The Faculty of Biology, whose expert team was engaged in the preparation of the “Final Report on the Review of the Impact of the Jadar Mineral Exploitation and Processing Project on Biodiversity and the Development of Mitigation Measures” by “SGS Belgrade” for the needs of the company “Rio Sava Exploration,” issued a statement regarding the publication of three “Draft texts of the impact assessment study of the ‘Jadar’ project on the environment” by “Rio Sava Exploration.”
As they stated, the reason for publishing this statement is the significant number of incorrect, unfounded, contradictory, and tendentious statements by state and private legal entities, as well as individuals, regarding the results of the research on biodiversity and the development of measures to reduce and mitigate the consequences of activities in the planned mining area. Another motive for this address, they added, was the inadequate and incorrect citation of certain key data, risk factors, proposed protection measures, as well as general conclusions presented in the “Final Report of the Faculty of Biology.”
Distancing themselves from the conclusions of the “Impact Study Draft” of the company “Rio Sava Exploration,” a subsidiary of Rio Tinto, they stated that “the extent and scope of the impact of opening the mine on the overall biodiversity of the area is extremely significant and crucially affects its degradation.”
They reminded that the Faculty of Biology, in cooperation with four renowned higher education and scientific institutions in Serbia, conducted a one-time field study in June and July 2020 in the broader area of the planned Jadar mine, and based on the research, the “Final Report of the Faculty of Biology” was prepared, which was submitted to “Rio Sava Exploration d.o.o.” Belgrade through the company SGS Belgrade in its entirety.
“Business Secret”
The complete “Final Report of the Faculty of Biology” is classified as a “business secret” (at the request of “Rio Sava Exploration d.o.o.” Belgrade), but the most significant data on the state of biodiversity in the studied area and potential consequences (if this project is realized) were presented at a scientific-professional gathering titled “Project ‘Jadar’ – What is Known?” held on May 6 and 7, 2021, organized by the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SANU) and the scientific paper published after that gathering.
The main conclusions, drawn from the analysis of the scientific results presented in the “Final Report of the Faculty of Biology,” published in the SANU collection “Project ‘Jadar’ – What is Known?” are as follows: “The extent and scope of the impact of opening the mine on the overall biodiversity of the area is extremely significant and crucially affects its degradation. Both irreversible and reversible consequences on the qualitative and quantitative structure of the area’s biodiversity have been identified. The proposed, realistically feasible measures to mitigate and remediate the consequences for the area’s biodiversity are extremely limited in capacity and time-defined impact,” the statement said, adding that “due to the expected irreversible changes in certain ecosystems and the risk of significant endangerment to the living world of the Jadar, Drina, and downstream waterways, the optimal and fundamental measure to prevent negative consequences on biodiversity in this area is to abandon the planned exploitation and processing of jadarite minerals.”
In the event that the optimal measure to prevent negative consequences on biodiversity is not realized, they proposed a series of measures and procedures that, if implemented to the highest standards, could, though only partially and for a limited period, allow the survival of some natural habitats and the populations of plant and animal species present.”
The Faculty of Biology also stated that according to data from the “Impact Study Draft” published by “Rio Sava Exploration d.o.o.” Belgrade, the review of previous studies and reports related to biodiversity, including the “Final Report of the Faculty of Biology,” was conducted by the consulting firm “The Biodiversity Consultancy” from Cambridge. Thus, all responsibility for the accuracy of the data and the proposals and positions presented lies with them and the signatories of the “Impact Study Draft,” not the expert team of the Faculty of Biology.
“The general conclusion presented in the ‘Final Report of the Faculty of Biology’ is the result of an assessment made based on strict scientific and methodological procedures and can only be refuted and questioned by following the same methodological procedures. Omitting these conclusions and relativizing them without following the same strict scientific and methodological rules is not in line with basic scientific principles. Therefore, the Faculty of Biology rejects any responsibility for the conclusions presented in the ‘Impact Study Drafts,’ which contradict the general conclusions published in the ‘Final Report of the Faculty of Biology,'” the statement said.
“Unacceptable Bypass of National Priorities in Nature Protection”
They also emphasized that the approach in the revision of previous studies and reports related to biodiversity, which led to the “regulatory assessments of the initial state of biodiversity” and the “proposed species protection plan recognized as priorities for long-term protection or compensatory measures to reduce the residual impact on biodiversity,” is not based on national legislation but aligns with relevant European Union practices (Standard 6 – European Bank for Development), based on EU directives related to nature protection (the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive).
Additionally, the species protection plans emphasize that endangered flora and fauna must be managed according to Rio Tinto Standard 14 – “Land Management and Rehabilitation” and Rio Tinto Standard 16 – “Biodiversity Protection and Natural Resource Management,” which they also consider an unacceptable bypass of national priorities in nature protection. They stressed that nature in every area is unique, and not all indicators of species vulnerability on a European scale are applicable to local conditions in Serbia.
In conclusion, the Faculty of Biology stated that the conclusions presented in the “Drafts” regarding the current and future state of biodiversity, as well as the possible impacts of the planned activities of the Jadar mine on natural values and the environment as a whole in the research area, do not represent an optimal solution for biodiversity protection from the perspective of the Faculty of Biology and the research team.
Stanisavljević: We Are a Renowned State Institution, and We Have No Intention of Lying
Ljubiša Stanisavljević, Dean of the Faculty of Biology in Belgrade, stated to FoNet that the aim of the institution’s letter regarding the Jadar project and the study of its impact is to address the public, “so that people know what we did and found out.”
“We are a renowned state institution, and we really have no intention of lying,” Stanisavljević said.
He emphasized that the team that worked on the “Final Report on the Review of the Impact of the Jadar Mineral Exploitation and Processing Project on Biodiversity and the Development of Mitigation Measures” wanted to address the public and clarify everything.
Source: NIN
