A multi-disciplinary approach to understanding the impacts of mines on traditional uses of water in Northern Mongolia

Abstract

Mongolia is an example of a nation where the rapidity of mining development is outpacing capacity to manage the potential land and water resources impacts. Further, Mongolia has a particular social and economic reliance on traditional uses of land and water, principally livestock herding. While some mining operations are setting high standards in protecting the natural resources surrounding the mine site, others have less incentive and capacity to do so and therefore are having adverse effects on surrounding communities. The paper describes a case study of the Sharyn Gol Soum in northern Mongolia where a range of mining types, from artisanal, small-scale mining to a large coal mine, operate alongside traditional herding lifestyles. A multi-disciplinary approach is taken to observe and attribute causes to the water resources impacts in the area. Surveys of the herding household community, land use mapping, and monitoring the spatial variations in water quality indicate deterioration of water resources. Collectively, the different sources of evidence suggest that the deterioration is mainly due to small-scale gold mining. The evidence included the perception of 78% of the interviewed herders that water quality had changed due to mining; a change in the footprint of small-scale gold mining from 2.8 to 15.2km(2) during the period 1999 to 2015; and pH and sulphate values in 2015 consistently outside the ranges observed at a baseline site in the same region. It is concluded that the lack of baseline data and effective governance mechanisms are fundamental challenges that need to be addressed if Mongolia's transition to a mining economy is to be managed alongside sustainability of herder lifestyles.

Environmental change in the Selenga River—Lake Baikal Basin

“…As a consequence, elevated levels of heavy metals and other mining-related pollutants (cyanides, phosphorus) have been detected in the water and sediments of the Selenga and its tributaries, as well as floodplain soils and groundwater (Battogtokh et al 2014;Brumbaugh et al 2013;Chalov et al 2015;Inam et al 2011;McIntyre et al 2016;Nadmitov et al 2014;Pavlov et al 2008;Pfeiffer et al 2015;Stubblefield et al 2005;Thorslund et al 2012). Even though contaminant transport towards the Selenga delta does take place (Chalov et al 2015;Khazheeva et al 2004;Karthe et al 2014), it should be noted that contaminations currently have the largest effects in local hot spots (Hofmann et al 2010;Inam et al 2011;Pfeiffer et al 2015).…”

Water in Central Asia: an integrated assessment for science-based management

“…Different sources of evidence suggest that smallscale gold mining is particularly problematic and some regions suffer from legacy contamination with heavy metals (Kaus et al 2016b). Challenges include a lack of environmental monitoring and management, the relatively quick transience of small mines and their spatially diffuse development (McIntyre et al 2016;Pfeiffer et al 2015). Even though contaminant transport toward the Selenga delta does take place Malsy et al 2016;Thorslund et al 2012), it should be noted that contaminations currently have the largest effects in local hot spots Inam et al 2011;Kaus et al 2016b;Pfeiffer et al 2015).…”

Coupled Relationship between Rural Livelihoods and the Environment at a Village Scale: A Case Study in the Mongolian Plateau

“…The crux of persistent poverty in rural areas is largely due to harsh natural conditions, poor locations relative to regional hubs, and uneven regional development [24]. To better understand the interplay between these factors, it is important to systematically explore the rural livelihood-environment nexus.With respect to studies on rural livelihoods and the environment, most researchers have focused on one-sided effects instead of mutual relationships [27][28][29]. Researchers have concentrated on the correlations between rural livelihoods and the environment [30,31], poverty traps [32,33], and the spatial clustering of poor populations [34,35].…”

“…With respect to studies on rural livelihoods and the environment, most researchers have focused on one-sided effects instead of mutual relationships [27][28][29]. Researchers have concentrated on the correlations between rural livelihoods and the environment [30,31], poverty traps [32,33], and the spatial clustering of poor populations [34,35].…”