Earth, Air and Water
An Information Service supplied by the KwaZulu-Natal Law Society

21 November 2006                       

This information service serves to draw attention to current news items
 and readers are directed to the hosts' websites

Contents
Government Gazette Update
Bills and Draft Bills
Government, General and Board Notices
In the News
Airports Company of South Africa (ACSA) fuel spill clean-up and health risks
The govt goes green
Court sets deadline for pollution clean-up
EU to punish environmental crimes
Red1 article inaccurate
Authorities unconcerned about damage to bush
Hunting for conservation solutions
Hunting 'has conservation role'
Man in court charged with breaking hunting laws [UK]
Weblog - http://knowgozone.blogspot.com

Government Gazette Update

  Bills and Draft Bills

Draft Bill

National Environmental Management Amendment Bill

Draft Bill for public comment
GenN 1405/GG 29240/29-09-2006


  Government, General and Board Notices

Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

Publication of Draft Policy for the Development of a Sustainable Aquaculture Sector in South Africa
GenN 1414/GG 29254/29-09-2006


In the News

Airports Company of South Africa (ACSA) fuel spill clean-up and health risks - 10 November
  Due to the fuel spillage incident from OR Tambo that took place on Tuesday, 7 November 2006 and contaminated the Blaauwpan Pan, Bonaero Park, Ekurhuleni, it has become necessary to inform the public of key facts regarding the response to the incident and impacts on local residents.

The product spilled is aircraft fuel, currently estimated at around 1 million litres. Clean-up is taking place around the clock and the spread of the spill has been fully contained. The outlet from the dam has been sealed off since Tuesday, 7 November 2006, and will not be re-opened until authorities are satisfied with the water quality.

Rapid Spill Response teams have been pumping off fuel since Tuesday, 7 November 2006. In addition, an organic peat absorbent is used to absorb spilled fuel. The absorption product contains no chemicals, and poses no risk at all. The absorbed waste product will be removed from the spill site to an authorised disposal site.

The fuel spilled gives off certain vapours with a strong odour, including toluene and xylene. Authorities are monitoring the levels of these vapours on an ongoing basis.

Whilst levels of these chemicals are higher than normal, authorities are satisfied that the levels are well within safety limits and pose no medium or long-term health risk. No levels of benzene have been recorded.

Due to the strong odour, discomfort might be experienced by local residents. Residents are advised to stay in well-ventilated areas, by opening windows on the downwind side. The odour will continue to dissipate until all the spilled fuels have been removed.

Authorities have taken water samples, both at the source of the spillage and at boreholes surrounding the Blaauwpan Dam. Should samples show that the product has reached groundwater ; the sampling programme will be extended appropriately.

Residents surrounding Blaauwpan Dam who rely solely on borehole water should contact: Jan Bodenstein from Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality Environmental Health on Cell : 082-302 0469.

Residents and visitors will not be able to access the Blaauwpan Dam until further notice.

Enquiries :
Blessing Manale
Cell : 083-381 2939

Issued by : Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

SA Government Information website


The govt goes green - 16 November
  Jocelyn Newmarch

Government’s new green energy strategy is steaming ahead, combining a strong focus on renewables and energy efficiency.

Three organisations have been established this year under the Central Energy Fund, a state-owned body, with a mandate to research and commercialise alternative energy technologies. The organisations centralise functions formerly performed by the government and parastatals such as Eskom.

The three agencies will both fund long-term research and facilitate the implementation of short-term energy efficient programmes, which can be fast-tracked now.

The South African National Energy Research Institute (Saneri), a subsidiary of the Central Energy Fund, develops and demonstrates new energy technology. Formed this year, its CEO, Kevin Nassiep, was appointed in August. Nassiep also oversees the National Energy Efficiency Agency (NEEA), which promotes energy saving measures. The third body is the Energy Development Corporation, which commercialises renewable and sustainable energy technologies. All three work closely together to drive projects.

A biofuels investment strategy will be ready in a matter of weeks. "It has been an exceptionally fast process," said Nassiep. As one of the government's growth initiatives (Asgisa), there is strong political interest in biofuels.

According to Nassiep, the greatest benefit to biofuels investment will be job creation. "I don't know of any other venture which can create as many jobs, as cheaply," he told the Mail & Guardian.

While the Industrial Development Corporation spends R100 000 to create a job, a biofuels strategy could create a job for R10 000, Nassiep said. Most of these jobs would be created in largely impoverished, under-resourced rural areas, representing the first significant investment in the rural economy.

Biofuels represent an additional income stream for the volatile agriculture industry. Because the fuels can be produced from food crops such as sugar cane, maize and soya, biofuels would keep arable land productive. If the industry grew sufficiently, Nassiep says South Africa could eventually find itself importing soya from a neighbouring country such as Malawi, rather than oil.

Consumers also benefit from alternative energy research. Saneri is testing 500 solar water heaters in Durban, Johannesburg and Cape Town, to determine which units perfom best in different climatic conditions. Nassiep said government is considering making solar water heaters mandatory for houses that are worth more than a certain amount, possibly R400 000. But, in order to do that, the correct technology must be recommended.

Nearly 40% of household energy bills go towards heating water, so solar heaters can result in significant cost savings. But they’re expensive - basic units start at R5 000, double the price of geysers - and add to the building costs, so government may introduce subsidies, according to Nassiep.

Then there's low-cost light bulbs. LED bulbs (light-emitting diodes) generate as much light as conventional downloaders, but use one-tenth of the energy - 5W compared to 50W. They can be used in homes and offices, as well as for street lighting and for the brake lights on cars.

Energy labelling is another project. For now, Saneri has started with household appliances. But eventually, cars and buildings will be "labelled", with information available on energy use, emissions and running costs.

Energy efficiency is important for low-cost housing. Most low-cost houses lack ceilings so their owners freeze in winter and swelter in summer. But there are energy efficient ways to build that don’t necessarily cost much. Nassiep said these included orientating the building for solar efficiency, building roof overhangs, using better glazing materials and brick construction, and creating natural ventilation by angling the roof to create natural downdrafts.

Saneri is suggesting possible amendments to the building codes, to promote energy efficient construction. It would cost an extra R2 000 to fit a ceiling to an RDP house, but the energy saving would be enormous. Retro- fitting these ceilings to existing units would be a possibility, perhaps with funds from Eskom's Demand Side Management campaign, which has about R600-million available.

If the codes were to change, a training course would have to be developed for property developers and architects. But without amending the codes, these energy efficient proposals are unlikely to be adopted.

Consumers need an alternative to paraffin. Nassiep said Saneri wanted to investigate paraffin in a gel form, which would not spread so easily, and which would be coloured for safety purposes.

Business has also become involved through the voluntary Energy Efficiency Accord, now a year old. By the end of last year, Mondi's Richards Bay plant had saved R39-million worth of energy and water, a net cost- saving of 27% since 2003.

Mail & Guardian website


Court sets deadline for pollution clean-up - 21 October
 

Zelda Venter

The department of mineral and energy affairs and its regional manager must within two weeks put measures in place to reduce dust and control the water pollution from the gold mine dump known as "the Princess Dump" at Victory Park, an extension of Davidsonville west of Roodepoort.

This order was made by the Pretoria High Court on Tuesday. It also ordered the dump be completely rehabilitated within two years. The department consented to the order.

Two residents, Desiree Raaths and Patrick Lawrence, with the help of the Legal Resources Centre, asked the court to step in and act against the pollution.

The Princess Dump is a goldmine tailing dam created by various gold mining companies, which no longer exist. The dump forms an "L" shape and Victory Park was developed inside the shape in the early 90s.

In 1996 an additional row of houses were added on the edge of the dump. Ellen Nicol, LRC attorney acting on behalf of the applicants, said the dump had not been rehabilitated and caused dust pollution. Seepage water from the dump floods the yards of residents and leaves stagnant pools during the wet season.

DRD Gold, one of the respondents in the case, failed to rehabilitate that part of the dump after completing its work, Nicol said.

The applicants claim that the company is responsible for the rehabilitation of that section and that in terms of the new Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, the directors of DRD Gold are personally liable for the pollution and for its rehabilitation.

They also hold that the department is responsible for the rehabilitation of the remainder of the dump.

Meanwhile, in a similar application the court declared the gold mine dump known as "the West Rand Consolidated Dump" at Kagiso, south of Mogale City, an environmental hazard. This followed an application by residents who complained that the dump was a health and environmental hazard.

This article was first published on page 4 of Pretoria News on October 25, 2006

IOL website


EU to punish environmental crimes - 26 October
 

The EU has urged tough sanctions on companies that break a ban on shipping toxic waste to developing countries.

Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas told the European Parliament he would put forward new laws by the year's end.

The move comes after a ship chartered by a Dutch company released toxic waste in the Ivory Coast last month, killing 10 people and making thousands ill.

The European Commission has long tried to criminalise big environmental offences, but EU nations have resisted.

According to the BBC's Alix Kroeger in Brussels, the Commission believes the Ivory Coast case gives its argument for such penalties fresh impetus.

Under European law, EU member states are banned from shipping their toxic waste to less developed countries.

Mr Dimas said the shipping of toxic waste to the Ivory Coast was a crime and should be treated as such.

"The incident has had disastrous consequences," he said.

Mr Dimas will put forward legislation by the end of the year on criminalising serious environmental offences, including the illegal shipment of waste.

BBC News website


Red1 article inaccurate - 14 September
  The article on the front page of your newspaper on September 5, "City finance committee blows fuse on Red1 salaries", refers.

The article contains a number of factual inaccuracies and incorrectly attributes certain inaccurate statements to me.

Your reporter either deliberately misrepresented, or misunderstood, key issues at the city finance committee meeting.

In particular, your reporter failed to understand that what was being discussed was the July 2005 to June 2006 budget, and not actual expenditure, when it was envisaged that Red1 needed resources to prepare for the transfer of business from the city and Eskom.

I clearly indicated in this meeting that the actual expenditure was less than the budgeted expenditure, but this information appears to have been lost on your reporter.

For the record I wish to clarify the following :

The figure of R4.391 million was budgeted for the staff in the year 2005/2006 when a larger staff component was envisaged. A substantially lower amount was actually spent on salaries in respect of four staff members and not three as reported.

TThe figure of R100 000 for secretariat services per month was budgeted for, but the actual expenditure as indicated in the meeting was R391 000 for the year - a cost incurred to support in excess of 10 board meetings and committee meetings

The budgeted amount of R62 500 a month for travel and subsistence was not just for the board members as reported by your paper but, as I indicated, was budgeted for the entire organisation.

With regard to the salaries of executives of Red1, these were recommended by EDI Holdings, the company established to facilitate the restructuring of the electricity distribution industry in South Africa.

These were independently benchmarked and were also approved by the City of Cape Town and the Department of Minerals and Energy in 2005.

It is important to indicate that the delay in the transfer of business to Red1 is not due to a "final decision by national government on the formation of Red1".

The reason for the delay is to effect the finalisation of the Asset Transfer Framework, as required by section 14 of the Local Government Municipal Management Act.

Francis Matabane

Chief financial officer, Red1

CapeTimes Report website


Authorities unconcerned about damage to bush - 15 September
  I was under the impression that most people here cared about the environment. I thought the authorities wanted to protect the coastline and its indigenous bush from unsightly development and environmental damage. I was wrong.

I am lucky enough to live in a house at the Brighton Beach end of the Bluff, facing the sea. We also own bush right down to the Admiralty Reserve. I thought this land was untouchable. It is a haven for birds, monkeys, servals and other small animals.

My new neighbour, however, has started cutting down the bush in front of his house and even trespassed on to our land to cut down indigenous trees and shrubs.

I tried to talk to him about this and he apologised for trespassing and said it was his workers' mistake. They had been instructed to find the boundary markers.

However, they later cut down even more vegetation, including a mature tree on my side of the boundary. The result is a vast swath of devastation in which alien weeds like triffid weed and lantana will flourish, but nothing else will.

I have tried complaining to everyone I can think of. The Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa (Wessa) is not interested and neither is KwaZulu-Natal Wildlife. They said it was the eThekwini Municipality's responsibility. I was told to ring the Parks Department.

After trying five different phone numbers I eventually found a sympathetic ear. The gentleman knew the area and promised to visit the next day. However, he was overruled.

Someone else phoned me to say that if it wasn't council property it was not their problem. They only restricted development on the seaward side of the Bluff because the land was unstable.

I have now phoned Brighton Beach Police Station and a very sympathetic lady there is going to try to help, but I don't hold out much hope. What can anyone do now? The bush has gone. No one except me seems to care.

Susan Martin

Bluff

The Mercury website


Hunting for conservation solutions - 27 October
 

Eugene Lapointe

Hunting bans could do more harm than good when it comes to the long-term survival of vulnerable species such as African elephants, argues Eugene Lapointe. In this week's Green Room, the former head of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) makes the case for hunting and why it can be a part of wildlife management policies.

Are bans on hunting and trade the best way to conserve species?

It is natural for people to jump to the conclusion that they are. After all, if no one is allowed to kill an animal, the thinking goes, surely its population will grow.

But the problem is that many more species are becoming endangered each year and very few are recovering.

The World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List of threatened species worldwide now stands at 16,119 for all flora and fauna and includes a quarter of all mammals. Is it not time we found a better approach?

Market value

To understand why hunting and trade bans are not as effective as they are supposed to be, it is worth considering elephant conservation programmes in Africa, where countries have adopted two diverse strategies.

Elephant tusks (ivory) are used in artefacts around the world and, whether we like it or not, they command a market value similar to many precious metals. As a result, there is a constant international demand for ivory.

Unfortunately, most African economies are poor and wildlife conservation has to compete with many pressing demands for public money, such as the provision of public housing, sanitation projects, health care (particularly related to Aids) and education.

So conservation projects are going to be most successful if they can be self-supporting ; in other words, if they can generate income and provide local jobs.

In southern Africa, countries have followed the philosophy of sustainable use. They have issued permits to sport hunters to kill a limited number of elephants that are pre-selected according to factors like age and sex. They cannot shoot breeding animals, for example.

Sport hunting produces significant income through hunting fees, safari costs (guides, accommodation, trophy fees, etc.) and this is reinvested into conservation programmes. Local people support it because it provides secure employment.

The result is that in Namibia, South Africa and Botswana, elephant populations are well-stocked and healthy, while incidences of poaching have been kept to low levels.

By contrast, Kenya takes a protectionist approach. Killing elephants is prohibited and the country steadfastly argues against international trade in ivory.

An unintended consequence is that poaching is encouraged because local people receive little added value from the elephants and, instead, see a local resource going to waste.

In some areas people suffer when elephants destroy crops and homes. Habitat damage from dense populations also negatively impacts many other species.

Conservation in Kenya has become largely a law enforcement operation and, inevitably, this is a drain on limited local resources.

While elephant populations have recovered, poaching remains a problem and, in stark contrast to southern Africa, people have to be paid to shoot problem animals.

Fishing for solutions

In the case of sturgeon, caught for its roe, protectionists claim that a caviar trade ban would help populations to recover in their principal location, the Caspian Sea.

But the real cause of depleted sturgeon numbers is not the legal trade, which is carefully regulated, but the illegal one which, by definition, is not, and which is unfortunately many times larger.

If there was a ban on caviar trade, as some groups advocate, responsible producers - who have invested in hatcheries to replenish stocks - would no longer have any conservation incentives.

The result would be disastrous. Rather than lead to a recovery of sturgeon stocks, such an approach would accelerate their depletion, while fishermen would lose their livelihoods.

Aquaculture can be developed but does not itself promote conservation in the affected areas.

What we need to do instead is take steps that positively encourage conservation by providing incentives to local producers, rather than criminalising them.

Bigger picture

It is to be expected that people will question how conservation can be aided by allowing animals to be killed and utilised.

Sustainable use still seems counterintuitive to some. But the conservation results with species like African elephants and the fully recovered and abundant Florida crocodile prove otherwise.

Sustainable use is enshrined in the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and is used as the basic wildlife management philosophy in countries like the United States.

And there are signs that "sensible conservation" may be creeping into vogue as realities hit home and wildlife officials begin to critically assess realities. Recently, the BBC reported that authorities in Malaysia have decided that the best way to protect turtles is to license, rather than ban, the collection of their eggs.

Unfortunately, there is a tendency for nations to practice sustainable use at home while prescribing protectionism abroad.

This is true for African elephants, seals, sturgeon, whales, tigers, rhinos and many of the so-called "charismatic" species.

In the future, the fate of many animals may well depend on the extent to which the public around the world starts to accept the idea of utilising wildlife in a sustainable way.

Eugene Lapointe is president of the International Wildlife Management Consortium (IWMC) World Conservation Trust, and was secretary-general of CITES between 1982-1990

The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website

BBC News website


Hunting 'has conservation role' - 27 October
 

Elli Leadbeater

Rifle-toting tourists hunting exotic animals could actually help protect Africa's vulnerable species, a leading conservationist has suggested.

Elephant populations had benefited from a permit system that allowed sport hunters to kill a limited number of the beasts, according to Eugene Lapointe.

Mr Lapointe was head of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) between 1982-90.

Animal welfare campaigners rejected the idea as "morally unjustifiable".

Writing in the BBC News website's Green Room, Mr Lapointe, president of the International Wildlife Management Consortium (IWMC), said that despite the best efforts of conservationists, the number of threatened species continued to grow.

He suggested that it was time to reconsider bans on hunting: "Unfortunately, most African economies are poor and wildlife conservation has to compete with many pressing demands for public money.

"So conservation projects are going to be most successful if they can be self-supporting ; in order words, if they can generate income and provide local jobs," he wrote.

A number of nations in southern Africa had adopted a "sustainable use" philosophy, including Namibia, South Africa and Botswana, he added.

"They have issued permits to sport hunters to kill a limited number of elephants that are pre-selected according to factors like age and sex. They cannot shoot breeding animals, for example," Mr Lapointe explained.

As a result, these nations had well-stocked and healthy elephant populations and poaching was not a major problem, he observed.

Costly conservation

The idea of "trophy hunting" being a weapon in the conservationists' armoury to protect vulnerable species was supported by Peter Lindsey from the University of Zimbabwe.

"Realistically, for conservation to succeed, wildlife has to pay for itself in Africa," Dr Lindsey told a recent meeting at London Zoo.

"If local people do not benefit, it is usually lost".

Trophy hunting involves allowing high-paying guests to shoot in the company of a professional hunting guide. Each hunter pays, on average, 10-20 times more than most eco-tourists would for their holiday.

He said that it can encourage landowners to accommodate and protect threatened wildlife in areas that do not appeal to most eco-tourists because they are politically unstable, too remote, or simply less scenic.

In South Africa, landowners were given permission to allow shooting of excess male white rhinos once the species began to recover after a sharp decline.

This gave landowners an incentive to buy and provide land for the rhinos, which is thought to have significantly accelerated their recovery.

Dr Lindsey, who is not a hunter, carried out research to assess both the positive and negative effects of hunting on conservation.

He found that the industry is not without setbacks. Estimates of how many animals can be shot without threatening the population are sometimes based on guesswork, because no research data is available.

Irresponsible lodge owners, who allowed illegal and unethical practises, such as hunting caged animals or shooting from cars, posed a severe threat to the industry's prospects.

Hunters also needed to find ways to make sure that the money from rich tourists did not end up in overseas bank accounts, but reached local communities, he added.

'Unjustifiable'

These concerns were shared by animal welfare groups. International Fund for Animal Welfare (Ifaw) spokeswoman Rosa Hill called the idea of shooting elephants and rhinos "morally unjustifiable".

"There is very little evidence that the funds raised from killing wildlife are ploughed back into conversation," she said.

"There are also biological reasons why trophy hunting is not a good idea. Generally, hunters want to kill the biggest, strongest and fittest animals and this can have disastrous implications for the species.

Ms Hill said a lack of knowledge about how many animals there were and how the creatures behaved could result in a sudden population crash.

"Trophy hunting quotas are not set with proper knowledge of true population sizes, so it can be difficult to measure a species' decline," she explained.

But Dr Lindsey believed that the overall shortfalls did not outweigh the conservation benefits.

He said : "The industry's not perfect, and we have to work on the problems ; but there is no question in my mind that if hunting were to be banned, the conservation consequences in Africa would be dire".

BBC News website


Man in court charged with breaking hunting laws [UK] - 17 October
 

Richard Savill

The joint master of a hunt is due in court charged with breaching the hunting laws in the first prosecution of its kind brought by police in England.

Maurice Scott, 63, faces two counts of hunting a wild mammal with dogs. Scott, an Exmoor farmer, has been joint master of the Devon and Somerset Staghounds for 25 years.

Peter Heard, 23, from Exford, Somerset, the hunt's professional second whipper-in, faces one charge of hunting a wild mammal with dogs.

The breaches were alleged to have taken place on Exmoor on April 25. The men, who are on bail, will appear before Taunton Deane magistrates on Thursday.

Hunts claim to have been hunting legally under exemptions to the Hunting Act, which allows trail hunting, using two hounds to flush mammals to guns, hunting rabbits or rats and using a terrier to flush foxes from underground to protect game birds. The League Against Cruel Sports has made several complaints to police, but until now, the Crown Prosecution Service has brought no case against a huntsman in England, although a poacher was prosecuted successfully.

Two earlier prosecutions against huntsman were brought privately by the league. The Countryside Alliance said the law was "very confused" and the Devon and Somerset pack had been trying hard to hunt within it.

A spokesman said : "They have been operating within their interpretation of the law using exemptions to keep the infrastructure of the hunt going and to continue to manage the deer population on Exmoor".

He said there was anger on Exmoor that Avon and Somerset police were prosecuting the huntsmen before the law was clarified in the earlier cases. "Maurice Scott is a pillar of the farming community. He voluntarily attended a police station and was put in a cell for two and a half hours before being charged.

"These are not people going out actively to commit criminal offences. The nightmare scenario is that there will be a breakdown between police and the rural community on Exmoor".

A spokesman for the League Against Cruel Sports said : "At long last, we are delighted to see the police fulfilling their responsibilities. The Hunting Act is clear legislation and it is right that anyone chasing animals for sport is brought to court".

Telegraph website


Contributions to this bulletin were made by the Librarians and Information Manager of the KwaZulu-Natal Law Society, and Marina Rubidge (Librarian - Jowell Glyn and Marais, Johannesburg)

Our librarians try to ensure that information provided is accurate and up-todate but the KZNLS does not accept liability in the event of any error or inconsistency.
Any information given to you is provided as a service only and is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, legal advice.
Our privacy policy is available at www.lawsoc.co.za/nlsprivacypolicy.htm and our general terms of use and disclaimer in respect of our websites and our services are available at www.lawsoc.co.za/disclaimer.htm.
Websites : www.lawsoc.co.za / www.lawlibrary.co.za

E-mail
Librarians :
help@lawlibrary.co.za
Website Administrator :
mary@lawsoc.co.za

Telephone
Durban Library : 031-301 1621
Pietermaritzburg Library and Website Administrator : 033-345 1304