Janine Stephen
Is clearing alien vegetation pouring money into a bottomless pit? Not if it is done correctly. But if no follow-up work is done, you can be back at where you began within a year. South African National Parks (SANP) was given R5-million in January on behalf of Working for Water, to clear areas in the Cape Peninsula choked with aliens.
The money has to be spent within the financial year, which ends this month, so teams of contractors have been working flat out since January 19.
Alien vegetation chokes indigenous fynbos – one of just six floral kingdoms worldwide – and it uses huge amounts of water. Clearing work is highly labour intensive, and large numbers of people have gained employment through various Working for Water projects.
But removing aliens is not easy. The plants regenerate through seeding and resprouting. Follow-up work is vital; in fact, if it’s not done, the initial cutting may as well never have been initiated. Port Jackson willows are particularly tenacious. If they are cut and not treated, up to seven stems can sprout from each stump, resulting in an even denser plague.
Concerns have been expressed about the SANP’s strategy to clear the land. The workers are attacking very densely infested areas and the results are now highly visible. But there is no follow-up clause in the clearers’ contracts.
Barry Patterson, the project co-ordinator, is adamant that follow-up work will be done. “Why follow-up is not built into the contracts is largely due to an agricultural law designed to control the use of herbicides. Herbicides cannot be used by unregistered people working for profit, which our contractors do,” he says. “The local authorities in each area are helping with follow-up; people are applying herbicide to the stumps. We will also be spraying new growth.”
Chris Martens, district manager of Overburg Cape Nature Conservation, believes it’s time the thinking around clearing alien vegetation changed. “At the moment, the effectiveness of clearing is measured by the initial cut, but follow-up and restoration work is often not built into costs. We need to adapt the process so that it can become more effective in the long run.
“It seems to be a human tendency, in a project of this nature, to tackle the bad patches first. Actually these patches can’t get any worse. It would be better to maximise the clear areas, working around the dense stands to contain further spread. The crunch comes with the follow-up. Here projects fold, because they don’t have the capacity to do the follow-up that is needed.”
An independent team of clearers working on privately owned land has demonstrated what can be done using a different strategy. Having received funds from the World Wildlife Fund’s Table Mountain Fund in 1996, The Red Hill Fynbos Restoration Project (RHFRP) employed eight people and got to work, using methods they claim are “cheaper and more effective”. Two years later, they have thoroughly cleared more than 1 000ha of land. The SANP, working with 672 people for 10 weeks, hopes to clear 820ha.
In some ways, the comparison is unfair: the SANP has attacked densely invaded areas, while Red Hill’s land has been mildly infested, with thick pockets here and there. But the difference is in the size of the follow-up operation needed.
“We work for maximum fatality at first encounter,” says Jeremy Croudace of the RHFRP. “Plants that are small enough are pulled out by the roots. Older plants are either lopped off below the ground so that they won’t resprout, or poisoned immediately. We don’t spray because it damages the fynbos. Our method is labour rather than capital or chemical intensive. But you are looking at a vastly reduced follow-up.” Patterson agrees that this kind of clearing may be ideal, “but with the time constraints, and taking into account that we are working in such densely infested areas, it was not practical”.
Looking over an area cleared by the Red Hill team a year ago, the only aliens to be seen are a few seedlings. These too will soon be cleared. In contrast is a small area nearby, cleared by Working for Water workers about six months ago. The Port Jacksons were cut above the ground, and have resprouted lushly, denser than before. No follow-up has yet been done.
Alida Croudace, also of the RHFRP, is worried. “Now there is money for alien clearing and a lot of support for it. Yet if the money is spent, and the area looks little better, this funding will dry up and we can forget about international funding thereafter.”
The SANP is monitoring the areas being cleared by the contractors to ensure the initial cut is done properly. Once the land is handed over to national parks, it will be their responsibility to do the follow-up work.
It appears that there will be money for this. “We will be receiving another R7,5 million in funding from the Global Environmental Facility,” says Patterson.
Says Chris Martens: “National parks has a lot of responsibility here. Whether the money comes from overseas or from the taxpayers, either way it makes sense that in the long term it would be best for the most cost-effective system to be used. Otherwise all your funding could be spent on keeping the land clear, and it is therefore not available for other priority conservation management.”
It appears that the SANP has been restricted in the clearing methods at its disposal, largely because of time constraints, but is aware of the need for follow-up work. In the future, perhaps ways could be found to ensure more time is available for projects of this nature.
ENDS