Town in Romania debates mine proposal

It is a classic tale of the developing world: a rich North American company discovers gold under pristine land and encourages the villagers to leave, offering money, homes in the city, soft-focus TV ads that tout the benefits of the project, and some tough talk.

International environmental groups ”” complete with celebrities like Vanessa Redgrave ”” descend on the town to support the locals, claiming that the mine is illegal and polluting.

But as of Jan. 1, this large piece of land will sit within the European Union, when Romania becomes a member. And resolving this dispute that has torn apart this ancient Transylvanian mining town for the last decade will test both the control of the Union over its newest members and promises by Romania to govern with transparency.

It is also a big test for the Canadian developer, Gabriel Resources, which has already spent nearly $200 million at the site and is waiting for Romania to authorize the mine. That decision is expected early in the year.

“I believe if I fight for my rights within the EU, they will be respected,” said Eugen David, 41, a farmer who is leading some of the villagers in refusing to leave their properties. “There are laws that forbid involuntary movement of people, there are regulations about testing of underground water and clear standards for environmental impact. I want to keep my life here.”

Gabriel Resources says it has complied with every Romanian and EU regulation, as well as with World Bank dictates on resettlement.

Catalin Hosu, a communications manager for the company, said: “People get emotional when you talk about foreigners, cyanide, gold, destroying churches and cemeteries. But this is really a model of environmentally conscious development.”

Those opposing the company say that pollution from a big mine would destroy the village, the environment and archeological sites. A valley, now filled with houses and four churches, will be dammed and converted to a storage pond for the cyanide sludge produced by the processing.

Even worse, critics contend, an accident could send toxic waste downstream into the Danube.

Rosario Golgoz, an engineer whose house is one of just a few that have not been abandoned, said: “Their explorations will turn this into a desert.”

But the project seems a fait accompli. About 300 employees of Gabriel Resources ply the potholed street in late- model cars, far outnumbering donkey carts and peasants in old clothes.

Green corporate banners hang from many dilapidated buildings ”” now converted to offices for the Rosia Montana Mining Corporation, owned by Gabriel Resources. They read: “We are saving Rosia Montana.”

Last May the company delivered the environmental impact analysis required by UN and EU laws.

The company agreed to clean up a local water system polluted by 2,000 years of primitive mining techniques; it contains 110 times the legal limit of zinc and 64 times the legal limit of iron.

Gabriel Resources has spent $9 million saving archeological sites ”” including a second-century necropolis ”” a sum far greater than Romania’s budget for archeology.

But critics assert that the company is better at public relations than science and that its environmental-impact analysis was deeply flawed.

A government panel from Hungary, which is downstream from Rosia Montana, characterized the data as “insufficient, deficient, inaccurate or not considered to be representative.”

Before Gabriel Resources can get final approval, it must respond to such criticisms, which have also come from environmental groups and local nongovernment organizations and were raised at 16 public meetings in Romania and Hungary. The mood is agitated because in 2000, a cyanide spill from an older mine in Baie Mare, Romania, killed wildlife in the Hungarian portion of the Danube and contaminated the water supply for 2.5 million people.

Gabriel Resources spent nearly $200 million and moved thousands of people before getting an environmental clearance, and critics say that was illegal. In its latest corporate report, the company told investors it expected Romania to sign off on its environment impact analysis in the first quarter of 2007 and to issue permits to build soon after.

“They are confident because in Romania it has been very easy to get what you want with money ”” maybe not quite bribes,” said Anamaria Bogdan, director of Greenpeace Romania. “Now, the European Union already has their eyes on this project and how Romania conducts itself.”

So far, the European Union has remained neutral, although the environment commissioner, Stavros Dimas, has “stressed that all relevant EU legislation should be taken into account,” said his spokeswoman, Barbara Helfferich.

She said the European Commission “does not have a formal role in evaluating the project unless an official complaint is submitted,” which cannot happen until Romania is a member. But once Romania joins, a complaint may be forthcoming.

The history of the conflict dates to 1997, when Romania sold mining rights for Rosia Montana to Gabriel Resources, which had never engaged in mining but is 20-percent owned by Newmont Mining of Colorado. Rosia Montana has been mined for 2,000 years, first delivering gold to its Roman conquerors.

A geological survey by Gabriel in 2000 found that 330 tons of gold and 1,600 tons of silver remained to be mined in four mountains that surround the town, using a technique that involves blasting and cyanide extraction.

The company began to coax the 2,100 residents to move. The Romanian government, which owns a small stake in the project, declared the area an industrial zone, essentially precluding other types of development.

Hosu of the mining company said that more than 60 percent of the local residents have left and that an additional 20 percent would probably leave in two to three months. Most have chosen to move to the provincial capital but some took up residence in a new community built by Gabriel near Rosia Montana, Hosu said.

Many here regard the new mine as an opportunity to leave grinding poverty.

“I have a very good opinion of the company because they brought us advantages when we had no possibilities,” said Gheorghe Boia, 51, a laborer with the local Archeology Department. The company bought his house for $60,000, he said, and he will move his wife and daughter to a flat. A Peugeot bearing a learner’s permit in the driveway illustrates how the compensation was spent.

Even so, there is a great difference of opinion about the mine on the streets of Rosia Montana, and many residents refuse to discuss their choices, or demand secret meetings.

Sorin Jurca, 44, an unemployed miner who has agreed to leave for a house in the city and the promise of a job, said, “My family has lived here for hundreds of years. I’ll go, but I’ll never get used to it.”

Gabriel says it is reviving a dying and polluted region. “People like to talk about beautiful nature but look around ”” this place has been mined for 2,000 years ”” welcome to the moon,” said Hosu, standing at the edge of an old pit.

To presage the town’s revival, the company opened a free Internet cafã© and hosted a Christmas party with food, drink and bands. Posters display neat model homes that Gabriel will build. A free DVD distributed by the company describes the good life in a town in New Zealand, which sits near an open mine.

But the holdouts of the town, led by the NGO, named Alburnus Maior, remain a formidable foe ”” especially since international groups are rallying behind them. In August, David organized a rally that attracted thousands, including Vanessa Redgrave. More recently, Alburnus Maior successfully sued to protect Roman ruins that sit smack in the middle of the proposed mine.

The latest plan by Gabriel calls for renovating the historic center as kind of a mining theme park, featuring a bed and breakfast and a museum of mining, geology and archeology.