In addition, the background discussion on how the policy objective will be
achieved contains a number of points that are worth noting. First, as might be
expected from an environmental policy, it is clear that the historical economic policy
drivers for managing alien species are acknowledged but, for the first time, the main
driver of the policy is clearly environmental. This is illustrated by the unambiguous
statement that “[t]his policy focuses upon alien organisms which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species”. Secondly, the policy makes it clear that government’s
approach should not entail a form of alien xenophobia because it says that alien
species can be categorised as being “(a) those that are problematic and harmful, in
that they negatively impact on biodiversity; and (b) those that are benign and in
many instances serve useful purposes”. Thirdly, the historical emphasis on plants is
balanced by an acknowledgement of the impacts of alien animals and marine
species. In this regard, the policy notes, for example, that “in the Cape Peninsula
. . . invasive alien plants are chiefly responsible for the highest concentration of
threatened taxa in the world”. However, it also notes that, “Introduced animals have
also reduced South Africa’s biodiversity, a few examples being the Argentinian ant,
the Himalayan thar, the European starling, the house sparrow and the black rat, and
on South Africa’s islands, house mice, rabbits, and feral domestic cats. Some of the
most drastic impacts of invasive animal species have been recorded in South African
rivers, where alien fish, and to a lesser extent invertebrate and reptile species, have
altered habitats and successfully outcompeted native fauna. Up to 60% of the
threatened endemic freshwater fish of South Africa may be threatened by introduced
fish species such as trout, carp and bass. Similarly in the marine environment, the
accidental introduction of alien species through ballast water or on ship hulls has
resulted in a number of alien species occupying our shores and coastal waters, in
some instances displacing local species.”
Finally, the policy acknowledges that previous policy and legislation had not
achieved their objectives, largely due to their ad hoc and reactive nature. The policy
therefore proposes a “proactive, preventative and precautionary approach” which
“will take into consideration the need to balance the risks associated with introducing and releasing alien organisms with the potential social, economic and environmental benefits derived therefrom”. To achieve this, the policy sets out a 13 point
action plan which can be summarised as follows—
1. Reforming the law and strengthening compliance and enforcement of the law;
2. Developing legislative requirements for the introduction of alien species that
pose a risk;
3. Continuing existing and creating new eradication programmes;
4. Preventing unintentional introductions of species;
5. Developing a policy on the translocation of species within the country;
6. Promoting local, native species in rehabilitation and re-vegetation schemes;
7. Providing incentives to landowners to control or eradicate harmful alien species;
8. Strengthening and coordinating institutional arrangements to identify harmful
invasive species proactively and to catalogue invasions;
9. Supporting the development of biological and other control methods;
536
P. Lukey and J. Hall
achieved contains a number of points that are worth noting. First, as might be
expected from an environmental policy, it is clear that the historical economic policy
drivers for managing alien species are acknowledged but, for the first time, the main
driver of the policy is clearly environmental. This is illustrated by the unambiguous
statement that “[t]his policy focuses upon alien organisms which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species”. Secondly, the policy makes it clear that government’s
approach should not entail a form of alien xenophobia because it says that alien
species can be categorised as being “(a) those that are problematic and harmful, in
that they negatively impact on biodiversity; and (b) those that are benign and in
many instances serve useful purposes”. Thirdly, the historical emphasis on plants is
balanced by an acknowledgement of the impacts of alien animals and marine
species. In this regard, the policy notes, for example, that “in the Cape Peninsula
. . . invasive alien plants are chiefly responsible for the highest concentration of
threatened taxa in the world”. However, it also notes that, “Introduced animals have
also reduced South Africa’s biodiversity, a few examples being the Argentinian ant,
the Himalayan thar, the European starling, the house sparrow and the black rat, and
on South Africa’s islands, house mice, rabbits, and feral domestic cats. Some of the
most drastic impacts of invasive animal species have been recorded in South African
rivers, where alien fish, and to a lesser extent invertebrate and reptile species, have
altered habitats and successfully outcompeted native fauna. Up to 60% of the
threatened endemic freshwater fish of South Africa may be threatened by introduced
fish species such as trout, carp and bass. Similarly in the marine environment, the
accidental introduction of alien species through ballast water or on ship hulls has
resulted in a number of alien species occupying our shores and coastal waters, in
some instances displacing local species.”
Finally, the policy acknowledges that previous policy and legislation had not
achieved their objectives, largely due to their ad hoc and reactive nature. The policy
therefore proposes a “proactive, preventative and precautionary approach” which
“will take into consideration the need to balance the risks associated with introducing and releasing alien organisms with the potential social, economic and environmental benefits derived therefrom”. To achieve this, the policy sets out a 13 point
action plan which can be summarised as follows—
1. Reforming the law and strengthening compliance and enforcement of the law;
2. Developing legislative requirements for the introduction of alien species that
pose a risk;
3. Continuing existing and creating new eradication programmes;
4. Preventing unintentional introductions of species;
5. Developing a policy on the translocation of species within the country;
6. Promoting local, native species in rehabilitation and re-vegetation schemes;
7. Providing incentives to landowners to control or eradicate harmful alien species;
8. Strengthening and coordinating institutional arrangements to identify harmful
invasive species proactively and to catalogue invasions;
9. Supporting the development of biological and other control methods;
536
P. Lukey and J. Hall