Environmental impact assessments are
'seriously flawed'
August 6, 2004
By
Laurianne Claase
Biodiversity is the lifeblood of the planet.
Birds, reptiles, insects and mammals depend on plants for their
survival.
Alarmingly, South Africa has the second highest
number of plant extinctions in the world. While the Cape Floral
Kingdom earned international recognition recently as South Africa's
newest World Heritage Site, other conservation initiatives also seem
to bode well for the preservation of what remains of the Western
Cape's unique biodiversity. Or do they?
The South African
government has made great strides in promulgating legislation to
protect the environment. This includes the National Environmental
Management Act (1998) and the Living Marine Resources Act.
The Biodiversity Act was signed into law by President Thabo
Mbeki on May 31. In addition, the government has ratified
international conventions such as the Convention on Biodiversity,
Ramsar, Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species
(Cites) and the World Heritage Convention.
The Western Cape
has also moved to redress the damage done to its natural heritage.
The Property Rates Bill of 2003 makes protected areas exempt from
land tax. Where agriculture has decimated indigenous fynbos, private
landowners now have an incentive to preserve what is left.
The world, too, has recognised the importance of the Cape
Floral Kingdom, and the World Bank and United nations Development
Programme have donated millions of US dollars to the Cape Action
Plan for People and Environment (Cape) project, which aims to have
"effectively conserved the natural environment and biodiversity of
the Cape Floristic Region" by 2024.
However, uncontrolled
and un-scrupulous development threatens such worthy ambitions.
Currently, the City of Cape Town is objecting to a proposed toll
road development that will cut through the Cape Flats, a
biodiversity hotspot with over 1 400 indigenous plant species. The
R300/N21 also threatens irreplaceable Renosterveld in the
Durbanville area and a number of Red Data species of both flora and
fauna.
In addition, Cape Nature Conservation's plea for
high-level intervention in the proliferation of golf courses and
estates along the southern Cape's Garden Route has attracted the
attention of the new provincial MEC for Environmental Affairs and
Development Planning, Tasneem Essop. She has initiated an
investigation into the sustainability of such developments to help
formulate a provincial policy guideline for golf estates.
There are already at least 22 golf courses along the Garden
Route and a positive record of decision was announced for yet
another in September 2003.
The R1 billion Kingswood Golf
Estate, with its 730 residential units and 18-hole golf course, will
be situated between the George Golf Club and Fancourt estate.
Our indigenous flora is being engulfed
by grass and concrete, and the food chain severely disrupted.
These developments are contentious for other reasons. Doubt
has been cast on the planning approval given for some of these
estates, and a number of court cases are under way.
The Cape
Times has also noted that in 2003, environmental laws in the Western
Cape were disregarded by developers in 140 recorded in-stances. The
application for the proposed 600ha Fynboskruin development near
Sedgefield was rejected in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
as "too ecologically valuable to be disturbed".
Then-minister of environmental affairs and tourism Valli
Moosa gave his approval anyway, ostensibly for the benefit of
tourism and the economy.
Despite the job creation invariably
touted in the developers' justification for their projects, there is
increasing scepticism both from the public and now, it seems, from
Essop: "While it can be argued that golf estates are of value for
tourism and job creation, this still needs to be assessed. The
negative impacts on our natural resources, especially our limited
water resources, may well outweigh the benefits."
In spite
of the vocal support of new Environmental Affairs Minister,
Marthinus van Schalkwyk, for placing "people firmly at the centre of
conservation", there is an increasing perception that these
developments are not for the community but for corporate profits.
There are legal obligations to perform EIAs before such
developments are given the go-ahead.
However, a number of
serious flaws in the process have been noted. In its response to the
draft EIA on the R300/N21 toll road, the City of Cape Town noted
that "there are numerous errors and omissions in the text and
terminology of the draft EIA".
A seeming insurmountable
problem with the EIA process is that the consultants that undertake
the assessment are paid by the developer. An unbiased EIA is
unlikely in such circumstances.
In addition, the public
participation process in many of these EIAs have been inadequate.
The draft EIA on the R300/N21 toll road amounted to five hefty
volumes of specialist information, inaccessible to most of Cape
Town's population even if they could view the report on the internet
or in 10 libraries around the city.
Legislation without
enforcement is a toothless lion.
These issues need urgent
attention - otherwise soon we will all have to take up golf to enjoy
the "great outdoors".
Claase is responsible for media liaison for the Zeekoevlei
Environmental Forum.
