Sand Mining Threatens Coastline as Sierra Leone Rebuilds

Within a few miles of Sierra Leone’s capital, sand mining is having a devastating effect. As beaches slowly disappear, so do the country’s hopes of post-war revival. 

Freetown Beach in Sierra Leone, Erik Cleves Kristensen, CC BY 2.0

Twenty years after Sierra Leone's 11-year civil war, the economic promises of sand mining prove to be costly. The war, which took thousands of lives and led nearly half the country's population into poverty, destroyed most of the country. What followed was a construction boom made possible by an essential ingredient of modern civilization: sand. However, as Sierra Leone’s 300 miles of glorious beaches slowly disappear, so does the revival of tourism and the protection of 55% of the population who live along the country’s coast from the dangers of rising sea levels due to climate change. 

As part of a post-civil war move to help communities benefit from local resources, Sierra Leone’s central government gave regulation of sand mining to local councils. Under the 2004 Local Government Act, local committees operate the trucks and strictly hire local people to mine the sand. After a long day of mining, the sand is dried and sold to developers to pave and extend roads as new homes, hotels and restaurants go up across the country. 

Government officials defend sand mining as an essential source of jobs and a necessary component in rebuilding Sierra Leone. Kasho Cole, chairman of the Western Area Rural District Council, told the Los Angeles Times that his council is “sensitive to environmental concerns, having banned sand mining on certain beaches because of the devastation it has already caused.”

Cole also acknowledged that assessments had not been carried out anywhere in the district to determine sand mining’s environmental impact. Due to large-scale illegal sand mining operations, Cole could not provide a definite amount of sand extracted from the beaches. 

Sand theft, the unauthorized and illegal form of sand mining, has led to a worldwide non-renewable resource depletion issue, causing the permanent loss of sand and significant habitat destruction. Sand mining has already made a significant environmental impact in North Stradbroke Island and Kurnell in Australia; the Indian states of Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Goa; and the Red River in Yunnan, China. 

In the United States, the sand mining market generates slightly over $1 billion per year. The industry continues to grow annually by nearly 10% because of its use in hydrocarbon extraction. Globally, sand mining is a $70 billion industry, with sand selling for up to $90 per cubic yard. 

In Sierra Leone, sand mining operations are regulated on John Obey Beach, a village 20 miles south of the Western Area (Freetown Peninsula.) According to the Environmental Protection Agency, sand mining should be banned on all beaches apart from John Obey. However, when the police leave the beaches at 5 p.m., the mining continues after dark. 

Efforts to address the issue are hampered by conflicts of interest from those involved: miners who need the work, construction companies who need the supply and investors who are getting rich taxing the sand. Last year, a press statement from the local police force confirmed “certain service personnel appear to be aiding and abetting this illegal act.” 

As dump trucks continue to haul sand away and tides push further inland, John Obey Beach is slowly disappearing—taking trees, businesses, homes and dry land with it as far down the coast as Bureh, a surf town two miles south. While the activity contributes to Sierra Leone's coastal erosion, which is proceeding at up to 6 meters a year, the removal of sand also changes wave patterns that move sand along the coast, altering the quality of surf that Bureh, a renowned surf spot in Africa, is known for. 

Prior to the war, Sierra Leone’s beaches were packed with adventurous travelers from around the world. Kolleh Bangura, the director of Sierra Leone’s Environmental Protection Agency, told The New Humanitarian that “sand-mining is a calamity for the tourism industry… Anywhere in the world, sand is the resource of tourism, but now our beaches are being degraded.”

Lakka, a coastal town located 10 miles from Freetown, was once known for its large beaches and seaside resorts, offering a glimpse of the future if actions are not taken. Sand mining on Lakka Beach is illegal now, but the ban came too late—leaving a thin wedge of sand lined by crumbling buildings, many of which have been left abandoned. 

Even the miners themselves recognize sand mining is not sustainable; however, with a youth unemployment rate of 70%, the pressure falls on the government to provide alternative jobs. “In time, they need to ban it, as we want to bring tourism here,” Abu Bakarr, a sand miner, told The New Humanitarian. “But we need sand-mining to sustain our lives…The government needs to give us jobs. If there are no jobs, the youths will mine the sand.”

Papanie Bai-Sessay, the biodiversity officer at Conservation Society of Sierra Leone, told the Los Angeles Times that “the sand has been a buffer… we are destroying our first line of defense. If we don’t stop, it will be a disaster for millions.”


Claire Redden is a freelance journalist from Chicago, where she received her Bachelor’s of Communications from the University of Illinois. While living and studying in Paris, Claire wrote for the magazine, Toute La Culture. As a freelancer she contributes to travel guides for the up and coming brand, Thalby. She plans to take her skills to London, where she’ll pursue her Master’s of Arts and Lifestyle Journalism at the University of Arts, London College of Communication.

Zimbabwe’s Mining Ban: A Potential Empty Promise?

The government of Zimbabwe now bans mining in its national parks, but environmentalists argue that the prohibition is hardly adequate. 

An elephant at a watering hole in Zimbabwe’s Hwange National Park. BARMCD. CC BY-NC 2.0.

After mounting pressure from conservationists, Zimbabwe’s government has declared a mining ban in the country’s national parks. Reports have circulated that Chinese companies are scouting out coal mining sites in Hwange National Park, Zimbabwe’s largest national reserve. The park stretches over nearly 6,000 square miles and is home to about 50,000 of Zimbabwe’s estimated 86,000 elephants. Extensive conservation projects are conducted in the region to preserve its plethora of wildlife species, but the call to protect the elephant population has drawn the most intense focus.

The government’s new ban is the result of a case brought to the country’s High Court by the Zimbabwe Environmental Lawyers Association. The group argues that mining would destabilize the park’s biodiversity while injuring the fragile ecotourism sector. This case was first brought to the High Court after officials of Afrochine Energy and Zimbabwe Zhongxin Coal Mining Group were arrested for conducting illegal mining projects only to be released with special permission by Zimbabwe’s President. Outrage immediately ensued, and conservationists rode the wave of anger to action. 

The immense pressure on the government to implement change follows months of anger by environmentalists claiming that Chinese mining companies have already caused catastrophic damage in other regions of Zimbabwe. Environmentalists explain that the companies dump toxic waste, clogging precious dams and resulting in substantial drops in local wildlife populations. Locals also resent the presence of Chinese mining companies due to diminishing livestock populations and disrupted irrigation routes. 

Environmental groups also argue that mining will perpetuate the drought and overcrowding problems that have already killed hundreds of elephants. Local residents deal with regular poaching disputes and rely heavily on income from ecotourism; so, many fear that failure to hold off Chinese mining companies could cause  economic damage and increased levels of conflict. Furthermore, many Zimbabweans believe that mining in Hwange is only one piece of the bigger picture. Gold and diamond mining sites pepper other parts of the nation, causing equal degrees of environmental destruction to the over 1,000 species of animals that roam the country.

Tusks removed from a poached elephant. Sokwanele. CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

For now, it seems that the government of Zimbabwe has yielded to the demands of conservation groups, but environmentalists appear far from satisfied. The government says that it is canceling current mining titles, but conservationists are doubtful that this is enough. Shamiso Mtisi, deputy director of the Zimbabwe Environmental Lawyers Association, states that the group is demanding an interdict, which is a legally binding prohibition. Pressure on the government to act quickly increased significantly in the past week as 11 young elephants died due to an unknown bacterial infection. Investigations are now proceeding to determine the cause of the elephants’ deaths, and whether poisoning may be linked to nearby mining activity. 

Although the High Court’s verdict is already known, but whether or not Zimbabwe’s government will take the necessary steps to save the country’s natural and economic resources remains a mystery.

Ella Nguyen

is an undergraduate student at Vassar College pursuing a degree in Hispanic Studies. She wants to assist in the field of immigration law and hopes to utilize Spanish in her future projects. In her free time she enjoys cooking, writing poetry, and learning about cosmetics.

The Amazon Rainforest Was and Still Is On Fire

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the dangers that threaten the Amazon rainforest

The Amazon rainforest during “fire season.” diversityphotos. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

There are a multitude of dangers ranging from climate change to human destruction that threaten the fragility of the Amazon rainforest. The destruction of the Amazon is largely attributed to consumerism and the extraction of natural resources. Without the existence of the Amazon, the world loses a crucial contender in the fight against climate change along with the likely deaths of many Indignenous people and already endangered species.

Reports from Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research recorded 2,248 fires last month, a 13-year high and a 20% increase over the norm. Last year around this time, there were about 1,880 fires. However, the worst is likely yet to come as burnings in the Amazon tend to increase until September, the end of “fire season.” 

In 2019, the greatest destruction of the fires correlated with the peak of fire season. The increase in the number of fires was likely fueled by President Jair Bolsonaro’s decision to decrease the fines for environmental violations. It gave more leeway for commercial groups and loggers to disregard regulations that help preserve the Amazon. Bolsonaro has been nicknamed “Captain Chainsaw” for his policies that prioritize development over conservation. In an interview, Bolsonaro stated that “the Amazon belongs to Brazil,” so it can do as it wishes with it. As a result, it was estimated last year that every minute, a portion of the Amazon equal to the size of a soccer field was lost due to deforestation

The process of deforestation results from loggers trying to clear land as quickly as possible. That includes the use of chainsaws to cut down lumber for manufacturing and development. Then, farmers burn the downed trees that remain to make room for crops and pastures. Fire season, then,is the mark of when farmers begin to set these fires. It is important to acknowledge this is not a new practice, but an unending cycle of extracting from the land without replenishing it. 

Another sign of deforestation in the Amazon. rosamariavidal. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

A similar phenomenon is occurring this year due to the lack of authority in the Amazon. Just as with last year, many of the fires started so far have been due to illegal loggers. For instance, in the first four months of 2020, deforestation rose by 55% due to a lack of governmental enforcement as Brazil’s attention focused on combating COVID-19.

The spread of COVID-19 also caused many activists and field agents to pull out of the region. As a consequence of the lack of protection by field agents and thin numbers of police, loggers and miners have been able to overtake the Amazon. To show the magnitude of this problem, April’s extent of deforestation was 64% higher than that in April 2019

Due to international outcry last year over the fires, President Bolsonaro was forced to deploy enforcement to help monitor the fires and enforce regulations. Most new enforcement agents were unable to be deployed for this year’s fire season, though, due to COVID-19. And to make matters worse, the authority of troops currently in the Amazon expired on June 10, so there is currently no one monitoring fire conditions. 

Eva Ashbaugh

is a Political Science and Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies double major at the University of Pittsburgh. As a political science major concentrating on International Relations, she is passionate about human rights, foreign policy, and fighting for equality. She hopes to one day travel and help educate people to make the world a better place.