In Suriname we interviewed a group of 56 respondents divided over 10 mining sites in three different locations: Balingsoula, Brownsweg en Sarakreek.

In Brazil, 25 miners were interviewed in the garimpo of Lourenço, near Macapá, Amapá State.

In Peru 30 respondents were interviewed in eight different concessions in the vicinity of Puerto Maldonado, the capital of the Madre de Dios Department.

In Bolivia only ten respondents were interviewed all part of the ASOBAL cooperative in Riberalta, Beni Department. Since this number was so low, we decided not to include them in this report.

In Suriname, the miners population is still relatively young. 41% of the respondents is between 20-30 years old. 39% is between 31-40 years old. (N=54)

In Brazil, the miners population interviewed is older: 25% is between 31-40 and 29% of the interviewed miners is between 51-60 years old. (N=24)

In Peru, the majority of miners interviewed is between 31-40 years old (57%). (N=30)

Age of the miners

In Surinam, 61% of the miners have been working between 1-10 years in the mine. 26% Says to have been working between 11-20 years. (N=54)

In Brazil, the miners have longer working records in the mine. 33% has been working between 11-20 years, 29% has been working between 21-30 years and 25% has been working between 31-40 years in the mine. (N=24)

In Peru almost all miners (90%) have been working between 1-10 years in the mine. (N=30)

Years working in the mine

In Suriname, 37% of the miners attended primary school, 45% went to secondary school and 7% went to secondary school for adults. (N=54)

In Brazil, 29% of the miners attended primary school, 34% went to secondary school and 21% went to secondary school for adults. (N=24)

In Peru, 7% of the miners went to primary school, 38% attended secondary school and 55% says to have attended another type of school. We still need to ask our Peruvian researcher which type this is. (N=29)

Level of education

Most people who work in the mines are called pitworkers, but there are also other roles in the mines. In Suriname, 49% of the interviewed miners are pitworkers, 34% is machine owner, 10% is supervisor. (N=55)

In Brazil, 27% of the interviewed miners is pitworker, 27% is supervisor, 23% is machine owner, 14% is kitchen helper, 9% is machine operator. (N=24)

In Peru, 38% of the interviewed miners is pitworker, 28% is machine operator and 10% is supervisor. (N=29)

Role in the mine

It is clear that most miners in Suriname, but also in Brazil and Peru, work in the mines because it is a financially attractive activity. (N=55)

(N=21)

(N=29)

Reason to work in the mine

In Suriname, 54% of the miners do mechanised alluvial mining. 33% answered with other, meaning…. (N=54)

In Brazil, 40% of the interviewed miners work in underground mining, 32% on mechanised alluvial mining, and 22% work on processed material. (N=21)

In Peru, all interviewed miners perform mechanised alluvial mining. (N=29)

Type of mining performed

In Surinam, 64% of the respondents decide where to mine by looking for gold containing material in the ground. (N=54)

Whereas in Brazil, 35% go by chance, 24% has other methods and 22% says to look for gold containing material in the ground. (N=23)

In Peru, 40% looks for gold containing material in the ground, while 20% follows others. (N=30)

Most miners in Surinam say they use a goldpan for prospection (42%), but there is also a group that uses an excavator (30%). In some cases a metal detector is used (13%). (N=56)

In Brazil, 32% uses a gold pan, 25% say they use other tools. Also the excavator is used (19%). (N=21)

In Peru, 55% of the respondents use another tools, such as a shovel, a ‘machete’, ‘cuya’, ‘barreta’, ‘varrilla’, ‘fierro’. 22% Uses a gold pan, 18% do not know what tool is used for prospection. (N=30)

In Surinam, 39% of the respondents would like to change their prospection methods, saying there are better methods, experts could be invited or by using an excavator to speed up the process. The 44% saying they do not want to change, claim there is no other or better method, or that they are used to doing it this way. (N=52)

In Brazil, 61% says they would like to change, against 27% who do not. The ones who want to change often say they want a more specific prospection, or by using new technology and machinery. (N=23)

In Peru, also 60% says they want to change their prospection method, mainly to speed up the process and make it easier, by using machines and new technology. (N=30)

When asked who can help to improve, in Suriname 27% indicates ‘others’ (answers?), 23% say ‘geologists’, and 12 say ‘the bank’. (N=48)

In Peru, 31% says Other (Answers?), 21% says geologists and 15% says investors can help. (N=21)

In Peru, 45% answers that the landowner can help, but also investors (28%) and geologists (7%). (N=30)

Tools that are used in Suriname to open a mine pit are buldozers/tractors(63%), explosives (19%), excavators (8%) and pumps (7%). (N=52)

In Brazil, mostly excavators are used (31%), but also buldozers/tractors (20%), explosives (18%) and hammers (15%). (N=22)

In Peru, 53% uses excavators, 32% uses explosives (check!) and 15% uses a pump. (N=30)

When asked in Suriname if they wanted to improve this method, 45% answered positively and 33% answered with no. (N=54)

In Brazil, 67% said they wanted to improve this method, and 15% said they did not. (N=21)

In Peru, 76% wants to improve this method, and 17% does not want to improve it. (N=30)

60% Says to lack money to be able to improve this method, 20% did not give an answer and 12% does not know how. (N=27)

In Brazil, only 5 miners responded, too little to consider the results in this research. (N=5)

In Peru, 33% claims that improvement is impossible because they lack technology, 23% says it is a lack of resources, 20% state another reason (check which ones) and 17% does not know how to improve this method. (N=24)

In Peru, 71% of the miners use mechanized methods to extract the gold from the soil. the remaining 29% only uses manual methods. (N=55)

In Brazil, the majority of miners (81%) uses manual methods, versus 19% using mechanised methods. (N=24)

In Peru, all miners use mechanised methods (100%). (N=30)

In Suriname, 69% of the miners say they get their tools from the city, paid for with cash. 13% buy from local stores, paid with cash, and 10% comes from the forest. (N=54)

In Brazil, 59% of the miners say they get their materials from local stores, paid for with cash, 32% say they get it in the city and 5% say they buy it with gold in local stores. (N=24)

In Peru, 87% say they buy tools from the city with cash, 7% buy from local stores. (N=30)

In Suriname, 48% state that they have always used this method, 30% say it is the best method to use, 11% say they are bound by certain rules and 10% says they do it like this because everybody else does. (N=54)

In Brasil, 50% also say they use this method because everybody else does, 20% state they have always done it like this and 15% states that financial restrictions make them use this method. (N=22)

In Peru, 38% state that they have always used this method, 20% says they use it because everybody else does and 18% state that they use it because it is the best method. (N=30)

(N=52)

(N=23)

(N=30)

In Suriname, 43% of the miners empty the sluicebox and add mercury before concentrating the gold in a bucket. 22% do the same without adding mercury and 17% uses a goldpan to concentrate the gold. (N=53)

In Brazil, 57% of the miners uses a gold pan for gold concentration and 20% adds mercury to the gold pan for concentration purposes. (N=24)

In Peru, 77% of the miners empty the sluicebox and add mercury before they concentrate the gold, using a bucket, 10% does so without adding mercury. 7% uses a goldpan and mercury. (N=29)

(N=53)

(N=22)

(N=30)

In Suriname, 34% of the miners say it’s the lack of money that keeps them from improving the technology. 31% Say it is a lack of technological options, 28% say it is a lack of knowledge.  (N=14)

No pie chart. (N=12)

In Peru, 37% of the miners state that it is a lack of technology that keeps them from improving the technology. 32% Say it is a lack of money. (N=27)

(N=53)

(N=22)

(N=30)

Everyone in Brazil uses an enclosed recipient. (N=0)

In Peru, 57% of the miners give a range of reasons why they do not use an enclosed recipient, such as there is no appropriate space, we just do it like this, nobody complains. (N=23)

In Suriname, 38% of the miners respond saying that everyone in the team processes the gold concentrate in rotation, 35% state the workers process it and 26% says it is the boss himself who does it. (N=52)

In Brazil, 48% of the miners state that the gold concentrate is processed in rotation, 33% say it is done by the boss and 13% say it is the machine owner who does it. (N=24)

In Peru, 57% of the miners state it is the machine owner who processes the gold concentrate, 22% say it is done by the workers themselves and 18% says it is done by everyone in rotation. (N=30)

(N=53)

(N=24)

(N=30)

In Suriname, 39% of the miners uses gloves, 38% uses mouth and nose protection, 15% uses a mask and only 8% uses a retort. (N=13)

In Brazil, 38% uses a mask, 31% uses other protection measures, such as a helmet, protection glasses and long sleeves, and 29% uses gloves. (N=11)

In Peru, 60% of the miners uses a retort, 20% uses mouth and nose protection and 13% store their mercury in a safe place. (N=15)

In Surinam, 36% of the miners say it is too uncomfortable to use personal protection measures, 35% say it is not necesarry. (N=37)

no pie chart (N=6)

In Peru, 54% of the miners gave no answer, 20% claims it is too uncomfortable and 10% says it is not necesarry to use personal protection. (N=14)

(N=54)

(N=23)

(N=29)

In Suriname, 32% of the miners says to invest in the education of their children, 18% invest in movable property ouside the mining sector. (N=52)

In Brazil, 35% of the miners say to invest in other things then the ones mentioned, 21% invests in real estate outside the mining sector. (N=23)

In Peru, 57% of the miners says to invest in the education of their children, 18% says to invest in other things than mentioned in the questionnaire. (N=29)

In Surinam, 41% of the miners says to work on the land of someone with a concession, 34% says to work on the land that is owned by the village. (N=50)

No pie chart. (N=24)

In Peru, 47% of the miners says to work on the land of someone with a concession, 23% says to work on the land owned by the government. (N=29)

In Suriname, 46% of the miners see small-scale gold mining as an activity with new opportunities for the future, 24% is less optimistic and sees it as a sector with conflicts. (N=54)

In Brazil, 54% has another answer to this question, 32% see the sector as conflictuous and with less good opportunities for the future, 14% still sees opportunities for the future. (N=23)

In Peru, 57% see the sector as conflictuous and with less chances for the future, 36% do see opportunities for the future. (N=28)

It is clear that many different answers were given to this question also in the different countries. In Suriname, 24% says they do not know how to improve, 22% says it could be improved by improving regulation, 16% sees improvement possible through the education of miners on regulatory issues. (N=50)

In Brazil, 26% sees improvement possible through the elimination of mercury in the mining process, 24% by improving mining methods, 19% by improving regulation on mining. (N=23)

In Peru, 27% of the miners say that restoring mining areas could help, 17% says that improving regulation could help, 17% states that recycling mercury and water in the mining process could help to improve the sector’s performance. (N=30)

And finally, in Suriname, 32% says they do not know how to contribute, 22% did not answer, 16% says they would like to contribute by mining without mercury. (N=42)

In Brazil, 36% answered they do not know how to contribute, 25% by selling gold in legalised places, 23% did not answer. (N=19)

In Peru, 65% says they want to contribute by recovering mined areas, 28% by selling gold in legalised places. (N=30)