of the time championed by foreign interests by foreign mineral exploiters of the time. The indigenous people did not have the same use of the minerals as the exploiters…just like now. The difference between now and then is, now the indigenous people know the long term effects of mining on their soil. They also know that there are viable sustainable alternatives to mining such as agriculture and tourism.
The truth is beneath the surface of the development of the cities referenced are costs in health and psychological degradation and subsequent disregard of human dignity. MNCs in the mining sector dont come to put food on any Zambian’s table. The real benefits of the mines must not be measured in…
In terms of rundown residential areas and paved roads in CBDs but sustainable living standards for host communities at the minimum.
If all else fails and the National Park really needs to be destroyed and the animals in it killed than perhaps relocating the wildlife to Luwangwa or Kafue National parks? Also don’t forget the impact poaching will have on the remaining 50% of the lower Zambezi. It’s a complicated situation. Hope a solution is found that benefits Nature as well as the virus called man.