MINING IN THE YILGARN: A QUESTION OF BALANCE?
A response to false appeals for ‘balance’ in the debate over proposed
mining of the Helena and Aurora Range (Bungalbin)
June 2014
It is often said by mining company executives, members of parliament and ministers of the crown they believe there
needs to be a balance between mining and conservation. But what do they mean and in what context?
The following Banded Ironstone Formation (BIF) Ranges occur within 150 km of Southern Cross, the heart of the Yilgarn
and they have extremely small, lower grade deposits (compared to the Pilbara) of direct shipping iron ore (or ‘DSO’):








Mt Jackson Range - mined
Koolyanobbing Range - mined
Windarling Range - mined
Yendilberin Hills (Carina) - mined
Parker Range - approval to mine
Helena and Aurora Range (Bungalbin) - explored and far western end being assessed for mining
Die Hardy Range – explored and part available for mining
Mount Manning Range – explored and available for mining
These ranges have been shown to have outstanding biodiversity and landscape values1. The EPA has acknowledged,
“the significant biodiversity values of the Helena and Aurora Range which has been
confirmed in contemporary published research2.
“The Mount Manning group of ranges (including Helena-Aurora Range) support the largest
numbers of BIF-specialist plants. It is only 0.1 percent of Western Australia’s land mass but
supports 6.1 per cent of its native plants.”3
The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) has also called for a balance between
conservation and development and says this has not been achieved: “There are currently no
BIF ranges protected from mining development through secure (Class A or National Park)
conservation tenure4.”
Western pygmy possum in BIF range – Jiri
Lochman
Mining of the ore in these ranges and then leaving the resulting pits and waste rock dumps
for inclusion in the conservation landscape is not a balanced outcome: The miners get what they were after while the
integrity of the range has been destroyed forever.
The EPA also does not believe the Helena and Aurora Range could be restored if mining took place5.
Iron ore production in the Yilgarn is less than two per cent of that in the Pilbara6. We are losing unique environments
and landscapes in exchange for a relatively tiny and short-lived resource and revenue stream.
There have been proposals for secure conservation estate across the greater Mount Manning area, focused around the
BIF ranges, for more than forty years. These reserves are still awaiting implementation while within the last five years
several new “mining and conservation reserves” have been created in the area.
In summary, we have unique ranges being destroyed despite many of them being recommended for decades to be
included in secure conservation reserves; we have other ranges long recommended for protection currently being
assessed for mining; and we have longstanding conservation reserve proposals in limbo while new ‘mining and
conservation’ reserves are created almost overnight.
This is not balance! This is clear bias in favour of mining and against the environment and wider public interest.
1
EPA Bulletin 1256 May 2007
EPA 2012-2013 Annual Report page 25
3
EPA 2012-2013 Annual Report page 24
4
EPA 2012-2013 Annual Report page 25
5
EPA Statement of Reasons for Level of Assessment Jackson 5 (J5) Exploration Program on M77/1095 6th January 2014
6
Helena and Aurora Ranges, Goldfields Environmental Management Group Workshop Proceedings May 2014
2