STAMPRIET WATER SECURITY CANNOT BE COMPROMISED: SAUMA DEMANDS FULL DISCLOSURE AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Research drilling is not proof of safety. No progression to uranium leaching without public scrutiny and independently assessed evidence.

The Stampriet Aquifer Uranium Mining Association (SAUMA) demands full disclosure of the government authorisation that Headspring Investments says it has received for additional research boreholes associated with its proposed Wings uranium project.

The stakes are fundamental: the protection of groundwater on which communities, towns, agriculture and livelihoods depend. Decisions affecting this resource demand rigorous scrutiny, enforceable safeguards and public accountability.

Headspring’s release of 3 November 2026 states that the announced research phase will involve no reagents and that a revised application for pilot testing will follow. Its announcement therefore does not establish approval for chemical leaching nor demonstrates that uranium extraction is safe for the Stampriet aquifer.

Any suggestion that the wider project has now been cleared as safe would be premature and unacceptable.

SAUMA remains firmly opposed to in-situ leach uranium extraction in the Stampriet Artesian Basin. The authorisation of further investigations does not resolve SAUMA’s substantive concerns about groundwater contamination and the potentially severe, lasting consequences for those who depend on this shared water resource.

Nor does the absence of reagents make research drilling exempt from scrutiny. The public is entitled to know how boreholes will be constructed, sealed and monitored, how groundwater will be protected, and who will be held accountable if safeguards fail.

SAUMA calls for the following immediate action:

1. Publish the authorisation in full. Identify who issued it, when, the activities and locations covered, its duration and every condition attached. State explicitly whether any separate authorisation exists for pilot extraction or chemical injection.

2. Release the IAEA mission report and relevant recommendations. References to international expertise cannot substitute for disclosure of the actual findings, qualifications and outstanding questions.

3. Disclose the scientific basis for the decision. Publish the research programme, available baseline water-quality data, aquifer assessments and groundwater protection measures, and provide for independent technical scrutiny.

4. Explain how compliance will be enforced. Identify the responsible authorities, inspection arrangements, reporting requirements and conditions that would trigger an immediate suspension of drilling.

5. Ensure meaningful public participation before any decision on pilot extraction. Affected communities and water users must have access to the evidence and a genuine opportunity to challenge it before decisions are made.

6. Account publicly for transboundary consultation. Explain what engagement has taken place with Botswana and South Africa concerning potential implications for the shared aquifer.

Pending disclosure and independent scrutiny of the authorisation and its safeguards, SAUMA calls for the newly announced drilling to be placed on hold. It further calls on government not to authorise chemical injection or pilot uranium recovery while groundwater safety concerns remain unresolved.

SAUMA requests an urgent meeting with the responsible ministries and affected community representatives, together with a clear timetable for publication of the requested documents and answers.

General assurances about the technology, promises of investment and commitments to future dialogue are insufficient. Claims of safety must withstand examination against the specific conditions of the Stampriet aquifer.

SAUMA will continue to scrutinise decisions, challenge unsupported assurances and press for accountability. The communities and water users whose futures are at stake deserve substantive answers and enforceable protection.

Water security is non-negotiable. Water is life.