In order to provide balance and perspective to current discussion and comments in the social media and press, Namibian Marine Phosphate Pty Limited (NMP) wishes to address the issue of co-existence between the activities of fishing and dredging of marine phosphatic sediments in Namibia.
Case for Coexistence
The case for co-existence requires fair and open acknowledgment of the common impacts of both activities and the shared responsibility of all ocean industries to protect the marine environment.
It also requires acknowledgment that management of the marine environment should be assessed and governed under a common set of fair and equitable standards in full compliance with Namibian environmental legislation. There are clear parallels between marine dredging, mining and fishing activities that in fact underpin a strong case for coexistence of fishing and marine phosphate dredging and for collaboration in environmental management activities in the ocean off Namibia. These parallel impacts have not been openly discussed in the media to any substantive level.
Those opposed to or advising against the development of the Sandpiper Marine Phosphate Project are attempting to portray the issue as a” stand-off” between phosphate dredging and fishing, stating the position that “only one or the other” can exist.
In reality, the data from site specific scientific studies and local evidence from the current fishing/trawling activities show clearly that this is not the case.
It is also both unfair and unreasonable to apply a “double standard” by imposing a requirement for higher levels of environmental knowledge, compliance and performance in assessment of the proposed phosphate dredging in comparison to those applied to the fishing industry.
Neither should the issue of phosphate and fishing be hijacked by those parties with vested interests or agendas to protect their individual interests nor those of one particular existing industry sector over the development of a new industry.
The real core of the issue is the mutual responsibility of developing all of Namibia’s natural marine resources to their fullest potential for the national benefit.
To achieve this vision it requires willingness and commitment for the coexistence of both new and existing marine resource industries along with implementation of a set of mutually fair and sound Environmental Management Practices which can ensure the protection and sustainability of the Namibian marine environment.
One or the other mindset
The mindset that, “you can only have either one or the other – not both” which is put forward by certain parties opposed to or cautioning against the development of the project is argued on the basis that “a viable fishing industry cannot exist in Namibia together with phosphate dredging, because dredging of phosphatic sediment is a disruptive exercise that will harm the seabed and marine environment” through the generation of potentially toxic suspended sediment plumes and benthic habitat destruction that will ultimately threaten the viability of the fishing industry.
This argument is fundamentally flawed
Firstly, for the parties promoting this position, the uncomfortable truth of the matter is that not one grain of phosphate has been dredged from the ocean however the seabed and marine environment off the Namibian coast is already being exposed to these disruptive activities at a significant scale in the form of the current fishing (trawling) and marine diamond mining operations.
In the statement issued on 7th July 2016 the Confederation of Namibian Fisheries Associations (“CNFA”) has publically acknowledged that current bottom trawling off the coast of Namibia does disrupt the sea floor. No comment is provided by CNFA on the scale or environmental impacts of the seabed disruption from trawling. However CNFA does state that “The South African hake trawling sector has been operating for 120 years without any significant adverse environmental effects”.
Secondly, it is already a globally established and a scientifically supported fact that there are significant parallels between the activities and the impacts of both fishing (bottom trawling) and dredging. Both dredging and bottom trawling cause a disruption of the seabed with consequential impacts on the marine habitats and ecosystem through the generation of re-suspended sediment plumes and benthic habitat disruption.
If , as CNFA states, the trawling industry is not affected by the disruptive effects of trawling across the continental shelf off Namibia , then why should the effects of a localised dredging operation pose any additional or greater risk to the fishing industry?
The “World First Phosphate Mining” misconception
The activity referred to as “Marine Phosphate Mining” that is proposed in Namibia is effectively a deep-water dredging operation to recover the phosphate bearing sediment, off the sea floor. The phosphate is contained within the sand particles in the seabed sediment which comprises a mixture of mud, sand and shelly gravel. Dredging is not a new or “world first” activity and has in fact been undertaken for more than 100 years in oceans around the world. Sediments recovered by dredging are deposited onshore and are typically used for landfill for coastal construction, shoreline protection or for construction material. In specific cases the sediments recovered by dredging are utilised for accessing their mineral content such as Calcium Carbonate (for cement or aluminium refinery), diamonds, iron or in this particular case phosphate. The dredging activity is then referred to as some form of sea mining such as marine diamond mining, or marine iron sand mining or marine phosphate mining.
Regardless of the “mining” connotation attached, the process undertaken remains essentially a dredging activity. Dredging in shallow or deeper water does also not change the fundamentals of the operation. The actual “world first” component is one of the technical risks associated with the extension of the dredge arm from current 165m depth capability to access the seabed at depths of greater that 200m. The alleged implications of “world first” and “phosphate mining” are utilised in certain instances to over-exaggerate the potential significance or impact of the basic dredging operations as proposed.
Habitat and scale
of operations
Hake and monk fish are the targeted commercial fishing species off the Namibian coast and both species are fished using bottom trawling nets and equipment. The hake and monk fish populations are bottom dwellers that exist on the seabed comprising the very same phosphate bearing sediments that will be targeted for phosphate dredging.
The 2012 EIA study noted that a fleet of approximately 100 Namibian demersal/bottom trawlers are registered to operate within Namibian waters. The demersal fishing trawler fleet operates along the entire length of the Namibian coast in water depths of 200 to 500m. The ocean area off Namibia is 580,000km2 (FAO website country profile).
By comparison, for the project in question one dredger is proposed to operate over the period of 20 years in the 60km2 target mining area (SP1) within ML170 which represents a very small fraction (0.01% or 1/100th of a percent) of the 580,000 km2 ocean area and fishing grounds off Namibia.
The Key Issue and the
Common Impacts
The primary issues raised by fishing industry and activist groups against the proposed dredging of phosphatic seabed sediments (sand, mud and shell) are those of 1) the potential “toxicity of sediment plumes” and 2) “seafloor habitat destruction” and their potential for a catastrophic impact on fish stocks and ecosystem.
The potential impacts of the sediment plume and habitat disturbance arising from the proposed dredging for phosphatic sediments have been comprehensively evaluated in the Project Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”) and subsequent Verification Study completed as proposed in the Environmental Management Plan for the project.. The effects were assessed at a high level of confidence to be of little or no impact on the fishing industry or environment at the proposed scale of the operation.
There are also numerous scientific studies that have definitively documented the disruptive impacts of bottom trawling the seabed resulting in disturbance of the surface sediments, habitat destruction and re-suspension of sediments generating large plumes of suspended sediments behind the bottom trawling net and equipment. (This article has been shortened.)