FânFest Conferences

This year, FânFest took place from September 12 to 14 and brought to Rosia Montana a series of conferences and debates relevant to illustrate the situation in which the locality finds itself after more than a decade of living with the intention of mining on an unprecedented scale here. Another dominant feature of the lectures was the highlighting of the possibilities for a sustainable development of the locality.

The topics discussed were: Heritage, resource for development. The case of Roșia Montană (organized by Arhitectură. Restaurare. Archaeology, arh. Ștefan Bâlici and arh. Virgil Apostol); Landscape Archaeology in the Transylvanian Gold Cadrilater: Roșia Montană - Bucium - Almașul Mare (archaeologist Horia Ciugudean), Rimetea case. Model of valorization of cultural heritage in the development of a rural community (arch. Eugen Pănescu), Roșia Montană case in the media. Manipulation, economic pressures, censorship (journalist Mihai Goțiu), Environmental racism (Adrian Dohotaru, prof. dr. anthrop. Eniko Vincze, soc. Cristina Raț), The future of agriculture at Rosia Montana (Dan Cișmaș, Eugen David, Ramona Duminicioiu), Save Rosia Montana Campaign - involvement and activism (jurist Ștefania Siminon, Eugen David, Sorana Olaru-Zăinescu) and Social Forum (Adrian Dohotaru).

Presentation of the Association Arhitectură. Restaurare. Archaeology dealt with the cultural heritage values of the Rosia Montana site, the actions of the association to save them and models of interventions in other communities.

The Association has organized two summer schools for the documentation of the heritage of Rosia Montana (including the realization of surveys), emergency interventions at the reformed parish office (unfortunately not continued due to the owner's wish), emergency interventions and restoration of the Unitarian parish house, carried out restoration projects for other buildings and developed a local network that allowed them to access traditional materials and crafts. All this was done at a cost of around €30,000. Multiplication of these actions by those interested would lead, with relatively small one-off investments, to the rehabilitation of the area. The case of Viscri was mentioned in the presentation because of the situation that could be reached at Roșia Montană as a result of such concerted one-off actions. In a settlement five times smaller than Viscri, as a result of NGO actions, tourism has developed in a few years, reaching 12,000 tourists in 2010. The Blenavon mining site in the UK was suddenly closed and the entire population had to relocate. In just 10 years, following the World Heritage listing, 75% of the historic center has been restored. 100,000 tourists a year and 100 construction jobs have been created. The UNESCO site of Las Médulas (Spain), also a mining site, attracts 80,000 visitors a year. The Gold Museum of the Apusenians in Rosia Montana, according to official data, sold 10,000 tickets last year without investing in tourism development. In conclusion, an invitation was extended to other scientific fields to come to Rosia Montana with projects involving the local community and the local heritage in order to generate sustainable development.

The presentation by archaeologist Professor Horia Ciugudean reviewed the situation of the other archaeological sites in the Cadrilaterul Auriferous Cadrilaterul where there are mining projects at various stages of approval and pointed out some of the reasons why the archaeological research carried out at Roșia Montană cannot be considered sufficient.

Landscape archaeology is ignored in the Romanian archaeological task discharges. The mining galleries are investigated individually and the research is considered completed. The general geological formation and the ensemble formed by it with the respective galleries is not considered. At Roșia Montană probably less than 10% of the landscape archaeology has been inventoried, not surveyed. Another problematic aspect of the Alburnus Maior program research is the fact that remains from eras other than the Roman period have been summarily investigated and not discussed in professional circles (e.g. Bronze Age tumuli). Why were the buried here? Why did they suddenly appear in the 3rd millennium BC? Why do they have a remote culture? What is the relationship between the mining of ferrous (needed to make the tools with which they mined) and non-ferrous deposits? The presentation ended with the regret of the disappearance of the Cetate Massif, emblematic for the cultural landscape of Rosia Montana, due to political pressure and the shameful acceptance by some scientists in the 1970s. It is also worth mentioning that, at the time, there was the intention of some archaeologists to start the procedure to classify the site in the UNESCO List.

The architect Eugen Pănescu presented the case of the rehabilitation of Rimetea, alocality with an important cultural heritage, located a little over an hour's drive from Rosia Montana. Historically the main profile of the locality was iron ore processing, but in the mid-1990s most of the inhabitants were forced to practice subsistence farming. With the help of relatively little but steady funding from the City Council of Budapest's District 5, supported by a project of the Transylvania Trust, within a few years the village became an important attraction for foreign tourists. The aid consisted of about 50-100 USD per traditional house, enough money in the late 1990s for the rehabilitation of the facade. For houses needing more extensive interventions, 10 grants of around 300 USD were awarded annually through a competition. In exchange for these grants, a contract was signed with a limited number of obligations on the part of the beneficiary: allowing access for research, preservation and restoration of elements identified as valuable, use of local labor to carry out the interventions, and maintenance of the buildings. Over time, the programme acquired specialized funding lines (rehabilitation of windows, gates) and, in the spirit of protecting the historic character of the locality, interventions on recent buildings were supported if traditional materials were used. Investment was also made in training local craftsmen. Small amounts of funding avoided creating a dependency on external funding and dissension within the community. The way the money was disbursed aimed to encourage interest in heritage.

As a result of the intervention, the same inhabitants have remained in the village, a more cohesive community has emerged, the development of private investment has been supported, traditional crafts have been revitalized and the economic profile of the village has become mainly tourist-oriented (50 guesthouses in 2010). 300,000 € have been invested in 15 years, benefiting 140 buildings. Unfortunately, the project failed to attract Romanian public funding.

Presentation by journalist Mihai Goțiu, The Roșia Montană case in the media. Manipulation, economic pressures, censorship, began with the dismantling of some key phrases promoted in the media in favor of the RMGC project. Here are just a few of these.

On a global scale, continued gold mining is necessary. At present, the gold needed by the industry can be supplied by recycling, continued mining is only for speculative reasons and for luxury goods.

RMGC is protecting the heritage of Roșia Montană. Many of the houses owned by the mining company in the protected area, especially those not on the main road, are in very poor condition. As an example of the care given to the houses by the company, the case of the house at no. 393, dating from 1819 as a historical monument, of which only the foundations remain.

The built heritage of Roșia Montană is being destroyed, and RMGC is the salvation for its restoration. The need to rehabilitate the buildings arose especially after the company acquired them, following their non-use. Even before the company came into existence, there were problems related to the preservation of the heritage, but they were not as widespread and did not worsen at the accelerated rate as they are now.

RMGC has invested in archaeological research that has uncovered extraordinary artifacts, research for which the Romanian state would never have had the money. The investments made by the company were not a charitable act, but, in order to obtain the necessary permits for the project, the company was obliged by law to carry out the research.

Mihai Goțiu also pointed out that he found some of the artifacts in the company's care in degrading physical and moral conditions.

Supporting the RMGC project by referring to courts that appear in equivocal contexts as far superior. See in this regard the reference to Oxford Policy Management specialists, without further clarification. This is not a department of Oxford University, as one might be tempted to think, but a public relations firm. The highly publicized "UNESCO expert report" by Dennis Rodwell has also created some misunderstandings. It is not a report, but some "considerations" (title in original: A Reflection on the Relevance and the Suitability of Roșia Montană as a UNESCO Word Heritage Site), the correct relationship between Dennis Rodwell should not be made with UNESCO, but with ICOMOS, an organization that does not, however, certify experts. Dennis Rodwell has indeed worked with ICOMOS in other situations. The sad fact is that these confusions are being propagated by most central and local publications which show a suspicious interest in some news at the expense of others. At the same time as the publication of the "UNESCO expert's report", which was intensely covered by the media, a debate was taking place in Brussels on Rosia Montana in peril, organized by Europa Nostra, Pro Patrimonio and MEP Daciana Sârbu, where several specialists presented the situation of the locality and supported the classification of the site on the UNESCO List. Moreover, at the same debate, one of the ICOMOS vice-presidents pointed out that the "UNESCO expert's report" does not represent the organization's position, and ICOMOS Romania dissociated itself from the "report". The news was overlooked by the publications that were publicizing the "report".

Another hypostasis exposed in the presentation, which raises questions about the fairness of the press, was the censorship of some materials against the RMGC project (disappearance from the website shortly after publication).

Leaving aside the deontological questions regarding its acceptance, the information trip organized by RMGC for Romanian journalists to New Zealand had a significant aftermath, as on their return, material was produced that presented only positively the exploitation and its relationship with the community. Only a month before the visit, the government, following protests, had decided not to extend the exploitation license and thus to leave deposits of more than 60 billion dollars underground. USD. The Romanian journalists also failed to notice the statistical data showing that the population in the mining area is older than the average for the region, with a higher number of people with mental problems, lower education, etc.

Regarding RMGC's relationship with the press, Mihai Goțiu pointed out that the sums invested by the company are huge, both taken in isolation and in relation to the current situation of the Romanian press.

Environmental racism presented the case of the evacuation of 60 families, mostly Roma, from the center of Cluj-Napoca, at - 4oC, a week before Christmas. The families were relocated to social housing provided by the city hall next to the garbage dump, 4 km from the city. The social housing did not meet the requirements of a decent living (not connected to utilities, not properly insulated, no privacy, etc.) Environmental racism is known in the literature as the action of adopting policies or regulations that adversely affect the living conditions of low-income or minority communities disproportionately to the rest of the population.

Thefuture of agriculture in Roșia Montană has presented, through concrete examples, an alternative to the industrial profile of the area, which is mainly related to livestock farming. This branch of agriculture is historically present in Rosia Montana (especially in the village of Țarina).

TheSave Rosia Montana - Involvement and Activism campaign consisted in presenting the existing legal situation and the most recent actions of the mining company. It showed the legislative implications raised by the draft amendment to the Mining Law, initiated by senators Toni Greblă and Ion Rușeț (in fact, a series of derogatory provisions from environmental, urban planning, construction and cultural heritage protection legislation, which lead to the burning of the steps in the start of mining operations). The draft is in the Chamber of Deputies, the Chamber of Deputies, which is the decision-making chamber on this project.

The contract between the National Heritage Institute under the Ministry of Culture and RMGC was discussed.

Petitions were presented to the Ministry of the Environment, for not granting the authorization for the mining project carried out by Roșia Montană Gold Corporation, to the Ministry of Culture, for the withdrawal of the archaeological discharge of the Cârnic Massif, and to the Chamber of Deputies, for the rejection of the draft amendment to the Mining Law.

During the Social Forum meeting, Adrian Dohotaru presented the Critic Atac initiative, which aims to set up a network of NGOs and individuals who can propose to politicians topics for reflection. He talked about citizens' involvement and supporting the creation of local organizations in order to convey community problems to the administration.

The Fân Festival, FânFest, is a large-scale cultural event which includes: live music concerts, theater performances, film screenings, conferences, traditional and home-made fairs, tourist guides, adventure park activities, etc. FânFest takes place in Rosia Montana and started as a form of protest against the mining project proposed by RMGC. FânFest promotes local development alternatives.