State diamond-mining company Alexkor was only partly responsible for the degradation of the wetland at the mouth of the Orange River, the Land Claims Court heard on Friday.
The court is hearing a claim by the Richtersveld community for up to R2,5-billion in compensation, and the return of more than 84 000ha of land, including the wetland, which is a declared Ramsar site.
Earlier this week, University of Cape Town environment expert Tony Barbour told the court that the wetland was damaged by dust from Alexkor’s mining activities and by roads built over it.
On Friday, Marius Oosthuizen, one of the four advocates appearing for the government, which is opposing the Richtersveld claim, told Barbour he is not disputing that Alexkor contributed to the wetland’s problems.
However, other experts have shown that a series of changes over decades in the hydrology of the Orange River, including construction of major dams and abstraction of water for irrigation schemes and the Orange/Fish scheme, also played a role.
By the time the wetland was declared a Ramsar site in 1991, the salt marsh there had already been destroyed, Oosthuizen said.
”My understanding is that destroyed means there is no salt marsh whatsoever,” replied Barbour.
Barbour agreed with Oosthuizen that the site is a national asset, that it should be accessible to the broader public, and that it is important that it be controlled and protected.
However, he balked at Oosthuizen’s proposition that it would be preferable for the site to be ”kept as a national asset” rather than pass into private ownership, which the transfer to the Richtersvelders would entail.
Barbour said this would depend on the level of governance in South Africa, the state of environmental legislation, and ”the ability to regulate”.
”As a Ramsar site, does this carry national responsibilities for the state?” asked Oosthuizen.
”Yes, it does,” said Barbour.
Earlier, Alexkor advocate Marius Scholz questioned Barbour on whether, if he were a consultant in a theoretical land claim on Kimberley, he would suggest that the Big Hole should be filled in, as he was suggesting for Alexkor’s disused mining pits and trenches.
”It would depend on the merits of the case,” Barbour replied.
Asked whether he was seriously suggesting that this was a possibility, Barbour said that in the Alexkor case, material to fill the holes is at hand.
He very much doubted whether in the case of the Big Hole that material is available.
The court moves to Alexander Bay itself this weekend for a three-day, on-the-spot inspection of the affected areas, which begins on Monday morning. — Sapa