as wheat, that led to the accidental introduction of Xanthium spinosum in
South Africa in the first place.
The Xanthium Spinosum Act became the basis for biological invasion governance for years to come. It was extended through Act 27 of 1864 of the Cape of
Good Hope and appears to have been largely replicated in the statutes of the Colony
of Natal, specifically Law 20, 1861. The latter was repealed and re-enacted with
amendments 13 years later by Law 38 of 1874 the purpose of which was “To prevent
the spread of the growth of the Xanthium Spinosum Burr Weed”. In this 1874
amendment, there is an admission that “the growth of the noxious plant known as
the Xanthium Spinosum Burr Weed has increased to an alarming extent in various
parts of the Colony, and is prejudicial to the farming interests of the Colony”.
Importantly, there is also the admission in the preamble that “the Law hitherto in
force has failed to check the spread thereof, and it has been necessary to make other
and more stringent regulations to effect its extermination”. Despite these admissions, it was more the penalties that changed than the approach. In this regard, the
more stringent regulations included occupiers of private land being liable to a
recurring “penalty for leaving Burr Weed upon their lands”. This penalty was no
doubt why Burr Weed became known as Boetebos (a Dutch and Afrikaans term
which can be literally translated as ‘penalty bush’). In cases of non-compliance
where the authority stepped in and claimed the bill the “expense thus incurred [was]
chargeable upon the land with 6 per cent interest”. The Transvaal Republic appears
to have promulgated a similar law in 1872—the Xanthium Spinosum Law (Law
1 of 1872).
Up until this time, the emphasis had been overwhelmingly on weeds. However,
14 years later, the Government of the Transvaal Republic set the scene for the use of
the ‘identify and direct’ approach to deal with a faunal species i.e. the Australian Bug
(the Cottony Cushion Scale—Icerya purchasi) and other problem insects, when the
Volksraad made the Australian Bug Resolution of 24 July 1888. The Resolution
authorised the Executive Council to make Regulations and provisions in respect of
the Australian Bug or other noxious insects. These Regulations and provisions
included: the chopping down and destruction by the owner of trees and plants
infected by the Australian Bug or other noxious insects; the power of the government
to do the chopping or destroying at the cost of the owner and without any entitlement
by the owner to claim compensation, if the owner is negligent; and the power to
make additional Regulations. As Icerya purchasi is a pest to citrus crops, it is highly
likely that it was influential citrus farmers who lobbied for this Resolution.
The focus, however, remained on weeds and by 1889, the Government of the
Cape of Good Hope had expanded and mainstreamed their weed legislation into the
Divisional Councils Act (Act 40 of 1889), Sub-Division VI, Part I, Extirpation of
Xanthium Spinosum and other Noxious Weeds and Plants. These weed provisions,
although similar to Act 22 of 1861, also included additional clauses such as allowing
for the special exemption of river beds; the power to identify other “noxious weeds
and plants” to be treated as if they were Xanthium spinosum, and the employment of
weed inspectors with the power to access all land. Given that the Spiny Cocklebur
competes with crop plants and native species along riverbanks, it is not clear why the
522
P. Lukey and J. Hall
South Africa in the first place.
The Xanthium Spinosum Act became the basis for biological invasion governance for years to come. It was extended through Act 27 of 1864 of the Cape of
Good Hope and appears to have been largely replicated in the statutes of the Colony
of Natal, specifically Law 20, 1861. The latter was repealed and re-enacted with
amendments 13 years later by Law 38 of 1874 the purpose of which was “To prevent
the spread of the growth of the Xanthium Spinosum Burr Weed”. In this 1874
amendment, there is an admission that “the growth of the noxious plant known as
the Xanthium Spinosum Burr Weed has increased to an alarming extent in various
parts of the Colony, and is prejudicial to the farming interests of the Colony”.
Importantly, there is also the admission in the preamble that “the Law hitherto in
force has failed to check the spread thereof, and it has been necessary to make other
and more stringent regulations to effect its extermination”. Despite these admissions, it was more the penalties that changed than the approach. In this regard, the
more stringent regulations included occupiers of private land being liable to a
recurring “penalty for leaving Burr Weed upon their lands”. This penalty was no
doubt why Burr Weed became known as Boetebos (a Dutch and Afrikaans term
which can be literally translated as ‘penalty bush’). In cases of non-compliance
where the authority stepped in and claimed the bill the “expense thus incurred [was]
chargeable upon the land with 6 per cent interest”. The Transvaal Republic appears
to have promulgated a similar law in 1872—the Xanthium Spinosum Law (Law
1 of 1872).
Up until this time, the emphasis had been overwhelmingly on weeds. However,
14 years later, the Government of the Transvaal Republic set the scene for the use of
the ‘identify and direct’ approach to deal with a faunal species i.e. the Australian Bug
(the Cottony Cushion Scale—Icerya purchasi) and other problem insects, when the
Volksraad made the Australian Bug Resolution of 24 July 1888. The Resolution
authorised the Executive Council to make Regulations and provisions in respect of
the Australian Bug or other noxious insects. These Regulations and provisions
included: the chopping down and destruction by the owner of trees and plants
infected by the Australian Bug or other noxious insects; the power of the government
to do the chopping or destroying at the cost of the owner and without any entitlement
by the owner to claim compensation, if the owner is negligent; and the power to
make additional Regulations. As Icerya purchasi is a pest to citrus crops, it is highly
likely that it was influential citrus farmers who lobbied for this Resolution.
The focus, however, remained on weeds and by 1889, the Government of the
Cape of Good Hope had expanded and mainstreamed their weed legislation into the
Divisional Councils Act (Act 40 of 1889), Sub-Division VI, Part I, Extirpation of
Xanthium Spinosum and other Noxious Weeds and Plants. These weed provisions,
although similar to Act 22 of 1861, also included additional clauses such as allowing
for the special exemption of river beds; the power to identify other “noxious weeds
and plants” to be treated as if they were Xanthium spinosum, and the employment of
weed inspectors with the power to access all land. Given that the Spiny Cocklebur
competes with crop plants and native species along riverbanks, it is not clear why the
522
P. Lukey and J. Hall