data/datasets/onu/Chapter_23.txt

Chapter 23. Offshore Mining Industries
Contributors: Elaine Baker (Lead member and Convenor of Writing Team) Francoise Gaill, Aristomenis P. Karageorgis, Geoffroy Lamarche Bhavani Narayanaswamy, Joanna Parr, Clodette Raharimananirina, Ricardo Santos Rahul Sharma, Joshua Tuhumwire (Co-Lead member)
Consultors: James Kelley, Nadine Le Bris, Eddy Rasolomanana, Alex Rogers Mark Shrimpton
1. Introduction
Marine mining has occurred for many years, with most commercial venture focusing on aggregates, diamonds, tin, magnesium, salt, sulphur, gold, and heav minerals. Activities have generally been confined to the shallow near shore (les than 50 m water depth), but the industry is evolving and mining in deeper wate looks set to proceed, with phosphate, massive sulphide deposits, manganes nodules and cobalt-rich crusts regarded as potential future prospects.
Seabed mining is a relatively small industry with only a fraction of the know deposits of marine minerals (Figure 1) currently being exploited. In comparison terrestrial mining is a major industry in many countries (estimated to be worth i excess of 700 billion United States dollars per year, PWC, 2013). Pressure on land based resources may spur marine mining, especially deep seabed mining. However global concerns about the impacts of deep seabed mining have been escalating an may influence the development of the industry (Roche and Bice, 2013).
The exploitation of marine mineral resources is regulated on a number of levels global, regional and national. At the global level, the most important applicabl instrument is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). It i complemented by other global and regional instruments. At the national level legislation governing the main marine extractive industries (i.e. aggregate mining may be extremely complex and governed in part by national or subnationa authorities (Radzevicius et al., 2010). As regards national legislation to regulat deep-sea mining, terrestrial mining legislation often applies to the continental shel or EEZ, rather than specific deep-sea mining legislation (EU, 2014). However man Pacific Islands States, that are gearing up for deep seabed mining have mad significant efforts to adopt concise and comprehensive domestic laws (SPC, 2014).
© 2016 United Nation 

>
ic CF Ofer  = Tees.”  F5e4 ms
ms ce ATLANTIC OCEA us
w oP . Red\ y ——
‘a>  L M Sze a lg pura? Tmze Sum.
u 5 x INDIAN OCEA a: onnnets
PACIFIC | OCEA EQUATOR
Coretta?
PLATE BOUND (GEOTHERMAL PO Divergent
~~ Convergent
Transform faults not shown
ARIE Pa TENTIAL)
~A ws
As SILVER ©» LIME MUD, SAND, SHELLS Hs. MERCURY mw NICKEL SILICEOUS SAND, UNCONSOLIDATED DEPOSIT A BAUXITE ¢r CHROMITE POTASH sm PHOSPHORITE er © UNDEVELOPE so Ti
av GOLD cu COPPER ™ MONAZITE Pt PLATINUM © DEVELOPE THORIUM
82 BARITE © DIAMONDS Ms MASSIVE nee RARE EARTH CONSOLIDATED DEPOSITS.
SULFIDES ELEMENTS IUMENITE, RUTILE 1D _UNDEVELOPE “4 MAGNESIUM «SALT URANIU FRESH WATE ZIRCON
© COAL Fe IRON, MAGNETIT co COBALT-RICH  @ GEMS
fe, FERROMANG- MANGANES " ANESE CRUST NODULES
@ DEVELOPE s SULFUR
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 1. Global distribution of known marine mineral resources (from Rona, 2008).
2. Scale and significance of seabed mining
2.1 Sand and gravel extraction
Aggregates are currently the most mined materials in the marine environment an demand for them is growing (Bide and Mankelow, 2014). Due to the low value of th product, most marine aggregate extractions are carried out at short distances fro landing ports close to the consumer base and at water depths of less than 50  (UNEP, 2014).
In Europe, offshore sand and gravel mining is an established industry in Denmark France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom of Great Britain an Northern Ireland (Earney, 2005). Marine aggregates are also mined in the tida channels of the Yellow River China, the west coast of the Republic of Korea, tida channels between the islands south of Singapore and in a range of settings in th waters surrounding Hong Kong, China (James et al 1999). In many of the Pacifi Islands States, aggregates for building are in short supply and the mining o terrestrial sources, principally beaches, has been associated with major increases i coastal vulnerability (e.g. impacts of beach mining in Kiribati and the Marshall Island are well documented (Webb 2005, McKenzie et al 2006). Therefore, marine source of aggregates are considered as a preferred source. The Secretariat of the Pacifi Islands Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), now part of the Secretariat of th Pacific Community, has been involved in assisting Pacific Island States in the
© 2016 United Nations  

planning, development and management of sand and gravel resources, (SOPAC 2007).
Although globally the majority of the demand for aggregates is met by aggregate extracted from land-based sources, the marine-based industry is expanding (JNCC 2014). However, no figures are available on the global scale of marine aggregat mining.
2.1.1 Case Study: North-East Atlantic
The Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marine Sediments (WGEXT) of th International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) has provided yearl statistics since 1986 on marine aggregate production (ICES 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 2011, 2012, 2013; Sutton and Boyd, 2009; Velegrakis et al., 2010). Since 1995, a average of 56 million m® y* has been extracted from the seabed of the North-Eas Atlantic (Figure 2). Five countries account for 93 per cent of the total marin aggregate extraction (Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the Unite Kingdom; OSPAR, 2009). The Netherlands is the largest producer (average 27. million m? y*). There are thirteen landing ports and 17 specialist wharves in Europ (Belgium, France and the Netherlands; Highley et al., 2007).
Total Aggregate Extraction
56
Millions Cubic Metre    ro g
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 #2005 2006 2007
Figure 2. Total marine aggregate extraction in the OSPAR maritime area (in million m’). Data from ICES, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 (OSPAR 2009).
The United Kingdom, one of the largest producers of marine aggregates in th region, currently extracts approximately 20 million tons of marine aggregate (san and gravel) per year from offshore sites (Figure 3). Production meets around 20 pe cent of the demand in England and Wales (Crown Estate, 2013). Around 85 per cen of the mined aggregate is used for concrete, with the remainder used for beac nourishment and reclamation. In 2010, the area of seabed dredged was 105.4 km’,
© 2016 United Nation 

although 90 per cent of dredging effort was confined to just 37.63 km’. Betwee 1998 and 2007, aggregate extraction produced a dredge footprint of 620 km (BMAPA, 2014). In 2012, 23 dredging vessels were operating (BMAPA, 2014) an aggregates were landed at 68 wharves in 45 ports in England and Wales. Wharve are mainly located in specific regions where a shortfall in land-derived supplies exist and/or there are economic advantages because of river access and proximity to th market (Highley et al., 2007).
oe
UK and Continental Aggregat Dredging Areas
Ml UK Dredging Areas
Xl Continental Dredging Areas
 OUNOALK
 SF
\
oust HARLINGEN
wewic °
BELGIUM
FRANCE
 HONFLEUR
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 3. Map of the coastline showing the location of aggregate license areas in the United Kingdo and the adjacent coast of continental Europe (Newell and Woodcock, 2013).
The European Union Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD: 2008/56/EC requires that its Member States take measures to achieve or maintain Goo Environmental Status (GES) by 2020. The Descriptor 6 of the MSFD, referred to a “Sea-floor integrity”, is closely linked to marine aggregate extraction from th seabed — seafloor integrity is defined as a level that ensures that the structure an functions of the ecosystems are safeguarded and benthic ecosystems, in particular are not adversely affected (Rice et al., 2010). Descriptor 6 requires immediat actions from Member States to develop suitable pressure indicators (calculated fro several parameters such as the species diversity, the number of species and th proportion of different types of species in benthic invertebrate samples) and launc continuous monitoring schemes to contribute to GES achievement.
© 2016 United Nation 

2.1.2 Case Study: Pacific Islands - Kiribati
The adverse effects of sand mining on the beaches (above the high water mark) o South Tarawa, the main island of Kiribati, were recognized in the 1980s. Removal o the beach sand changes the shape of the beach, increasing erosion and the island’ vulnerability to flooding from storm surges and rising sea level. As a consequence o ongoing beach mining, the EU-funded Environmentally Safe Aggregate Project fo Tarawa (ESAT) was started in 2008. A purpose-built dredge vessel, the “M Tekimarawa” was commissioned and a State-owned dredging company wa developed to provide marine aggregates for urban construction. The mined materia is processed by local people at a processing facility, used on the island for buildin material and also sold to other islands. The resource area in Tarawa Lagoon (Figur 4), which is currently being mined for coarse sand and gravel, is expected to provid aggregates for 50 to 70 years. ESAT also has a license to excavate access channels o the intertidal reef flats in Beito and Bonriki. This provides fine intertidal silt suitabl for road base.
The introduction of marine mining in Tarawa Lagoon has not stopped illegal beac mining. Reviews have found that controlling beach mining by communities i difficult, and that trying to regulate this practice in the absence of a suitabl alternative source of revenue is next to impossible (Babinard et al., 2014).
The shoreline and beach profile in South Tarawa has been severely altered, with th almost complete removal of the high protective berm. Mining has now moved on t other untouched beaches. It is estimated that natural recovery of damaged area will take decades (SOPAC, 2013).
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 4. Tarawa Atoll. ESAT resource area in yellow (50-70 year supply). The dot is larger than th absolute maximum surface area that could be mined in any given year (SOPAC, 2013, Figure courtes Dr. Arthur Webb).
© 2016 United Nation 

2.2 Placer mining
Placer deposits include minerals that have been concentrated by physical processes such as waves, wind and currents. Globally, diamonds dominate this sector, bu placer deposits also contain valuable minerals. Harben and Bates (1990) identify th most economically important of these minerals (and their associated elements) as cassiterite (tin), ilmenite (titanium), rutile (titanium), zircon (zirconium), chromit (chromium), monazite (thorium), magnetite (iron), gold and diamonds. About 75 pe cent of the world’s tin, 11 per cent of gold, and 13 per cent of platinum are extracte from placers (Daesslé and Fischer, 2013).
Table 1. Principal marine placer mining activities (from Murton, 2000)
Placer Minerals Mined locations
Rutile and ilmenite South-east and south-west Australi Eastern South Africa
South India
Mozambique
Senegal
Brazil
Florida
Titanium-rich magnetite North Island, New Zealan Java, Indonesi Luzon, Philippines
Hokkaido, Japan
Tin Indonesian Sunda shelf, extending fro the islands of Bangka, Belitung, an Kundur
Malaysi Thailand
Diamonds West Coast, South Afric Namibia
Northern Australia
Diamond placer deposits exist in two distinct areas: a 700-km stretch along th coastal borders of Namibia and South Africa, and an area off the northern coast o Australia (Rona, 2005). Deposits off the coast of South Africa have not been activel mined since 2010 (De Beers, 2012) and Australian operations have not progressed
© 2016 United Nations

since discovery. Offshore of Namibia, five vessels operated by NAMDEB (a join partnership between the Namibian government and De Beers) currently extrac approximately 1 million carats/year (De Beers, 2007; 2012). In addition there ar diver operated mining activities conducted from smaller vessels. A report from Th World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) South Africa (Currie et al., 2008) identified  number of environmental concerns associated with offshore diamond mining. Thes included destruction of kelp beds, which provide important habitat for juvenile roc lobsters and the destruction of healthy reefs during the removal of diamondiferou gravels. The authors also suggested that the dumping of tailings back into the ocea or onto the beach (after processing) could also potentially result in the formation o land bridges from some islands to the mainland in the vicinity of islands.
Dredging of tin placers is the largest marine metal mining operation in the worl (Scott, 2011). The tin belt, as it is called, stretches from Myanmar, down throug Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. The largest operations are offshore o Indonesia, where submerged and buried fluvial and alluvial fan deposits are mine up to 70 meters below sea level, using large dredgers. P.T. TIMAH, a state-owne enterprise, operates the official tin mine offshore of Bangka and Belitung islands Their dredges can recover more than 3.5 million cubic meters of material per mont (Timah, 2014). Numerous “informal miners” also dredge in the shallow coastal are (see Figure 5). These operations use divers to suck sediment from the seafloor usin plastic tubing connected to a diesel pump (which also pumps air to the divers). Th Indonesian islands produce 90 per cent of Indonesia's tin, and Indonesia is th world's second-largest exporter of the metal.
Commercial production of tin began in Thailand in the late 1800s. Most of th offshore tin is located off the Malay Peninsula. The major offshore mining operation ceased in 1985 when the tin price collapsed. Prior to that, large-scale operation were located in the Andaman Sea and the Gulf of Siam (now Gulf of Thailand). Th Thaisarco tin smelter in Phuket processes tin from inside and outside Thailand. Whil most of the Thai-sourced tin originates from land-based deposits, a number o privately owned suction boats still work the near shore during the dry season;  typical boat can recover about 15 kg of cassiterite ore per day.
Gold placer deposits along the Gulf of Alaska of the United States of America coas have been worked since 1898. The gold is recovered from sands exposed at low tide but the gold-bearing sands extend for approximately 5 km offshore to water depth of 20 m (Jewett et al., 1999). The deposit was most recently actively mined fro 1987 to 1990, when the lease was terminated. During that period, 3,673 kg of gol were recovered (Garnett, 2000). The Placer Marine Mining Company purchased a offshore lease at Nome from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources in 2011 The AngloGold-De Beers partnership also has an offshore lease and has investe several million US dollars in exploration and baseline studies. They are hoping t have the required permits in place to begin mining by 2017. There are also a numbe of individual leases, and due to interest from the general public in shallow wate gold mining, the Alaska Department of Natural Resources has also established tw recreational mining areas offshore of Nome.
© 2016 United Nation 

Figure 5. Homemade dredges operating offshore Bangka Island Indonesia (Photo Rachel Kent, Th Forest Trust).
2.2.1. Case Study: New Zealand
Iron sands constitute a very large potential resource in New Zealand. Iron sand occur extensively in the coastal zone, and exploration off the west coast of the Nort Island of New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone has identified potential resource concentrated on the continental shelf. In 2014, following an exploration phase Trans-Tasman Resources Limited (TTR) was granted a 20-year mineral mining permi by the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment for th extraction of iron sand from the South Taranaki Bight (Figure 6). This permit is th first step in a regulatory process that may allow the company to extract iron san over a 66-km? area of seabed located in water depths of between 20-42 m, up to 3 km offshore. It is estimated that 50 million tons per year of sand could be extracte from the seabed (TTR, 2015). It may still take several years before minin commences and, in addition, the company also needs to obtain consent from th New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals branch of the Environmental Protectio Authority (EPA) before any mining can begin (NZ Petroleum and Minerals, 2014). A the time of publication of this report, the decision-making Committee appointed b the EPA has refused to grant the mining consent to TTR (NZ EPA, 2015). The reaso for this decision is related in part to the uncertainties about the scope an significance of the potential adverse environmental effects.
© 2016 United Nation 

lronSand | Concentration |}
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 6. Surficial concentrations of iron sand along the west coast of the North Island of New Zealan (Taranaki region) (modified from Carter, 1980, Taylor & Francis, Ltd., www.tandfonline.com).
2.3 Sulphur mining
Sulphur is used in manufacturing and agriculture. Most is produced onshore, bu native sulphur is associated with offshore salt domes in the Gulf of Mexico. On offshore mine, the Main Pass 299 facility, located in shallow water off centra Louisiana, United States, was operational until 2000 (Kyle, 2002). The sulphur wa extracted by the Frasch system, which uses the injection of superheated wate through boreholes to melt the sulphur, which is then forced to the surface b compressed air (Ober, 1995). The mine facility is one of the largest platfor configurations in the Gulf, with 18 platforms. However, it is unlikely that the min will resume operations in the near future, due to a glut in the supply of sulphur. Thi over-supply stems from the fact that sulphur is now extracted in environmenta control systems and petroleum refining, which account for 55 per cent of the worl sulphur production.
© 2016 United Nation 

3. Significant environmental, economic and/or social aspects in relation t offshore mining industries
3.1 Environmental Impacts
The current shallow-water seabed mining activities all employ dredging systems t excavate material from the seabed. Dredging techniques vary depending on th nature of the material being mined. They include: a plain suction dredge, whic vacuums up unconsolidated material; a rotary cutter dredge, which has a cuttin tool at the suction inlet to dislodge more consolidated material; and bucket dredges which drag a bucket along the sea floor. In marine mining, the dredged material i generally placed into an onboard hopper and excess water and tailings ar discharged back into the environment.
Environmental impacts include physical alteration of the benthic environment an underwater cultural heritage. Table 2 summaries the environmental impact associated with aggregate mining, which are potentially applicable to all types o shallow water marine mining. Examples of documented impacts are listed in Table 3 The most immediate impacts relate to sediment removal resulting in loss of benthi communities. The removal of the sediment may also affect (re) colonization an recovery rates of impacted communities (Tillin et al., 2011). Most studies on th impact of dredging on marine benthos show that dredging can result in a 30-70 pe cent reduction in species variety, a 40-95 per cent reduction in the number o individuals, and a similar reduction in biomass in dredged areas (Newell et al., 1998).
In addition to removal, sediment disturbance can expose marine organisms t increased turbidity and elevated suspended sediment concentrations. This ca reduce light availability, which can impact photosynthetic organisms lik phytoplankton. Tides and currents can spread turbidity plumes and sedimen beyond the mine area. This can be accompanied by changes in water chemistry an contamination (such as algal spores, and from formerly buried substances).
Changes in hydrodynamic processes and seabed geomorphology can also occur. Fo example, trailer suction dredging, a common form of aggregate dredging, involve dragging the dredge slowly along the seabed, resulting in furrows that are up to 2- m wide and 0.5 m deep. These furrows can persist, depending on the local curren regime and mobility of the sediments (Newell and Woodcock, 2013). Static suctio dredges are employed at sites where deposits are thick and can result in th formation of large pits. Hitchcock and Bell (2004 and references therein) reporte that pits within gravelly substrates may fill very slowly and persist after several years whereas pits in channels with high current velocities have been observed to fil within one year, and those in intertidal watersheds can take 5-10 years to fill.
The European SANDPIT project (Van Rijn et al 2005) aimed to develop reliabl techniques to predict the morphological behaviour of large-scale sand minin pits/areas and to understand associated sediment transport processes (Idier et al. 2010). In the study, a baseline pit, based on an actual Dutch pit, was defined as a inverted truncated pyramid 10 m below the seabed, with dimensions at the seabed
© 2016 United Nations
1 

of 500m x1300m, an excavated volume of 3.5Mm}, and located 1.5km from shore a a water depth of 10m (Soulsby et al., 2005). Modelling results using this baseline pi indicate that, for example, there could be a reduction of current speed of up to 1 per cent in the pit; an increase in wave height in the centre of the pit of 1-5 per cent increasing to 10-15 per cent in the areas surrounding the pit; a reduction o sediment transport in the centre of the pit by 40-90 per cent and an increase of 70 200 per cent outside the pit (Soulsby et al., 2005).
Changes in sediment grain size composition can also occur. For example, diamon mining on the continental shelf of Namibia in 130 m depth was shown to hav altered the surficial sediments in a mined area, from previously predominantl homogenous well-sorted sediment, to a more heterogeneous mud, coarse sand an gravel. This is because, as part of the on-board processing, cobbles, pebbles an tailings are discarded over the side (Rogers and Li, 2002). Long-term or permanen changes in grain size characteristics of sediments will affect other factors such a organic content, pore-water chemistry, and microbe abundance and compositio (Anderson, 2008).
Less well-documented potential impacts include underwater noise. A review b Thomsen et al. (2009) summarized information on the potential risks from dredgin noise. They noted that dredging produces broadband and continuous low frequenc sound, that studies indicate that dredging can trigger avoidance reaction in marin mammals, and that marine fish can detect dredging noise over considerabl distances. They report that the sparse data available indicates that dredging is not a noisy as seismic surveys, pile driving and sonar; but it is louder than most shipping operating offshore wind turbines and drilling, and should be considered as a mediu impact activity. Marine fauna and birds may collide with or become entangled i operating vessels, but this potential impact is also not well studied. Todd et al (2015 noted that collisions with marine mammals are possible, but unlikely, given the slo speed of dredgers.
Because most marine mining currently occurs close to shore there has bee considerable concern regarding the potential impact of mining on archaeologica sites. Mining activities, particularly aggregate dredging, has been shown t irreversibly damage underwater cultural heritage, including shipwrecks, airplan crash sites and submerged prehistoric sites (Firth, 2006). Individual States, such a the United States have prepared recommendations and guidelines to avoid dredgin impacts on cultural sites (Michel et al., 2004). These include improved location o cultural sites using remote sensing technology, the establishment of buffer zone around known sites, and preparation of plans to preserve resources and subsequen monitoring of dredging activity. Government policies in the United Kingdom o marine mineral extraction from the seabed off the coast of England are set out i Marine Minerals Guidance Note 1 (MMG 1; Wenban-Smith, 2002). The MMG  states that all applications for dredging in previously undredged areas require a environmental impact assessment. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, whic approves applications, can request the applicant to provide information relating t potential impacts to archaeological heritage and landscape and provide informatio on the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and where possible offset an significant adverse effects. A review by Firth (2013) of marine archaeology in the
© 2016 United Nations
1 

United Kingdom recommends that thorough exploration of cultural sites, t constrain their area, may be more cost effective than blanket buffer zones, whic can disrupt dredging activity.
Table 2. Spatial and tem
the confidence associated with the evidence (from Tillin et al 2011).
poral scale of the main effects arising from aggregate extraction activities and
Effects arising fro aggregat extractio activities
Spatial Scale o Effect
Temporal Scale o Effect
Confidence i Evidence
Direct Impacts:
Removal o aggregates:
Impacts on benthi marine organism and seabe morphology Confined t footprint o extraction: th active dredge zone.
Recovery ma begin afte cessation o activity.
Good evidence fo impacts on seabe habitats an biologica assemblage (Newell et al 2004).
Direct Impacts:
Removal o aggregates:
Impacts on cultura heritage an archaeology
May be permanen and irreversible
Good evidence fo impacts (Michel e al., 2004)
Direct Impacts:
Formation o sediment plumes
From 300-500m fo sand particl deposition to 3k where particles ar remobilised b local hydrodynami conditions
Longevity o sediment plumes up to 4-5 tida excursions for fin particles (MALS 2009)
Confidence i understanding o sediment plum has been assesse as high (MALS 2009)
Indirect Impacts:
Visual Disturbance
May affect seabird and marin mammals, spatia extent of effec depends on visua acuity of organis and response.
Confined to perio of extractio activities
Little evidence unlikely to b different fro other forms of
shipping.
Indirect Impacts:
Noise Disturbance
Changes in nois levels detectabl up to several km Behavioura responses likely t occur over muc more limite distances and little
Confined to perio of extractio activities
Evidence of hearin thresholds onl available for a fe species (Cefa 2009).
© 2016 United Nations
1 

risk of hearin damage.
Indirect Impacts:
Collision Risk
Confined to activit footprint
Confined to perio of extractio activities
Little evidence unlikely to b different fro other forms of
shipping Indirect Impacts: From 300-500m for | Heaviest particles High (fro Sediment sand particle settle almost modelling studie deposition deposition to 3km__| immediately, and direct
where particles ar remobilised b local hydrodynamic
lightest particle will settle within  tidal excursion (a
observations at  number of sites).
conditions. tidal cycle of eb and flood) (Cefas
2009).
The scale of impacts will vary depending on the method and intensity of dredging level of screening (for example in aggregate mining screening may be employed t alter the sand to gravel ratio, in which case significant quantities of sediment typically unwanted fine sediment particles, can be returned to the seabed), sedimen type and local hydrodynamics (Newell and Woodcock, 2013).
Physical and biological impacts (e.g. smothering leading to death or impaire function) may persist well after the mining finishes. Recovery times are likely to var greatly and be species dependent (Foden et al., 2009). Cumulative impacts such a climate change and other anthropogenic activities may also affect recovery timing.
Some of the mitigation measures now used with dredging operations include — The use of silt curtains to contain dredge plumes — The return of overflow waste to the seabed rather than in the water column;
— Locating mining activities away from known migratory pathways and calving o feeding grounds;
— Limiting the number of vessels or operations in given areas — Requiring reduced boat speeds in areas likely to support marine mammals;
—Engineering to reduce the noise of the primary recovery and ore-lif operations;
— Limiting unnecessary use of platform and vessel flood lights at night an ensuring that those that are required are directed approximately verticall onto work surfaces to avoid or mitigate seabird strikes;
© 2016 United Nations
1 

—Leaving patches within a mining site un-mined to increase the rate o recolonization and recovery of benthic fauna;
— Excluding areas from mining if they support unique populations of marine life;
— Excluding areas of mining if they are potential sites of cultural heritage;
— Depositing tailings within as small an area as possible surrounding the minin block, or onshore; and
— Avoiding the need for re-mining areas by mining target areas to completio during initial mining.
Table 3. Documented environmental impacts of offshore mining
Mining activity Location Impact Referenc Shell and sand Owen Anchorage, Dredging in shallow near-shore Walker et al. extraction south-west of waters associated with significant 2001
Fremantle, Wester Australia
conservation values, e.g. seagrass, coral communities adverse effects on marine habitat due to direct seabed disturbanc and indirect effects, such a elevated turbidity levels. Othe concerns include changes in near shore wave and curren conditions, which could affec shipping movements an seabed/shoreline stability
Sand and grave extraction
European Union
Loss of abundance, specie diversity and biomass of th benthic community in the dredge area. Similar effects from turbidit and resuspension of sedimen over a wide area. Benthic impac is a key concern where dredgin activities may impinge on habitat or species classified as threatene or in decline (such as Maerl o Sabellaria reefs).
OSPAR, 2009
Sand and grave extraction
Dieppe, France
10-year monitoring programm revealed a change in substrat from gravel and coarse sand t fine sand in the dredged area. Th maximum impact on benthi macrofauna was a reduction by 8 per cent in species richness and 9 per cent in both abundance an biomass. In the surrounding area the impact was almost as severe Following cessation of dredging species richness was fully restore after 16 months, but densities an biomass were still 40 per cent and
Desprez, 2000
© 2016 United Nations
1 

25 per cent, respectively, lowe than in reference stations after 2 months. The community structur differed from the initial one corresponding to the new type o sediment.
Sand and grave extraction
United States o America
Comprehensive review of impact from dredging operation identifying the most sever effects: entrainment of benthi organisms; destruction o essential habitat; increase turbidity affecting sensitive faun like corals and suspension-feedin organisms.
Michel et al. 2013
Sand and grave extraction
Moreton Bay Australia
Alteration of the existing tida delta morphology by the remova of a small area of shallow banks In most cases, the prevailin sediment transport processe would result in a gradual infill o extraction sites.
Fesl, 2005
Sand and grave extraction
Puck Bay, Souther Baltic Sea
Benthic re-colonization at a sit formed by sand extraction wa investigated some 10 years after th cessation of dredging. The examine post-dredging pit is one of five dee (up to 14 m) pits created with  static suction hopper on the sandy flat and shallow (1-2 m) part of th inner Puck Bay (the southern Balti Sea). Organic matter was found t accumulate in the pit, resulting i anaerobic conditions and hydroge sulfide formation. Macrofauna wa absent from the deepest part of th pit and re-colonization by pre mining benthic fauna wa considered unlikely.
Szymelfenig e al., 2006
Diamond mining
Benguela Region Africa (offshore o Namibia and Sout Africa)
Cumulative impacts of seabe diamond mining assessed ove time and as a combination o numerous operations. Four to 1 years for benthic recovery biodiversity altered in favour o filter feeders and algae, resultin in decreased biodiversity bu increased biomass.
Pulfrich et al. 2003; Pulfric and Branch 2014
Diamond mining
Offshore Namibia Orange Delta
Changes in surficial sedimen grain size composition fro unimodal to polymodal, wit increased coarse sand and gravel.
Rogers and Li 2002
Tin mining
Bangka-
Hundreds of makeshift pontoons
IDH, 2013
© 2016 United Nations
1 

Belitung Province operate alongside a fleet of 5 Indonesia dredgers belonging to P.T. TIMAH The island coastline has bee altered by tailing dumps, and up t 70 per cent of coastal
ecosystems, particularly coral, sea grass and mangroves, are
degraded Gold mining Norton Sound, Mining with a bucket-line dredge Jewett et al. northeastern Bering occurred near shore in 9 to 20 m 199 Sea, United States. during June to November 1986 to
1990. Sampling a year after minin ceased indicated that benthi macrofaunal community parameter (total abundance, bio- mass diversity) and abundance o dominant families were significantl reduced at mined stations
Several studies have looked at the restoration of seabed habitat after mining activit (e.g., Cooper et al., 2013, Kilbride et al., 2006, Boyd et al., 2004). In the OSPA region, where damage to protected species and habitat occurs, restoration i identified within the obligations of the Convention for the Protection of the Marin Environment of the North-East Atlantic, various European directives, and in variou United Kingdom marine policy documents, (Cooper et al., 2013). A study on seabe restoration identified three issues central to decisions about whether to attemp restoration following marine aggregate dredging. They include: (i) necessity (e.g.  clear scientific rationale for intervention and/or a policy/legislative requirement), (ii technical feasibility (i.e. whether it is possible to restore the impacts), and (iii whether is it affordable (Cooper et al., 2013).
A recent study of the Thames Estuary, United Kingdom, an area of aggregat extraction, used the estimated value of ecosystem goods and services to determin if seabed restoration was justifiable in terms of costs and benefits; they conclude that in this case it was not (Cooper et al., 2013). The proposed restoration involve levelling the seabed and restoring the sediment character for an estimated cost o over 1 million British pounds. In order to determine if this expenditure could b justified, the authors assessed the significance of the persistent impacts on th ecosystem goods and services and the cost and likelihood of successful restoration While the site-specific cost benefit analysis precluded restoration, they suggest tha the approach taken could be used at other sites to determine if restoration i practical and effective.
In the United Kingdom a research fund, (the Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund), wa established in 2002 and ran until March 2011, using revenue from the Aggregate Levy introduced in 2002 - a tax of 2.00 British pounds per ton on primary aggregat sales (including land- and marine-derived aggregates; Newell and Woodcock, 2013) There was intense public criticism when the Fund was discontinued in 2011, a previously 7 per cent of the Fund had been directed to communities, non-
© 2016 United Nations
1 

governmental organizations and other stakeholders to fund projects deliverin conservation, local community and other sustainability benefits (e.g., BBC 2011 MPA 2011). Cooper et al., 2013 also suggest that the fund could have been used t finance seabed restoration projects.
3.2 Social impacts
Social impacts of offshore mining are likely to be complex and different an generally less than that for terrestrial mining (Roche and Bice, 2013). Table 4 detail potential social impacts from offshore mining. In countries where offshore mining i relatively new and untested (like Australia), societal expectations set highe standards for its acceptance, particularly with regard to environmental protectio and strengthening of the national economy (Mason et al., 2014).
Table 4. Positive and negative potential social impacts identified (after Tillin et al, 2011; Roche an Bice, 2013)
Impact Effect
Environmental Loss of ecosystem services that negatively affects livelihoods degradation
Provision of For coastal defence and beach replenishment.
material
Revenue Revenue to industry, government and community; Foreign exchang earner.
Reduced Avoidance of social impacts for resource extraction on land, including
pressure on land | competing resources, community relocations based resources
Employment Employment for local community, accompanied by influx of people t new industry; particularly for small island communities.
Cultural impacts | Loss of cultural sites; changes/loss in resource distribution (food territory, etc.); ignoring of/loss of traditional knowledge.
Governance and_ | New regulatory regimes; implementation of policy; social an policy environmental degradation can lead to conflict.
Regional initiatives, targeted at developing a holistic approach to decision-making that incorporate social, environmental and economic evaluation and stakeholde engagement, are outlined in Table 5. In some areas, such as the Pacific Island region, emphasis is on making informed decisions about deep-sea mining. Countrie which decide to engage in deep sea mining can obtain assistance from th Secretariat of the Pacific Community to develop national regulatory framework (offshore national policy, legislation and regulations) in close collaboration with al key stakeholders and in particular, local communities (SPC-EU, 2012). Elsewhere, th framework is focused more on the sustainable management of the marin environment, including non-living resources, and includes ecosystem-based
© 2016 United Nations
1 

approaches and valuation of ecosystem services affected by human activity. Fo example the European Union Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008) advocate a transition from a sector-specific policy landscape to a system-based one, in whic activities are regulated in concert, based on shared space and time acros boundaries. Uncertainty remains, however, about how to value coastal assets an quantitatively measure social impact (Beaumont et al., 2007).
Awareness is increasing of the potential social impacts of marine and coasta extractive mineral industries, such as coastal dredging for aggregates and beach re nourishment schemes (e.g., Austen et al., 2009; Drucker et al., 2004). Strong publi sentiments about environmental and social issues already exist around land-base mining (e.g., Mudd, 2010). However, there is currently not the same level o understanding and informed debate around offshore mining (Mason et al., 2014). A offshore mining becomes more commonplace, information and data on the marin environment and impacts will be collected, and it is important that this informatio is disseminated to stakeholders. It is worth noting that the value of stakeholde participation in developing and implementing policy was included in Principle 10 o the Rio Declaration, which states that: “environmental issues are best handled wit the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level...”
Studies suggest that for an informed society to accept a nascent offshore minin industry, stakeholders require: better information (particularly rigorous scientifi analysis of potential impacts, costs and benefits); a transparent and sociall responsive management process within a consistent and efficient regulatory regime and meaningful engagement with stakeholders (Boughen et al., 2010; Mason et al. 2010).
© 2016 United Nations
1 

Table 5. Relevant regional and national initiatives
Initiative
European MSFD (2008): “Directive 2008/56/EC on establishing a framework fo Union community action in the field of marine environmental policy”
This directive provides a transparent legislative framework for a ecosystem-based approach to the management of human activities supports the sustainable use of marine goods and services; an integrates the value of marine ecosystem services into decision
making United Marine Environment Protection Fund 2010: Framework to allo Kingdom marine aggregates extraction options to be analysed using socio-
economic information. The framework analyses the interaction between different uses of the marine environment at both local an regional levels (Dickie et al., 2010)
Pacific SPC-EU DSM Project (2011-2016): Technical assistance and advisor Islands service for Pacific Island countries choosing to engage in deep se mining to help them improve governance and management i accordance with international law, with particular attention to th protection of the marine environment and securing equitable financia arrangements for their people.
United Executive Order 13547- Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and th States Great Lakes. The Order adopts the recommendations of th Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, except where otherwise provide in this Order, and directs executive agencies to implement thos recommendations under the guidance of a National Ocean Council Based on those recommendations, this Order establishes a nationa policy to ensure, amongst other things, the protection, maintenance and restoration of the health of ocean and coastal ecosystems an resources.
3.2.1 Case Study: Kiribati
A recent study by Babinard et al. (2014) examined the potential social impacts o offshore aggregate mining in South Tarawa (see section 2.1.3). The author determined that as the ESAT (Environmentally Safe Aggregates for Tarawa) dredgin operation develops, it could have adverse consequences for the welfare of thos Kiribati residents who are either sellers or users of aggregates. Sellers of aggregate rely on beach mining for their livelihood (they currently receive 1 Australian dolla per bag). A 2006 household survey found that 206 out of 280 households surveye were involved in some form of beach mining (Pelesikoti, 2007). There is widesprea belief that they are acting within their rights as customary owners of the land, an they will likely lose economic opportunities as a result of the offshore dredgin operations. For users of aggregates on the island, the main issue is whether they wil be legally able to continue to mine aggregates from their own beaches. Residents
© 2016 United Nations
1 

argue that the customary rights to mine are included in the Foreshore Amendmen Act of 2006 (Pelesikoti, 2007).
3.3 Economic benefits from marine mining
The economic benefits from near-shore mining are difficult to estimate. Marin aggregates are often sourced locally and reporting is scattered, but the marin sector is often distinguished from the land sector, so the value of the resource ca be estimated. In contrast, commodities like tin and diamonds are part of a globa market, which does not distinguish between land-derived and marine-derive materials. Table 6 gives estimated values where reported.
Table 6. Estimates of marine aggregates and minerals
Locations
Europea Union, Unite Kingdom Japan, Unite States (minor)
South Africa Namibia Australi (Inactive)
Indonesia Malaysia Thailand;
Australi (inactive)
New Zealan (inactive)
United States South America Australia, Ne Zealand, Africa Portugal, Indi (all inactive)
Mexic (inactive)
United State (now inactive)
Resource
Aggregate
Diamond Placers
Tin
Iron Sands
Phosphates
Phosphates
Sulphur
© 2016 United Nations
Quantity
~ 50-150+ millio m?/ year (can var strongly year t year depending o demand)
1.1 million carat (2012).
19,000 tons /yr tin
Total of 327. million ore tons a 18.5% P,Os,
0
Revenue
1-3+ billion U dollars)
3.5 billion US dollars
Indonesia 500 millio US dollars
Employment
5,000-15,00 (estimate)
~1,600
Indonesia ~3,500
Malaysia  Thailand N/A
N/A
N/A
References
Ifremer, 201 Herbich, 200 Marinet, 2012
Newell an Woodcock, 2013
NAMDEB, 201 NAMDEB, 2014
Timah, 2012
Don Deigo (2015)
2 

4. Developments in other forms of seabed mining: current state and potentia scale
4.1 Phosphate mining
Phosphorites are natural compounds containing phosphate in the form of cement binding sediments in tropical to sub-tropical regions (Murton, 2002). They are widel distributed on the continental shelves and upper slopes, oceanic islands, seamount and flanks of atolls. Deposits have been found off the west coast of Tasmania Australia; Congo, Ecuador, Gabon, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, New Zealand, Peru South Africa, and the United States. They are usually located in less than 1,000 m o water and their formation is linked to zones of coastal upwelling, divergence an biological productivity.
Currently proposals to mine phosphate are under consideration in New Zealand Namibia and Mexico. In New Zealand, the Ministry of Business, Innovation an Employment has granted a 20-year mining permit to Chatham Rock Phosphate Ltd for the extraction of rock phosphate nodules from an 820-km2 area of the Chatha Rise (Figure 7). Before mining can commence, the company still needs to obtai consent from the Environmental Protection Authority. At the time of publication o this report the Authority had refused an application by Chatham Rise Phosphat limited for a marine consent to mine phosphorite nodules on the Chatham Rise (N EPA, 2015). The decision-making committee found that that “the destructive effect of the extraction process, coupled with the potentially significant impact of th deposition of sediment on areas adjacent to the mining blocks and on the wide marine ecosystem, could not be mitigated by any set of conditions or adaptiv management regime that might be reasonably imposed.” They also concluded tha the economic benefit to New Zealand of the proposal would be modest at best.
© 2016 United Nations
2 

HIKURANG PLATEAU
Chatha Islands
Matheson Bank
Bh Mining Permit A BOUNTY TROUG mien rrr rea
Continental Shel Prospecting Licence Area
Prospecting Permit i L100 k Application Areas 7 al
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 7. Location of Chatham Rise phosphate project area (RSC, 2014).
In Namibia, an Environmental Impact Assessment Report and an Environmenta Management Plan were submitted in March 2012 for the Sandpiper Phosphat Project (Figure 8), which proposed to dredge phosphate-enriched sediments sout of Walvis Bay, Namibia, in depths of 180-300 m (Midgley, 2012). The compan planned to extract 5.5 Mt of phosphate-enriched marine sediments.on an annua basis, for over 20 years. The environmental impact assessment (EIA) identified low level potential adverse impacts including biogeochemical changes, benthic habita loss, loss of biodiversity and cumulative impacts (Namibian Marine Phosphates 2012; Midgley, 2012; McClune, 2012). No official decision has been issued on th Sandpiper Phosphate Project application as yet, however in September 2013, an 18 month moratorium on environmental clearances for bulk seabed mining activitie for industrial minerals, base and/or rare metals (including phosporites) was declare by the Government of Namibia. During this period the Ministry of Fisheries an Marine Resources is required to make a strategic impact assessment on the potentia impacts of the proposed phosphate mining on the fishing industry. While th Ministry of Mines and Energy is allowing marine phosphate exploration activities t continue during the moratorium period, such activities are not currently bein undertaken in areas within the national jurisdiction of Namibia.
© 2016 United Nations
2 

vy
|
NAMIBIAN MARINE PHOSPHATE LTD  LICENCE ARE Location
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 8. The Sandpiper Project (license area shown) includes the zone of highest regional phosphat concentration (Namibian Marine Phosphate, 2012).
A proposed Mexican underwater phosphate mine, the Don Diego project, is locate in 60-90m water depth, approximately 40 km off the cost of the Bay of Ulloa, on th west coast of Baja California. The permit area is 912 km? and it is estimated that i the project proceeds the area dredged annually would be around 1 per cent (1. km?; Don Diego, 2015). Phosphorite resources at the Don Diego deposit have bee estimated to total 327.2 million ore tons at 18.5 per cent P2O;. Odyssey Marin Exploration has lodged an environmental impact assessment for the recovery of th phosphate sands with the Mexican Secretary of Environment and Natural Resource and is awaiting a decision (Odyssey Marine Exploration, 2014). Local non governmental organizations including WildCoast, Centro Mexicano Derech Ambiental (CEMDA), Grupo Tortuguero, Vigilantes de Bahia Magdalena and Medi Ambiente Sociedad have been vocal in their opposition to the project (Pier, 2014).
4.2 Deep-Sea Mining
Although commercial deep-sea mining has not yet commenced, the three mai deep-sea mineral deposit types — sea-floor massive sulphides (SMS), polymetallic
© 2016 United Nations
2 

nodules and cobalt-rich crusts — have been the subject of interest for some time (se SPC 2013a,b,c,d). Recent announcements make it seem likely that SMS mining wil begin in the Manus Basin of Papua New Guinea (Nautilus Minerals, 2014a and b) Other Pacific Island States (e.g., Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu) hav issued exploration licenses to various companies to evaluate the commercia feasibility of mineral resources development in their exclusive economic zones. Th economic interest in SMS deposits is their high concentrations of copper, zinc, gold and silver; polymetallic nodules for manganese, nickel, copper, molybdenum an rare earth elements; and ferromanganese crusts for manganese, cobalt, nickel, rar earth elements, yttrium, molybdenum, tellurium, niobium, zirconium, and platinum.
In addition, the International Seabed Authority (ISA), which regulates deep-se mining in the Area (the seabed, ocean floor and subsoil thereof beyond the limits o national jurisdiction) has entered into 15-year contracts for exploration fo polymetallic nodules, SMS and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts in the deep seabe with 26 contractors (composed of companies, research institutions and governmen agencies) plus 1 contract pending ISA Council action in July 2015 (ISA, 2000; IS 2001; ISA 2010; ISA 2013).
Seventeen of these contracts are for exploration for polymetallic nodules in th Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone (CCZ, 16) and Central Indian Ocean Basin (1). Ther are six contracts for exploration for SMS in the South West Indian Ridge, Centra Indian Ridge and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and four contracts for exploration fo cobalt-rich crusts in the Western Pacific Ocean (3) and Atlantic (1) (ISA 2015a). Thes licences allow contractors to explore for seabed minerals in designated areas of th Area.
The ISA has called for comments on draft regulations for exploitation licensing in th Area (ISA 2015b). The decision to commence deep-sea mining in the Area wil depend in part on the availability of metals from terrestrial sources and their price in the world market, as well as technological and economic considerations based o capital and operating costs of the deep-sea mining system.
5. Gaps in capacity to engage in offshore minerals industries and to assess th environmental, social and economic aspects.
Despite the importance of marine extractive industries in many developin countries, the environmental, social and economic aspects are often not adequatel understood. Therefore it is necessary to strengthen the approach to planning an managing these activities. This includes implementing the precautionary principl and adaptive management, as well as transparent monitoring. There is also a lack o consensus on what is an acceptable condition in which to leave the seabed pos mining. Increasing public awareness and engendering a custodial and stewardshi attitude to the environment may help curb the most damaging practices.
© 2016 United Nations
2 

Unregulated mining often occurs in parallel to regulated mining activities. Fo example, numerous small operators participate in the marine sector of the ti mining industry in Bangka and Belitung, Indonesia. Many of the practices associate with these workers are unsafe and miners are killed or injured every year; local new reports refer to over 100 fatalities per year (Jakarta Post, 2010). The lack o regulation or the lack of enforcement of regulations, allows mining to take place i critical marine habitats and extensive damage has been done to coral reefs an mangrove environments (IDH, 2013). Improved licensing, regulation, enforcemen and monitoring, in conjunction with social programmes to find alternative sources o revenue, would be needed. How the industry is being regulated would also need t be considered. The export data, published by the Bangka Belitung regiona administration, showed that P.T. Timah, which owns 473,800 hectares of concessio areas, exported 8,899 tons of tin in 2009, and privately owned smelters, whic Operate concession areas of 16,884 hectares, exported 13,867 tons. Thes discrepancies highlight the magnitude of the problem. The penalties provided b mining and/or environmental legislation may need to be strengthened to stop thes practices.
For any State or company planning resource development, integrating coastal an marine ecosystem services into the development process is important; however information on the services provided or the value of these services is often scarce. I many developing countries the interface between governments and offshor minerals industries needs to be strengthened. Deficiencies exist in the informatio available and in the institutional capacity to manage non-living marine resources. I summary, the following gaps can be identified:
—Increased capacity in coastal and marine geosciences information system (including social, cultural, economic, ecological, biophysical and geophysica information) to improve geoscientific advice for management and monitorin of coastal environments to meet the requirements of ecosystem-base management and sustainable development;
— Development and implementation of robust regulatory frameworks for marin mineral extraction industries, which include environmental impac assessments, environmental quality and social laws, environmental liability and monitoring capacity;
— Increased public awareness of the vulnerability of coastal environments, th benthic habitats and the fishery nursery grounds that may be affected b marine mining; and
— Technology transfer and skills development to ensure best practice in marin mineral extraction.
© 2016 United Nations
2 

References
Austen, M.C., Hattam, C., Lowe, S., Mangi, C., Richardson, K. (2009). Quantifying an Valuing the Impacts of Marine Aggregate Extraction on Ecosystem Goods an Services. MALSF funded project MEPF 08-P77 www.cefas.co.uk/media/462458/mepf-08-p77-final-report.pdf. Accesse June 2014.
Babinard, J., Bennett, C.R., Hatziolos, M.E., Faiz, A., Somani, A. (2014). Sustainabl managing natural resources and the need for construction materials in Pacifi island countries: The example of South Tarawa, Kiribati. National Resource Forum, 38, 58-66.
Beaumont, N.J., Austen, M.C., Atkins, J.P., Burdon, D., Degraer, S., Dentinho, T.P. Derous, S., Holm, P., Horton, T., van lerland, E., Marboe, A.H., Starkey, D.J. Townsend, M., Zarzycki, T. (2007). Identification, definition and quantificatio of goods and services provided by marine biodiversity: Implications for th ecosystem approach. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 54 (3), 253-265.
BBC (2011). Dismay in Cumbria at quarrying tax fund end. 10 April 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-13025923. Accessed Jun 2014.
Bide, T. and Mankelow, J. (2014). Mapping marine sand and gravel. Planet Earth Spring 2014, pp. 14-15. www.planetearth.nerc.ac.uk. Accessed June 2014.
BMAPA (2014). British Marine Aggregate Producers Association http://www.bmapa.org/. Accessed June 2014.
Boughen, N., Mason, C., Paxton, G., Parsons, R., Johns, S., Parr, J., Moffat, K. (2010) Seafloor exploration and mining in Australia: Stakeholder reactions expectations and desired level of engagement. CS/RO Wealth from Ocean Flagship, Report EPIII562, Australia: 20pp.
Boyd, S.E., Cooper, K.M., Limpenny, D.S., Kilbride, R., Rees, H.L., Dearnaley, M.P. Stevenson, J., Meadows, W.J., Morris, C.D. (2004). Assessment of the re habilitation of the seabed following marine aggregate dredging. Scienc Series Technical Report. CEFAS Lowestoft, 121, 154pp.
Cefas (Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science) (2009). A Generi Investigation into Noise Profiles of Marine Dredging in relation to th Acoustic Sensitivity of the Marine Fauna in UK waters with particula emphasis on Aggregate Dredging: Phase 1 Scoping and Review of Key Issue MEPF Ref No: MEPF 08/P21 Project.
Cooper, K., Burdon, D., Atkins, J.P., Weiss, L., Somerfield, P., Elliott, M., Turner, K. Ware, S., Vivian, C. (2013). Can the benefits of physical seabed restoratio justify the costs? An assessment of a disused aggregate extraction site off th Thames Estuary, UK. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 75(1), 33-45.
© 2016 United Nations 2 

Crown Estate (2013). Marine Aggregates, Capability & Portfolio 2013 http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/media/495658/ei-marine-aggregates capability-and-portfolio-2013.pdf. Accessed June 2014.
Currie, H., Grobler, K., Kemper, J., Roux, J.P., Currie, B., Moroff, N., Ludynia, K. Jones, R., James, J., Pillay, P., Cadot, N., Peard, K., de Couwer, V. an Holtzhausen, H. (2008). Namibian islands’ marine protected area. Ministry o Fisheries and Marine. Resources, Windhoek.
Daesslé, L.W., Fischer, D.W. (2001). Marine Minerals in the Mexican Pacific: Towar Efficient Resource Management. Marine Georesources & Geotechnology 19(3), 197-206.
De Beers (2007) Operating and Finance Review http://www.debeersgroup.com/content/dam/de beers/corporate/documents/Archive%20Reports/Operating_and_Financial_ eview_2007_March_2008.PDF Accessed June 2014.
De Beers (2012) Operating and Finance Review http://www.debeersgroup.com/content/dam/de beers/corporate/documents/articles/reports/2013/OFR_2012.PDF Accesse June 2014.
Desprez, M. (2000). Physical and biological impact of marine aggregate extractio along the French coast of the Eastern English Channel: short-and long-ter post-dredging restoration. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57(5), 1428-1438.
Dickie, S., Hime, E., Lockhart-Mummery, E., Ozdemiroglu, R., Tinch (2010). Includin the Socio-Economic Impacts of Marine Aggregate Dredging in Decision Making. Published February 2011.
Don Diego (2015). http://www.dondiego.mx/ Accessed March 2015.
Drucker, B.S., Waskes, W., Byrnes, M.R. (2004). The U.S Minerals Managemen Service Outer Continental Shelf sand and gravel program: Environmenta studies to assess the potential effects of offshore dredging operations i Federal Waters. Journal of Coastal Research, 20(1), 1-5.
Earney, F.C. (2005). Marine mineral resources. Routledge.
Fesl, E. (2005). Moreton Bay sand extraction study. Queensland Environmen Protection Agency. 14pp.
Firth, A. (2006). Marine Aggregates and Prehistory. HERITAGE AT RISK, 8.
Firth, A. (2013). Marine Archaeology, in Newell, R.C., Woodcock, T.A., (2013) Aggregate Dredging and the Marine Environment: an overview of recen research and current industry practice. The Crown Estate, pp. 165.
Foden, J., Rogers, S.I., Jones, A.P. (2009). Recovery rates of UK seabed habitats afte cessation of aggregate extraction. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 390, 15 26.
© 2016 United Nations 2 

Garnett, R.H.T. (2000). Marine placer gold, with particular reference to Nome Alaska, in: Cronan, D.S. Ed. 2000. Handbook of marine mineral deposits. pp 67-10.
Harben, P.W. and Bates, R.L. (1990). /ndustrial minerals: geology and world deposits Metal Bulletin Plc.
Herbich, J.B. (2000). Handbook of coastal engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Highley, D.E., Hetherington, L.E., Brown, T.J., Harrison, D.J., Jenkins, G.O. (2007). Th strategic importance of the marine aggregate industry to the UK. Britis Geological Survey Research Report, OR/07/019, 44 pp.
ICES (2007). Report of the Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marin Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT). 17—20 April 2007, Helsinki Finland, ICES CM 2007/MCH:08, 92pp.
ICES (2008). Report of the Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marin Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT). 8-11 April 2008, Burnham-on Crouch, UK, ICES CM 2008/MHCO09, 86pp.
ICES (2009). Report of the Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marin Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT). 14-17 April 2009, New York USA, ICES CM 2009/MHC:09, 98pp.
ICES (2010). Report of the Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marin Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT). 31 May-4 June 2010 Djuréndset, Sweden, ICES CM 2010/SSGHIE, 108pp.
ICES (2011). Report of the Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marin Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT). 11-15 April 2011, Delft, th Netherlands, ICES CM 2011/SSGHIE, 89pp.
ICES (2012). Report of the Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marin Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT). 16-20 April 2012, Rouen France, ICES CM 2012/SSGHIE, 104pp.
ICES (2013). Report of the Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marin Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT). 22-25 April 2013, Faial Portugal, ICES CM 2013/SSGHIE, 54pp.
IDH (2013). IDH Tin working group communiqué http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/idh-tin-working-group communiqu-18070.pdf. Accessed June 2014.
Idier, D., Hommes, S., Briére, C., Roos, P.C., Walstra, D.J.R., Knaapen, M.A. an Hulscher, S.J. (2010). Morphodynamic models used to study the impact o offshore aggregate extraction: a review. Journal of Coastal Research, 39-52.
Ifremer (2014). Marine aggregate extraction http://www. ifremer.fr/demf/aggregate_eng.html. Accessed June 2014.
ISA (2000). Decision of the assembly relating to the regulations on prospecting an exploration for polymetallic nodules in the Area. International Seabe Authority, Jamaica, ISBA/6/A/18, pp.48.
© 2016 United Nations 2 

ISA (2001). Recommendations for guidance of contractors for the assessment of th possible environmental impacts arising from exploration for polymetalli nodules in the Area. International Seabed Authority, Jamaica, ISBA/7/LTC/ 2001, pp.11.
ISA (2010). The International Marine Minerals Society’s Code for Environmenta Management of Marine Mining. Note by the Secretariat; ISBA/16/LTC/ http://www. isa.org.jm/files/documents/EN/16Sess/LTC/ISBA-16LTC-2. pdf Accessed June 2014.
ISA (2013). Towards the Development of a Regulatory Framework for Polymetalli Nodule Exploitation in the Area. [SA Technical Study, No. 11, pp. 90.
ISA (2015a). Deep sea mineral contractors. http://www.isa.org.jm/deep-seabed minerals-contractors Accessed March 2015.
ISA (2015b). Developing a Regulatory Framework for Mineral Exploitation in th Area. http://www.isa.org.jm/files/documents/EN/Survey/Report-2015.pd Accessed April 2015.
Jakarta Post (2010). Hundreds of illegal miners killed in last four years. The Jakart Post, http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/02/08/hundreds-illegal miners-killed-last-four-years.html. Accessed June 2014.
James, J., Evans, C., Harrison, D., Ooms, K., Vivan, C. & Boyd, S.E. (1999).The effectiv development of offshore aggregates in south-east Asia. Technical Repor WC/99/9. Notthingam, British Geological Survey.
Jewett, S.C., Feder, H.M. and Blanchard, A. (1999). Assessment of the benthi environment following offshore placer gold mining in the northeastern Berin Sea. Marine Environmental Research, 48(2), 91-122.
JNCC (2014). Offshore Marine Aggregates. Joint Nature Conservation Committee http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4278. Accessed June 2014.
Kilbride, R., Boyd, S.E., Rees, H.L., Dearnaley, M.P. and Stevenson, J. (2006). Effect of dredging activity on epifaunal communities: surveys following cessation o dredging. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 70 (1-2), pp207-223.
Kyle, J.R. (2002). A Century of fire and brimstone: the rise and fall of the Frasc sulphur industry of the Gulf of Mexico Basin. Industrial Minerals an Extractive Industry Geology. Geological Society of London, Specia Publication, 189-198.
MALSF (2009). Marine aggregate extraction: helping to determine good practice Summary Report. Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund.
Marinet (2012). Aggregate dredging and the Crown Estate — facts and figures http://www.marinet.org.uk/campaign-article/aggregate-dredging-and-the crown-estate-facts-and-figures. Accessed June 2014.
Mason, C., Paxton, G., Parr, J., Boughen, N. (2010). Charting the territory: Explorin stakeholder reactions to the prospect of seafloor exploration and mining i Australia. Marine Policy, 34(6), 1374-1380.
© 2016 United Nations 2 

Mason, C., Paxton, G., Parsons, R., Parr, J., Moffat, K. (2014). “For the Benefit o Australians”: Exploring expectations for the mining industry from a nationa perspective, Resources Policy, 41, 1-8.
McClune, J. (2012). Marine phosphate mining generates global concern. Nami Times. http://www.namibtimes.net/forum/topics/marine-phosphate-mining generates-global-concern. Accessed June 2014.
McKenzie, E., Woodruff, A. & McClennen, C. (2006). Economic Assessment of th True Costs of Aggregate Mining in Majuro Atoll Republic of the Marshal Islands. SOPAC.
Michel, J., Bejarano, A.C., Peterson, C.H. and Voss, C. (2013). Review of Biologica and Biophysical Impacts from Dredging and Handling of Offshore Sand. U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Herndon VA. OCS Study BOEM 2013-0119. 258 pp.
Midgley, J. (2012). Environmental impact assessment report for the marin component - Sandpiper project http://www.envirod.com/draft_environmental_impact_report2.html Accessed June 2014.
MPA (2011). Mineral Products Association press release. MPA Says Scrapping o Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund Works Against 'Localism'. 12 Januar 2011. http://www. mineralproducts.org/11-release001.htm. Accessed Jun 2014.
MSFD (2008). Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council  17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field o marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive http://eur lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do ?uri=OJ:L:2008:164:0019:0040:EN:P F. Accessed June 2014.
Mudd, G.M. (2010). The environmental sustainability of mining in Australia: ke mega-trends and looming constraints. Resources Policy, 35 (2), 98-115.
Murton, B.J. (2002). A Global review of non-living resources on the extende continental shelf. Brazilian Journal of Geophysics, 18(3), 281-306.
NAMDEB (2010). Financial performance for the year ended 31 December 2010 http://www.namdeb.com/pdf/NamdebFinancialAdvert.pdf. Accessed Jun 2014.
NAMDEB (2014). Corporate website http://www.namdeb.com/about_org_profile.php. Accessed June 2014.
Namibian Marine Phosphate (2012). Sandpiper marine phosphates project http://www.namphos.com/ Accessed June 2014.
Nautilus Minerals (2014a). Press release Nautilus Minerals and State of PNG Resolv Issues and Sign Agreement. http://www.nautilusminerals.com/s/Media NewsReleases.asp ?ReportID=649293. Accessed June 2014.
© 2016 United Nations 3 

Nautilus Minerals (2014b). Community consultation in Papua New Guinea http://www.cares.nautilusminerals.com/PapuaConsultationProcess.aspx Accessed May 2014.
Newell, R.C., Woodcock, T.A. (2013). Aggregate Dredging and the Marin Environment: an overview of recent research and current industry practice The Crown Estate, pp. 165.
Newell, R.C., Seiderer, L.J., Simpson, N.M. and Robinson, J.E. (2004). Impacts o marine aggregate dredging on benthic macrofauna off the south coast of th United Kingdom. Journal of Coastal Research, 20 (1): 115-125.
Newell, R.C., Seiderer, L.J. and Hitchcock, D.R. (1998). The impact of dredging work in coastal waters: A review of the sensitivity to disturbance and subsequen recovery of biological resources on the seabed. Oceanography and Marin Biology: An Annual Review, 36: 127-78.
NZ Petroleum and Minerals (2014). Minerals mining permit granted to Trans-Tasma Resources Limited. http://www.nzpam.govt.nz/cms/news_media/2014/trans tasman-resources-Itd-mining-permit-granted. Accessed June 2014.
NZ EPA (2015). New Zealand Environmental Protection Authorit http://www.epa.govt.nz/news/epa-media-releases/Pages/EPA-refuses marine-consent-application-by-CRP.aspx Accessed March 2015.
Ober, J. (1995). Sulfur, from Mineral Commodity Summaries, U.S. Bureau of Mines January 1995, pp. 166-167 http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/mining/minedock/ d/id4-sulf.pdf Accessed March 2015.
Odessey Marine Exploration Inc. (2014) http://ir.odysseymarine.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaselD=869839 Accesse March 2015.
OSPAR (2009). Summary assessment of sand and gravel extraction in the OSPA maritime area. OSPAR Commission http://qsr2010.ospar.org/media/assessments/p00434_Sand_and_Gravel_S mmary_Assessment.pdf. Accessed June 2014.
Pelesikoti, N. (2007). Reducing vulnerability of Pacific ACP states. Kiribati Technica Report. 1. Extent of Household Aggregate Mining in South Tarawa 2 Proposed Integrated Monitoring Framework for Tarawa Lagoon. EU EDF 8  Project Report 72. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission.
Pier, D. (2014). A Project of this Magnitude has Never Been Undertaken on Earth.”  Gigantic Ocean Mine Threatens Baja California. The Scuttlefish http://thescuttlefish.com/2014/12/a-project-of-this-magnitude-has-never been-undertaken-on-earth-a-gigantic-ocean-mine-threatens-baja-california/ .
Pulfrich, A. and Branch, G.M. (2014). Effects of sediment discharge from Namibia diamond mines on intertidal and subtidal rocky-reef communities and the
rock lobster Jasus lalandii. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 150, 179-191.
© 2016 United Nations 3 

Pulfrich, A., Parkins, C.A., Branch, G.M., Bustamante, R.H. and Velasquez, C.R. (2003) The effects of sediment deposits from Namibian diamond mines on intertida and subtidal reefs and rock lobster populations. Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 13(3), 257-278.
PWC (2013). Review of global trends in the mining industry http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/mining/publications/assets/pwc-mine-a confidence-crisis.pdf. Accessed June 2014.
Radzevicius, R., Velegrakis, A.F., Bonne, W., Kortekaas, S., Garel, E., Blazauskas, N and Asariotis, R. (2010). Marine aggregate extraction regulation in E member states. Journal of Coastal Research, S| 51: 15-37.
RCS (2014). Independent JORC (2012) Technical Report and Mineral Resourc Estimate on the Chatham Rise Project in New Zealand.
Rice, J., Arvanitidis, C., Borja, A., Frid, C., Hiddink, J., Krause, J., Lorance, P. Ragnarsson, S.A., Skéld, M., Trabucco, B. (2010). Marine Strategy Framewor Directive — Task Group 6 Report Seafloor integrity. FUR 24334 EN — JRC Luxemburg, pp. 73.
Roche, C., Bice, S. (2013). Anticipating Social and Community Impacts of Deep Se Mining, in: Baker, E., Beaudoin, Y. (Eds.), Deep Sea Minerals: Deep Se Minerals and the Green Economy. Vol. 2, Secretariat of the Pacifi Community, pp. 59-80.
Rona, P.A. (2005). TAG hydrothermal vent field: A key to modern and ancien seafloor hydrothermal VMS ore-forming systems, in: Mao, J., Bierlein, F.P (Eds), Mineral Deposit Research: Meeting the Global Challenge, Vols 1 & 2 687-690.
Rona, P.A., (2008). The changing vision of marine minerals. Ore Geology Reviews, 3 (3-4) 618-666.
Scott, S.D., (2011). Marine minerals: their occurrences, exploration an exploitation. Oceans 2011. IEEE, pp. 1-8.
SOPAC (2007). EU EDF 8 —- SOPAC Project Report 74. Reducing Vulnerability of Pacifi ACP States. Samoa. Technical report on aggregate sources assessment i selected parts of Upolu and Savai’i Islands. 72pp http://ict.sopac.org/VirLib/EROO74.pdf. Accessed June 2014.
SOPAC (2013). Annual report. http://www.sopac.org/sopac/sopac-3/SOPAC-3_2-1 4_O1P%202013%20report.pdf Accessed June 2014.
SPC (2013a). Deep Sea Minerals and the Green Economy. Baker, E., Beaudoin, Y (eds). Vol 2 Secretariat of the Pacific Community, 210pp.
SPC (2013b). Sea-floor Massive Sulphides: A physical, biological, environmental, an technical review. Baker, E., Beaudoin, Y. (eds). Vol 1A, Secretariat of th Pacific Community, 65 pp.
SPC (2013c). Manganese Nodules: A physical, biological, environmental, an technical review. Baker, E., Beaudoin, Y. (eds). Vol. 1B, Secretariat of th Pacific Community 70 pp.
© 2016 United Nations 3 

SPC (2013d). Cobalt-rich Ferromanganese Crusts: A physical, biological environmental, and technical review. Baker, E., Beaudoin, Y. (eds), Vol. 1 Secretariat of the Pacific Community 60 pp.
SPC-EU (2012). ACP states regional legislative and regulatory framework for deep se minerals exploration and exploitation. Prepared under the SPC-EU EDF1 Deep Sea Minerals Project. - 1st ed., pp70 http://www.smenet.org/docs/public/FinalDeepSeaMineralsProjectReport.p f Accessed March 2015.
Sutton, G., Boyd, S. (2009). Effects of Extraction of Marine Sediments on the Marin Environment 1998 — 2004. ICES Cooperative Research Report No. 297. 180pp.
Szymelfenig, M., Kotwicki, L. & Graca, B. (2006). Benthic re-colonization in post dredging pits in the Puck Bay (Southern Baltic Sea). Estuarine, Coastal an Shelf Science, 68(3), 489-498.
Tillin, HM., Houghton, A.J., Saunders, J.E., Drabble, R., Hull, S.C. (2011). Direct an Indirect Impacts of Aggregate Dredging, Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainabilit Fund (MALSF). Science Monograph Series: No. 1; MEPF 10/P144, 46pp.
TIMAH (2012). Press release http://www.idx.co.id/Portals/0/StaticData/NewsAndAnnouncement/ANNO NCEMENTSTOCK/From_EREP/201303/805e679600_5ffbd03093.pdf Accessed June 2014.
TIMAH (2014). http://www.timah.com/v2/eng/our business/4110052012111846/tin-product/. Accessed June 2014.
Thomsen, F., McCully, S., Wood, D., Pace, F. and White, P. (2009). A generi investigation into noise profiles of marine dredging in relation to the acousti sensitivity of the marine fauna in UK waters with particular emphasis o aggregate dredging: phase 1 scoping and review of key issues. Cefas MEP Ref No. MEPF/08/P21. 59 pp.
Todd, V.L., Todd, I.B., Gardiner, J.C., Morrin, E.C., MacPherson, N.A., DiMarzio, N.A and Thomsen, F. (2015). A review of impacts of marine dredging activities o marine mammals. ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil, 72(2) 328-340.
TTR (2015) Trans Tasman Resources http://www.ttrl.co.nz/south-taranaki-bight project/overview/ Accessed march 2015.
UNEP (2014). Sand, rarer than one thinks. UNEP Global Environment Alert Servic (GEAS) http://na.unep.net/geas/getUNEPPageWithArticlelDScript.php?article_id=1 0. Accessed June 2014.
United Nations (1992a) Convention on Biological Diversity. Rio de Janeiro, 5 Jun 1992.
United Nations (1992b) Agenda 21. United Nations, Rio de Janeiro, 13 June 1992 Van Rijn, L.C., Soulsby, R.L., Hoekstra, P. & Davies, A.G. (2005). SANDPIT, San Transport and Morphology of Offshore Mining Pits. Aqua Publications.
© 2016 United Nations 3 

Velegrakis, A.F., Ballay, A., Poulos, S., Radzevicius, R., Bellec, V., Manso, F. (2010) European marine aggregates resources: Origins, usage, prospecting an dredging techniques. Journal of Coastal Research, S| 51, 1-14.
Walker, D.I., Hillman, K.A., Kendrick, G.A., Lavery, P. (2001). Ecological significance o seagrasses: Assessment for management of environmental impact i Western Australia. Ecological Engineering, 16(3), 323-330.
Wenban-Smith, F.F. (2002). Marine Aggregate Dredging and the Histori Environment: Palaeolithic and Mesolithic archaeology on the seabed. BMAP and EH, London.
Webb, A. (2005). Technical Report--An assessment of coastal processes, impacts erosion mitigation options and beach mining. (Bairiki/Nanikai causeway Tungaru Central Hospital coastline and Bonriki runway--South Tarawa Kiribati). FU-SOPAC Project Report, 46.
© 2016 United Nations
3