Wittenoom, once one of the world’s biggest producers of blue asbestos, lies 1,400 kilometers north of Perth. It has in recent months become the epicenter of a free speech controversy. This year, the West Australian state government finally acknowledged the crime by demolishing the town. This was a monumental initial step toward addressing the chronic toxicity that has plagued the region ever since mining operations ceased more than thirty years ago. The legacy of contamination has already killed more than 1,200 former employees and community members. This extremely dangerous circumstance poses a clear threat to public safety and the potential exposure to harmful fumes associated with the facility.
In July 2024, Fe Metals blundered. Led by environmental scientist Simon Rushton, the start-up company accidentally nominated land for exploration rights in the polluted, asbestos-laden outback around Wittenoom. An exploration geologist hired by Rushton’s company was the one who started the application process. Only later did he learn that the former owner had abandoned the tenement. The geologist had apparently not known that the area had been labeled an asbestos site.
Government Action on Wittenoom
Since closing the mine, the West Australian state government has implemented extensive measures to rectify the legacy inherited from Wittenoom’s mining operations. The community was formally erased from maps in 2007. This demolition is an important step to decrease the health risk associated with continued exposure to asbestos that has contaminated the surrounding environment. Piles of asbestos-tailings remained visible in the area as recently as 2021, highlighting the ongoing difficulty of the cleanup process.
The Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety stated unequivocally that they will not sanction any exploration occurring in Wittenoom. In their announcement of this decision, they attached tough conditions. This proactive regulatory approach seeks to make sure that any activity we have in that polluted-defined environment place a premium on protecting human health and safety.
Industry Response
County Commissioner Simon Rushton, who voted against the exploration application, expressed his concerns. He emphasized the need for better messaging from regulatory agencies around the dangers of locations such as Wittenoom.
“In circumstances where there’s fully documented risks to human health, and regulations around how and why and when people can go into asbestos management zones,” – Simon Rushton
Rushton reiterated that finding something useful on the site would not make such exploration operations acceptable. In addition, safety risks are too great to allow moving forward.
“When I first became aware that this application had been lodged, I said, ‘I wouldn’t care if there were 100 million tonnes of diamonds there, we wouldn’t be proceeding with that tenement,’” – Simon Rushton
He made the case for robust guidance on prohibited zones to ensure the protection of public health.
“I think there’s a compelling reason for making it clear the area is off limits.” – Simon Rushton
The Road Ahead
After months of grassroots advocacy, Fe Metals withdrew its application in March, recognizing the risks involved with exploring such a hazardous site. The situation raises questions about how mining companies navigate regulatory frameworks and assess risk in regions with a history of contamination.
CSI’s Simon Rushton admitted their exploration geologist overstepped when he didn’t realize the full extent of this site’s limitations.
“It was done by our exploration geologist,” – Simon Rushton
He noted that it’s really important to do safety right. Yet, he admitted that no such approach could ever fully protect human health in the wake of such environmental dangers.
“Simply because there is no foolproof way of guaranteeing human health and safety.” – Simon Rushton
