Parliament’s Standing Committees on Natural Resources and on Economics and Public Administration have urged the government to allow uranium exploration to continue in the Stampriet Artesian Basin – but only in the absence of evidence that in-situ recovery mining will contaminate groundwater.
Their March 2025 report follows a series of visits to Farm Tripoli 546 near Leonardville, where Headspring Investments, a subsidiary of Uranium One, began uranium exploration in 2019, as well as consultations with the Ministries of Agriculture, Water and Land Reform; Mines and Energy; Environment, Forestry and Tourism; and various community stakeholders.
According to the report, the company had completed about half of its exploration programme when activities were halted, after the agriculture ministry found what it called “gross violations” of drilling permit conditions.
Exploration was originally intended to run until 2027 to determine whether mining by in-situ recovery, or ISR, was feasible.
The ministry’s letter, attached as an annexure to the report, records that Headspring failed to drill boreholes in line with strict conditions for the Kalahari and Auob aquifers, left some boreholes open for long periods, and drilled at least 70 exploration and seven hydrogeological boreholes without valid permits.
The permits, issued in March 2021, were withdrawn with immediate effect and no further drilling was allowed.
When the committees visited the site, all foreign specialists had left and the company’s workforce had shrunk from 300 employees to only 12. No drilling was taking place.
Headspring’s own presentation to the committees, as recorded in the report, claimed that interim results showed a potentially sizeable operation.
The company projected a possible 25-year mine producing around 3,000 tonnes of uranium per year, generating revenues of roughly N$6,6 billion annually and contributing between one and two percentage points to gross domestic product if developed.
It said up to 800 miners could be employed in a steady state, in addition to earlier exploration jobs.
Those promises collided head-on with fears that ISR mining, which dissolves uranium underground with a sulphuric acid solution and pumps the uranium-bearing water to the surface, could permanently degrade the Stampriet Basin’s drinking water.
The basin is the only year-round water source for settlements including Leonardville, Stampriet, Aranos, Aminuis, Gochas and Koes, as well as farms, livestock and tourism operations across commercial and communal areas.
The committee’s report notes that a large part of the exploration area lies on commercial farms. Still, that communal villages such as Okahiokaapa, Osarimaree and Omurambauondjombo also fall within the eight exclusive prospecting licences, seven of which had already been partially explored.
Community meetings held in Leonardville, Stampriet and Aranos revealed deep divisions. Some residents, facing chronic unemployment and limited economic activity, argued that uranium mining could bring jobs and new business opportunities.
Others insisted that no financial benefit could justify risking a shared aquifer that sustains people, livestock and crops in three countries.
The report records allegations that some farmers received payments for drilling on their land, further fuelling mistrust.
Community members also called for more independent clinical and geological studies to measure water quality and pollution risks before any further drilling is authorised.
A separate presentation by the Stampriet Aquifer Uranium Mining Association (SAUMA), delivered by geologist Dr Miller, reinforced those concerns. According to the committee’s summary, SAUMA accepts the need for mining development but is “strongly opposed” to ISR in the Stampriet Basin because uranium deposits lie in the same sandstone units that carry high-quality drinking water, and because ISR dissolves not only uranium but also other toxic heavy metals, which can build up in the groundwater.
The committees noted that, despite the permit breaches, there was, at the time of writing, no evidence that exploration drilling had contaminated groundwater. However, they also acknowledged that many potential problems associated with ISR are underground and cannot be easily seen.
In their conclusion, the committees called for more consultation and clarification from the ministries involved, noting that Headspring had never been given the full agriculture ministry report detailing non-compliance.
They stressed that the exploration suspension was based on contraventions of permit conditions and the Water Resources Management Act.
Their recommendations attempt to straddle the line between economic opportunity and environmental caution. On the one hand, they support the continuation of exploration “in the absence of any evidence that the mining methodology being used has or will contaminate groundwater”.
On the other hand, they urge the government to appoint independent specialists in hydrology, geology, hydrogeology, geochemistry, and metallurgy to review the ISR proposal and its likely impact on the Stampriet Basin.
Finally, the report calls on the government to share information more widely and “educate the community at large”, especially on ISR’s potential impacts, in an effort to rebuild trust in a region where water is non-negotiable and the stakes could not be higher.
