George Ellis
------------------------------------------
What you won't be doing on weekends anymore!
Many Capetonians don't seem to realise that they days of their forest walks and picnics in the greater Cape Town area are numbered. We are shortly to lose Cecelia Forest and Tokai Forest for example. You will no longer be able to walk in forest shade on a hot summer's day, nor shelter from the wind and rain on a cold winters day, except in a few minuscule areas of Afro-Montane forest that will be all that remains in the near future. Yes these are mainly commercial plantations and so subject to periodic harvesting, but that does not have to be done all at once, and crucially the present plan is not to replant: they will be gone forever.
There are of course a significant number of people supporting the destruction of our beautiful plantations. But there are a great many more opposed to this extraordinarily destructive action. Consider the
following:
* The underlying attitude is extraordinarily extremist. In the CPNP, 4% of the area is `alien’ plantations and 96 % is Fynbos. The extremists have a Xenophobic need to exterminate to the last - to destroy that 4% in order to attain 100% Fynbos . I myself love Fynbos – I am co-owner of one of the best privately owned Fynbos tracts in the peninsula - but 96%
suffices: it does not have to be 100%. Yes of course invasive species need to be controlled and prevented from spreading, that is not what this forest destruction is about.
* This whole philosophy is arbitrarily inconsistent. If you are going to destroy all alien trees, to be consistent you should also destroy all rose gardens, wheat-fields, vineyards, buildings, roads, and indeed remove all `alien’ people (including those carrying out this
destruction): they should all go according to this philosophy. Why take it out on trees? From my view point, inclusion of all these `aliens’ in our environment enriches it.
* These forests are long term part of our cultural heritage, adding greatly to the beauty and amenity of the area, and properly understood, historical and cultural resources fall within the scope of the natural environment. Because this is so, South African heritage resources are subject to the protection and conservation measures offered under national and international law (http://www.criticalmethods.org/p108.mv).
Thus this destruction is probably illegal unless a proper impact assessment is carried out first to evaluate the effect of such large scale destruction of part of our cultural heritage.
* These forests have been a public amenity for the better part of a century, and are increasingly used by people from the townships of Cape Town. There is virtually no shade in these townships; having access to shaded picnic spots may not be a big deal to the privileged few who live in leafy suburbs like Constantia but it is a major benefit for those who do not.
* If you look at this in political terms, it is yet again the choice of a small fraction of the white elite dominating what happens and causing a major loss of amenity not only to those who disagree with them in their own community but to the majority of poorer people from other communities in the city. They are not being given a say as to whether this will happen or not. No well-publicised open public hearing process has been undertaken.
* As such, it is a highly authoritarian and coercive action on the part of a few. It allows no option. Those who don’t like the forests don’t have to walk in them; they can walk in the 96% of the CPNP that is Fynbos. But they want to prevent me and all who think like me - who love the beauty of these forests - from even having the option of appreciating them and rejoicing in the shade and the magnificence of those tall trees. They want to remove from me a wonderful possibility I have had all my life.
* And when they succeed what will happen? On scorching hot days when walkers like myself seek protection from the sun under shade, it will place a huge extra load on the few afro-montane forest areas that will remain. There will be dense queues along all the paths in those few remaining patches of forest, and standing room only in the few remaining shady picnic areas. So how will the authorities handle this overload? By selling permits of course – even more restricting access to these areas, limiting those who can benefit from them. A privileged few will have taken away a precious public amenity from all their poorer fellow citizens.
The felling of these forests should be stayed as a matter of urgency until public opinion in the matter has been properly canvassed and a proper impact assessment has taken place that takes cultural heritage into account.
For a wonderful website (with beautiful pictures) making the case for saving these forests, please see http://www.coolforest.org.za/.
George Ellis
Kenilworth