conservation of the marine ecosystem as one of its express objectives—require
applications for mariculture activities to contain information regarding how the
introduction of alien commensals, parasites and pathogens will be avoided and
what measures will be taken to avoid the establishment of alien species in the wild
(Regulation 61 of GNR 111 GG 19205, 2 September 1998). In 2013, a proposed
amendment to the Act was published which allowed for more direct control over the
release of alien species through a new section 43A (GN 434 GG 36413, 25 April
2013). The Bill, however, has not been passed to date.
18.6.4 1991: Rethinking Policy
Apart from these legislative developments in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the
apartheid government of the day was also reassessing its environmental policy. One
of the major initiatives during this period was the President’s Council’s investigations and recommendations on environmental policy. The mandate of the Council
included ‘a particular reference to the ecological, economic, social and legal
implications thereof’. In 1991 the President’s Council released its report (The
President’s Council 1991) which made proposals for a national environmental
management policy.
Amongst the many issues that the Council considered, it is clear that it was alive
to the issue of invasive alien species; it contained just over a page dedicated to the
issue, as well as references in other areas of the report. Although some of the
Council’s proposals appeared quite proactive, others seemed somewhat resigned,
pragmatic and/or highly subjective. For example, it made comments such as “trees
improve any landscape”. In a seemingly progressive stance, and as seen from the
extract below, the Council appeared willing to expand the traditional approach of
managing invasive alien species for purely economic reasons by also including
environmental considerations: “In addition to the threat to agriculture, the rapid
spread of invasive alien plants such as the jointed cactus, Australian acacias, hakea,
lantana and many others are also a threat to the native flora and fauna and to
natural habitats. Alien vegetation affects the productivity of river systems and
wetlands. The banks of many of our rivers, particularly the upper reaches, are
completely overgrown with Australian acacias (wattles). From here they spread up
the mountain slopes. The open water of many rivers, dams and vleis is being choked
by one or more of South American weeds e.g. the water hyacinth, and the water fern
(Salvinia). Little has been done to control these invasive plants, because they affect
only the natural productivity of the waters and their recreational potential, which as
yet do not enjoy a high priority rating.” (The President’s Council 1991).
As a policy suggestion, the Council’s opinion was that the strategy to address
these negative impacts should be to “clear sparsely infested areas” and to “contain
the dense stands to prevent them from spreading until more effective control
measures have been developed.” The report also signals the need for a pragmatic
approach. For example, it sounds a warning to ‘purists’ that “. . .a fact that must be
532
P. Lukey and J. Hall
applications for mariculture activities to contain information regarding how the
introduction of alien commensals, parasites and pathogens will be avoided and
what measures will be taken to avoid the establishment of alien species in the wild
(Regulation 61 of GNR 111 GG 19205, 2 September 1998). In 2013, a proposed
amendment to the Act was published which allowed for more direct control over the
release of alien species through a new section 43A (GN 434 GG 36413, 25 April
2013). The Bill, however, has not been passed to date.
18.6.4 1991: Rethinking Policy
Apart from these legislative developments in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the
apartheid government of the day was also reassessing its environmental policy. One
of the major initiatives during this period was the President’s Council’s investigations and recommendations on environmental policy. The mandate of the Council
included ‘a particular reference to the ecological, economic, social and legal
implications thereof’. In 1991 the President’s Council released its report (The
President’s Council 1991) which made proposals for a national environmental
management policy.
Amongst the many issues that the Council considered, it is clear that it was alive
to the issue of invasive alien species; it contained just over a page dedicated to the
issue, as well as references in other areas of the report. Although some of the
Council’s proposals appeared quite proactive, others seemed somewhat resigned,
pragmatic and/or highly subjective. For example, it made comments such as “trees
improve any landscape”. In a seemingly progressive stance, and as seen from the
extract below, the Council appeared willing to expand the traditional approach of
managing invasive alien species for purely economic reasons by also including
environmental considerations: “In addition to the threat to agriculture, the rapid
spread of invasive alien plants such as the jointed cactus, Australian acacias, hakea,
lantana and many others are also a threat to the native flora and fauna and to
natural habitats. Alien vegetation affects the productivity of river systems and
wetlands. The banks of many of our rivers, particularly the upper reaches, are
completely overgrown with Australian acacias (wattles). From here they spread up
the mountain slopes. The open water of many rivers, dams and vleis is being choked
by one or more of South American weeds e.g. the water hyacinth, and the water fern
(Salvinia). Little has been done to control these invasive plants, because they affect
only the natural productivity of the waters and their recreational potential, which as
yet do not enjoy a high priority rating.” (The President’s Council 1991).
As a policy suggestion, the Council’s opinion was that the strategy to address
these negative impacts should be to “clear sparsely infested areas” and to “contain
the dense stands to prevent them from spreading until more effective control
measures have been developed.” The report also signals the need for a pragmatic
approach. For example, it sounds a warning to ‘purists’ that “. . .a fact that must be
532
P. Lukey and J. Hall