NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
FOR WRITTEN REPLY
QUESTION NO 2151
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 06 NOVEMBER 2009
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 27)
2151 Mrs A T Lovemore (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental
Affairs:
Whether she will assist farmers with the high cost of removing alien
vegetation from their land as a water-saving measure; if not, why not;
if so, what are the relevant details? NW2151E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act 43 of 1983) and
the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 700 of
2004) place the responsibility for the control of invasive alien
plants on the land-user (including land-owner). The land-owner is
therefore accountable for the land being clear of invasive alien
plants.
Notwithstanding the legal provisions, it is recognized that there are
many circumstances where it is necessary to support land-owners in
bringing invasive alien plants under control, such is the extent of
invasions, the difficulty that many be encountered identifying
invasive alien plants, and the costs involved.
Certain of these plants have very negative impacts on people other
than the land-owners on whose land the plants have invaded, including
water quantity, water quality, wild fires, soil erosion, siltation,
flooding, the productive use of land, biological diversity and many
other considerations. In such circumstances, an argument can be made
for a level of âpayment for ecosystem servicesâ â i.e. where those
receiving more water as a result of the invasive alien plants being
cleared pay towards the costs of control of the invasive species.
The Working for Water Programme is driven, amongst others, by the
principle that it would be unfair to put the responsibility for
assistance solely on those benefiting from the ecosystem services. It
is through this programme that My Department provides assistance to
land-owners to take control of invasive plants on their land. This is
done in a systematic manner, including the identification of priority
species and priority land, and working in a co-ordinated manner to
ensure that there can be sustained control of the species on all land
within prioritized areas.
It is recognized that the invasion of alien plants is an on-going
threat, and that follow-up clearing is essential if the species are to
be brought under control. The land-owner agreements provide for an
appropriate level of support for follow-up clearing, to a point where
it is reasonable and fair to expect the land-owner to maintain the
land in a cleared state.
It has however become apparent that the programme needs to review its
approach regarding working on private land. This is because the
programme has helped some land-owners who have not managed invasives
on their land, who in turn have sued the programme for alleged or
actual damages. There will be a shift to providing incentives to land-
owners for them to manage labour-intensive work on their land, and be
accountable for the associated risks. It is also felt that this
approach will strengthen the sense of ownership of the problem more
than where Working for Water takes responsibility for the clearing,
and build relationships with the contract workers.
---00O00---