Cape Workshop Proceedings

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Workshop Participants

PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATION PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATION Dr A Boyd MCM Dr M Barnett C.A.P.E. Dr K Hamman CapeNature Dr C Marais WFW S Gildenhuys CapeNature S Matthews DEA&DP J Deventer CapeNature Dr A Whitfield SAIAB J du Plessis CapeNature D Harebottle ADU, UCT G Cleaver CapeNature F Mackay Oceanographic Research Institute, KZN S Page CapeNature Dr D Hay University of KZN T Rashied CapeNature Dr R Nel EKZN Wildlife R Jalving CapeNature A Mather eThekwini Metro, Durban J Vlok CapeNature N Demetriades Marine & Estuarine Research, KZN M Prophet CapeNature Dr H Malan Freshwater Research Unit Dr T Williams CapeNature Dr I Russel SANParks A Purves CapeNature P Joubert SANParks A Wolfaardt CapeNature M le Roux WAM Technologies R Hiseman CapeNature W Botes WAM Technologies T Hoekstra CapeNature Dr D van Driel CMC Dr C Reed CapeNature Prof. T Wooldridge NMMU L van Niekerk CSIR Dr T Borman NMMU S Taljaard CSIR J Coleman Environmental Education & A Theron CSIR Sustainability Unit Private L Barwell CSIR P Huizinga Botanical Society Sanbi M Gulekana CSIR A von Hasa Botanical Society Sanbi Prof. B Allanson Researcher – Knysna K te Roller Researcher – UCT Ms B Weston DWAF Dr JK Turpie Lower Breede River J Roberts DWAF S Conradie Lower Breede River T Belcher DWAF N Scholz Hessequa Environmental MCM G Mars S Lamberth Committee L Mbola MCM N Scarr DEAT E Molepo MCM L Egan Kouga Municipality K Morake MCM Mr Thwala DEAT D Laider DEA&DP G Ferreira DEAT P Malan Enviro-Fish Africa

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Our strategic vision for the estuaries in the Cape Floral Region is:

Our estuaries are beautiful, rich in plants and animals, they attract visitors, sustain our livelihoods and uplift our spirits.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Table of Contents

1. BACKGROUND ______1

2. KEY ROLE PLAYERS ______1 2.1 Cape Action Plan for the Environment and the People (C.A.P.E) 1 2.2 CapeNature 2 2.3 Marine and Coastal Management (MCM), Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) 2 2.4 Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) 3

3. VISION ______4

4. KEY CONSTRAINTS TO REACHING THE VISION ______5

5. STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES TO ADDRESS KEY CONSTRAINTS ______9

6. MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ______10 6.1 The classification and prioritisation of CFR estuaries in terms of health, conservation and economic importance and the development of a regional conservation plan 11 6.1.1 Introduction 11 6.1.2 Project approach 11 6.2 Marine living resources 14 6.3 Water quantity and quality 17 6.4 Infrastructure and development 20 6.5 Climate change 22 6.6 Institutional and management structures 24 6.7 Education and awareness 26

7. WORKING GROUP ______28 7.1 C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme Task Team 28 7.2 Estuaries Working Group 28 7.3 Technical Advisors to the Working Group 29

8. PILOT ESTUARIES ______30 8.1 Selection Criteria 33 8.2 Final selection 35

9. FUTURE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT NEEDS______36

10. WAY FORWARD … ______38

III

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Tables

Table 1. The activities and management actions that pose a threat to the goods and services provided by estuaries can be categorised as follows (activities given in bold are of high priority): _____ 5 Table 2. C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme Task Team ______28 Table 3. Estuaries Working Group ______29 Table 4. Technical Advisors to the Working Group______29 Table 5. Ranking of CFR estuaries (ordered from west to east) in terms of type, size (ha) and updated biodiversity importance score. Estuary types are classified as river mouths (R), permanently open (O), temporarily open/closed (C), estuarine bays (B) and estuarine lakes (L) (Turpie 2004)______30 Table 6. Project Gantt chart ______42

Figures

Figure 1. Strategic objectives aimed at addressing the key threats preventing us from achieving the vision for the estuaries for the Cape Floral Region...... 10 Figure 2. Locality map indicating the potential pilot estuaries...... 35 Figure 3: Proposed National Management Protocol for Estuaries...... Appendix A, pg 4

Appendices

APPENDIX A: NATIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL______1 APPENDIX B: INTRODUCTION______5 APPENDIX C: VISION ______8 APPENDIX D: STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES ______10 APPENDIX E: MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES______13 APPENDIX F: WORKING GROUP NOMINATIONS ______16 APPENDIX G: INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATIONS______18 APPENDIX H: PILOT ESTUARIES______27 APPENDIX I: FINAL COMMENTS ______29

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

1. Background implement these strategies; Nominate a Working Group to assist The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management in the technical guidance and Programme was developed to ensure the development of the C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management conservation and sustainable utilisation of the Programme; and estuarine biodiversity in the Cape Floral Region (CFR). The Programme follows a strategic, Select the pilot estuaries in the CFR integrated approach to estuarine to be used as case studies. management. Cooperative governance is seen as a key requirement for the success of the project. The proposed National Estuarine 2. Key Role Players

Management Protocol (see Appendix A) is the recommended approach for establishing 2.1 Cape Action Plan for the broad alignment on a regional scale. Environment and the People (C.A.P.E) To pilot test the strategic concept, the C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management Programme The Cape Floristic Region (CFR) in South Africa was designed in accordance with the is the smallest and richest of the six floral guidelines of the proposed Protocol (as kingdoms in the world, and it is the only one to stipulated in the new National Environmental be found entirely within one country. Its rich Management: Coastal Zone Bill). The biodiversity is under serious threat for a variety comprehensive C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine of reasons including conversion of natural Management Programme will be the first of its habitat to permanent agriculture and kind in South Africa and perhaps rangelands for cattle, sheep and ostriches, internationally, and will be a test case for the inappropriate fire management, rapid and incorporation of strategic decision making into insensitive development, overexploitation of estuarine management. water and marine resources, and wild flowers, and infestation by alien species. The region has The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management been identified as one of the worlds "hottest" Programme will take a phased approach. hotspots of biodiversity. Phase I (2005 to 2009) will focus on the design and testing of the process delineated by the In response to this a process of extensive proposed National Estuarine Management consultation involving various interested parties, Protocol in a number of pilot estuaries in the including local government and non CFR. Phase II (2009 to 2014) will extend the governmental organisations resulted in the Programme to include the more complex establishment of a strategic plan referred to as estuaries (from a management perspective) in Cape Action Plan for the Environment the region. Phase III (2015 to 2020) will extend (C.A.P.E.). the Programme to all the remaining estuaries within the CFR. The development of C.A.P.E. was made possible by an initial grant from the Global The purpose of the workshop was to: Environment Facility (GEF) in 1998. In this Develop the overarching vision for strategic plan the key threats and root causes the CFR; of biodiversity losses that need to be addressed in order to conserve the floral kingdom were Prioritise the threats of the CFR estuaries; identified. This resulted in a spatial plan detailing areas which need to be conserved Develop strategic objectives and and a series of broad programme activities management strategies to counter which need to be undertaken over a 20 year the major threats; period. Identify the tools, methods, guidelines and targets needed to

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Based on the situation assessment and analysis Six components of the programme will of threats, three overarching themes that strengthen institutions, support conservation complement and reinforce one another were education, unleash the socio-economic developed. C.A.P.E. will: potential of protected areas, facilitate community stewardship of priority areas, establish an effective network of reserves, integrate biodiversity concerns into watershed enhance off-reserve conservation, and management and ensure ongoing co- support bioregional planning; ordination, management and monitoring. strengthen and enhance institutions, policies, laws, co-operative governance, 2.2 CapeNature and community participation; and CapeNature is a provincial authority develop methods to ensure sustainable constituted in terms of the Western Cape yields, promote compliance with laws, Nature Conservation Board Act of 1998, and integrate biodiversity concerns into operates under the legislative mandates of, catchment management, and promote amongst others, the following legislation: sustainable eco-tourism. Nature Conservation Ordinance, 1974; Sea-Shore Act, 1935; September 2000 marked the end of the National Environmental Management strategic planning phase and the beginning of Act, 1998; the implementation phase. C.A.P.E. has now National Environmental Management: become known as the Cape Action for People Protected Areas Act, 2003; and the Environment, emphasizing its National Environmental Management: involvement with, and benefit to, the people Biodiversity Act, 2004; across the CFR. Marine Living Resources Act, 1998.

The goal of C.A.P.E. is that "By the year 2020, CapeNature is tasked with the execution of the the natural environment of the Cape Floristic C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management Region will be effectively conserved and Programme. It is also seen as an important role restored wherever appropriate, and will deliver player as it is the mandated local authority for significant benefits to the people of the region estuarine protection and management for a in a way that is embraced by local large part of the CFR region. communities, endorsed by government and recognised internationally". 2.3 Marine and Coastal Management (MCM), Department of During 2004-2009, the implementing agencies Environmental Affairs and Tourism will accelerate the implementation of the (DEAT) C.A.P.E. 2000 Strategy by laying the The national DEAT is tasked with the foundations for an economy based on management and conservation of estuaries. biodiversity. To do this: Within DEAT the specific responsibility for

managing the living marine resources, Capable institutions will co-operate to including those in estuaries, is vested in the develop a foundation for mainstreaming Branch: Marine and Coastal Management biodiversity in the CFR into social and (MCM). economic development; and Conservation of the CFR will be enhanced MCM is also one of the key role players and through piloting and adapting funders of the C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine programmes for sustainable, effective Management Programme and supports the management. programme’s aim of developing a blueprint for protection of estuarine biodiversity throughout

the area. MCM also supports piloting a coordinated management system at a number of

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

selected estuaries. This system will meet the DWAF is a key role player as it is tasked with requirements of individual government determining the freshwater requirements departments responsible for specific aspects of (“Reserve”) for the estuaries of South Africa, estuarine management in a co-ordinated way, including those of the CFR. whilst allowing individual estuarine management plans, with local input, to be The Estuarine “Reserve” determination, in drawn up and implemented. The systematic combination with the setting of the approach has been called a “National Management Class (i.e. Desired future state or Estuarine Management Protocol” and it level of protection) and Resource Quality comprises a Chapter in the new Coastal Objectives (i.e. overarching management Management Bill (see Appendix A and B for objectives) have significant consequence for more detail). the management of the estuaries of the CFR.

2.4 Department of Water Affairs and The DWAF is also the champion (Ms A Belcher) Forestry (DWAF) for the River Health Programme in the Western Cape. This is seen as a key aspect in the The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry is development of a regional estuarine the lead agent responsible for the monitoring programme for the CFR. management of water quantity and quality in estuaries.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Africa’s national (and international) obligations pertaining to estuaries as well as local socio- 3. Vision economic requirements (e.g. livelihoods and

tourism) for growth in the region The vision The first task in initiating the Regional Estuarine describes an ideal state and focuses on the Management Programme was the core issues decided upon by consensus among development of the overarching vision, the participants. Our vision also serves as objectives and management strategies for the motivation to role players in estuarine estuaries. management in the region regarding future

actions. The regional vision and objectives for the estuaries of the CFR recognise both South

Our strategic vision for estuaries in the CFR is:

Our estuaries are beautiful, rich in plants and animals, they attract visitors, sustain our livelihoods and uplift our spirits.

This vision translates into a formal statement that reads as:

The estuaries of the CFR sustain our spiritual and economic well-being through their biophysical attributes and production of goods and services, which are made possible by the maintenance of their biodiversity and ecosystem functions (integrity).

This formal vision highlights the different aspects of our estuaries, which we value and which we The formal vision was developed to highlight to need to enhance and manage, namely: the scientists and managers of the CFR the technical aspects of our estuaries that we The contribution of our estuaries to value and to communicate this to the larger our spiritual well-being; scientific community and funding bodies. (See The role that our estuaries play in our Appendix B for details on key words nominated economic welfare; by the workshop participants during the Our dependency on the goods and visioning exercise.) services that our estuaries provide; The importance of the biophysical attributes of our estuaries; and The value of maintaining the biodiversity and ecosystem function of our estuaries so that we can derive these benefits from our systems.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

The unsustainable use of living 4. Key Constraints to resources; Reaching the Vision Water quantity and quality (i.e. river- flow modification and pollution); Taking into account our knowledge on the Land-use and infrastructure planning ground of how things work, guiding policies, (i.e. habitat modification and legislation and institutional structures in South destruction); Africa, activities and management actions Institutional and management posing threats to the estuaries can be divided structures; into the following broad categories (Van Climate change; and Niekerk & Taljaard 2002; Turpie 2002; Breen & Education and awareness. McKenzie 2001; Boyd, Barwell & Taljaard 2000; Morant & Quinn 1999; Smith & Cullinan 2000; Glazewski 2000; Prochazka & Griffiths 2000):

Table 1. The activities and management actions that pose a threat to the goods and services provided by estuaries can be categorised as follows (activities given in bold are of high priority):

THREAT CATEGORY RELATED ACTIVITIES Habitat loss/destruction Flow modification: water abstraction, effluent discharge Overexploitation of marine living resources outside estuaries (inshore marine, coastal, freshwater systems) Pollution Overexploitation of marine living resources in estuaries (fish, bait, mangroves) Marine living resources Aliens within estuaries: invertebrates, fish Isolation between systems (e.g. due to mouth closure) Human disturbance Mariculture Climate change Inadequate representation of estuaries in current designated Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to ensure complete estuarine biodiversity protection for the country Flow modification Surface and groundwater abstraction Alien-vegetation water demand Water quantity and quality Forestry water demand Illegal abstraction Climate change

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

THREAT CATEGORY RELATED ACTIVITIES

Water-quality degradation Sewage effluent Industrial effluent Septic and conservancy-tank seepage Sewage and storm-water run-off (ecological and public health) Solid-waste dumps near estuaries, e.g. littering and seepage Bad catchment practices, e.g. erosion, fertilisation, pesticide use Water quantity and quality (increase in sedimentation) Development in flood plains Industrial pollution Mariculture waste products Harbour pollution Cooling-water discharge (thermal pollution) Littering

Management Cooperative application of legislation (Justice Administration Act) Lack of cooperation in planning, both spatial and financial (population dynamics) Lack of implementation of legal requirements Prioritisation of estuaries regarding different levels of protection and requirements for conservation Lack of responsibility, accountability and ownership (due to various Acts) Lack of commitment (measured in terms of resources allocated to estuaries) Integration of other resources, e.g. wetland loss, groundwater depletion (link to bad management practices) Lack of technical expertise Lack of knowledge and expertise Communication (between scientists and managers) Awareness and capacity building (to get commitment right) Uncontrolled/inappropriate development within the wider estuarine spaces Residential & resort development (and associated service infrastructure) leading to a range of downstream and cumulative Land-use and infrastructure impacts, compromising the integrity of systems primarily as a result of planning increased direct human pressures on estuaries. Loss of aesthetic or visual qualities Estuarine management not part of into wider Integrated Coastal Zone Management approach Structures within the estuary basins themselves Marinas Bridges Jetties Slipways Bank stabilisation Stormwater outlets

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

THREAT CATEGORY RELATED ACTIVITIES Physical manipulation of estuarine morphology Inappropriate mouth-breaching practices Channel modification Dredging Mining (sand, diamond, heavy minerals) Agricultural practises in and around estuaries, e.g. bank destruction Salt works on flood plains and marsh areas Inappropriately placed infrastructure (e.g. stormwater outlets, sewage outlets, water abstraction intakes) necessitating breaching Carrying-capacity exceeded Boating activity Boating infrastructural requirements (jetties etc) Amenities (e.g. parking lots, control gates, permit offices, “upgradings” – eg informal pathways become concrete walkways) Harvesting of marine living resource (e.g. fishing and bait collection) Pollution and waste management issues Conflict of interest with bathing areas Trampling and foot paths Vehicles in sensitive vegetation areas Fragmented environmental legislation (> 40 national Acts related to estuarine management) Lack of expertise and capacity in government departments and local authorities Lack of legally mandated lead agent prepared to take control for certain key aspects Poor relationship and trust among relevant tiers of government (linked to lack of capacity) Lack of or inadequate cooperation among lead institutions and between lead institutions and partner organisations, i.e. fragmented management Lack of political will Lack of funding Institutional and management Lack of information (e.g. no monitoring data) structures Current very-low profile of estuaries at national, provincial and local levels Lack of effective streamlining of delegation of authority Lack of process to formulate policies and plans into binding local municipal by- laws (municipalities often breaching their own policies) Lack of willingness by authorities to take one another on Development of concept of 10 carrots to one stick, deciding who to hold stick Frequent disregard of what works – need acknowledgement and strengthening of functional management systems Current view of estuaries of not being seen as protected or special areas Estuarine priorities not recognised by local decision makers (e.g. housing projects are more important) Rise in sea level Reduction in freshwater inflow Rise in temperature Increase in storm damage Mouth dynamics – changing type of estuary Climate change More closure due to increase in sediment availability Protection of infrastructure (due to sea-level rise). Impact on biota and ripple effects on livelihoods Impacts on fisheries Developmental pressures as sea level rises and no space is allowed for system to vary naturally

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Lack of strategic profile of awareness or education in policies and strategies of organisations, reflected in organisational structures and low budgets (1-4%) Lack of capacitated educators at all levels of governance (organisations lacking overt strategies in core business relating to estuarine management) High staff turnover and resultant lack of capacity retention (low level of post) Lack of appropriate skills, materials and interventions at relevant levels of Education and awareness governance Legislative and institutional fragmentation Lack of insight into estuarine biophysical processes Lack of insight into economic value contributed to local and national economy by estuaries Low profile of estuaries in eyes of general public

The workshop highlighted a number of key overarching or priority threats that need urgent intervention if the CFR vision is to be achieved.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

for the C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine 5. Strategic Objectives to Management Plan set out 1) the targets that Address Key Constraints we need to develop to achieve our vision and 2) the key actions that we need to undertake Estuaries do not operate in isolation but are to address our priority threats. connected ecologically to other estuarine systems in the CFR and even globally (e.g. The following strategic objectives will allow us through fish and bird migrations). As a result, to achieve the C.A.P.E. estuaries vision: certain decisions need to be made on a higher level to ensure overall sustainability (taking into account social equity, economic growth and ecological integrity). The strategic objectives

Living resources:

Achieve targets for ecosystem biodiversity and health in terms of the long-term habitat persistence of habitats, species, community structure, biomass and functioning by 2015.

Water quantity and quality:

Determine, implement, monitor and review Resource Quality Objectives (RQOs) (taking into account public health) in order to maintain or restore estuarine structure and function in the best attainable state for five priority estuaries within the CFR by 2010.

Land-use and infrastructure planning:

Define estuarine areas, assess their current status and values and formulate appropriate integrated management plans to regulate development and other activities impacting upon them, with particular reference to cumulative impacts, by 2008 (focusing on mechanisms).

Institutional and management structures:

Cooperatively manage estuaries, through relevant institutions of management comprising appropriate spheres of government and civil society, according to appropriate management plans by 2010.

Climate change:

Minimise the detrimental impacts of predicted climate change by 2010 through: 1) Taking a long-term precautionary approach to infrastructure development and water-resource planning; 2) Influencing land management in upper and middle catchments to reduce impacts on estuaries; and 3) Promoting long-term sustainable livelihoods through estuarine management that minimises risks.

Education and awareness:

Generate education and awareness regarding CFR estuaries by 2010, having: 1) Contributed to integrated, collaborative and informed action and decision making regarding estuaries; 2) Contributed to a sustainable quality of life; 3) Promoted good management practices that will sustain healthy estuarine functioning; 4) Raised awareness of the intrinsic value of estuaries and developed a sense of ownership of estuaries not only among local communities but throughout South Africa; and 5) Raised awareness of and insight into the legal context and obligations of all levels of government (national, provincial, local and community).

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

the overarching strategy (Section 6.1) to 6. Management Strategies protect our biodiversity and the individual

management strategies necessary to deal with In order to achieve our strategic objectives, specific concerns (Sections 6.2 to 6.7). management strategies were developed to deal with the key threats that prevent us from achieving our vision. These can be divided into

Figure 1. Strategic objectives aimed at addressing the key threats preventing us from achieving the vision for the estuaries for the Cape Floral Region.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

et al. 2003; Moore et al. 2004; Faith & Walker 6.1 The classification and prioritisation of 2002). CFR estuaries in terms of health, conservation and economic While many South African estuaries do enjoy importance and the development of some level of conservation status, there is still a a regional conservation plan need for the systematic, integrated conservation planning of estuaries that involves (Project leader: Dr JK Turpie) a range of stakeholders as well the scientific community. A substantial amount of work that 6.1.1 Introduction can inform such a process has been carried out on estuaries (Turpie 1995; Maree & Whitfield Conservation planning is a rapidly evolving 2000; Colloty et al. 2001; Turpie et al. 2002). area of research in which numerous Turpie (2004) proposed a strategy for the approaches have been explored around the conservation of estuarine biodiversity in South world in recent years. Systematic conservation Africa based on Estuarine Protected Areas planning has replaced the relatively ad hoc (EPAs), co-managed Estuarine Conservation way of selecting conservation areas in the past Areas (ECAs) or Estuarine Management Areas and is becoming increasingly holistic in terms of (EMAs) to ensure that all estuaries undergo ecological goals and integrating conservation active management. and development needs in a region. Having first concentrated on the representation of The overall objective of the sub-project will be species, conservation planning has evolved to to identify (in collaboration with estuarine incorporate ecosystem processes and now managers and scientists and the broader gives greater emphasis to biodiversity stakeholder community) the CFR estuaries that persistence (e.g. Cabeza & Moilanen 2001). should be assigned different levels of One of the biggest challenges is setting protection (as EPAs, ECAs or EMAs) and to spatially explicit targets for the maintenance of prioritise estuaries in need of rehabilitation on ecological and evolutionary processes. This the basis of an updated classification of involves identifying the processes, finding estuaries in terms of health, conservation spatial surrogates for them and setting targets importance and socio-economic values. for them (Pressey et al. 2003). Another key challenge is delivering a plan that not only 6.1.2 Project approach achieves representativeness but also ensures the persistence of targeted populations and Task 1. Fill biodiversity data gaps the maintenance of biodiversity (Reyers et al. Turpie et al. (2004) undertook an analysis of all 2002). In many respects, the C.A.P.E. the data available for South African estuaries Programme has set the standard for systematic and augmented this with data collection on conservation planning (Balmford 2003). Much invertebrates. The updated database was used of its success has been attributed to its two- to update the estuary-importance rating. pronged approach of involving stakeholders However, there are still some important early on in the process, coupled with scientific deficiencies in the data. Task 1 involves the rigour, resulting in wide ownership of the following: terrestrial conservation plan. In addition, it is 1) Vegetation: Update spatial data for becoming increasingly recognised that CFR estuaries, involving the detailed conservation planning cannot take place in mapping of at least 12 systems. isolation of an understanding of socio- 2) Fish: Validate Harrison data and use economic pressures and values. Socio- the analysis to devise a sampling plan economic factors are important in identifying to augment existing data. the most appropriate types of conservation 3) Birds: Undertake bird counts in estuaries intervention and resource economics is playing not covered by existing monitoring an increasing role in conservation planning programmes or recent studies (about (Abbitt et al. 2000; Balmford et al. 2000; Frazee 30 systems).

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Task 2. Do a health assessment Task 4. Describe the economic value of CFR The health state of South African estuaries has estuaries been estimated by several authors using a Estuaries provide goods and services that variety of indicators or concentrating on generate a range of economic values and different aspects of estuaries (Heydorn 1972, contribute to national income. Although 1973 in Morant & Quinn 1999; Heydorn & Tinley Costanza et al. (1997) provided a rough 1980; Heydorn 1986; Harrison et al. 2001; estimate of the average global value of Whitfield 2000). Although several assessments estuaries (in dollars per hectare per year), have been made, there is disagreement on the which suggested that they were highly health status of individual systems. A valuable, there have been very few empirical comprehensive estuarine health index was studies of the economic value of estuaries. Task developed for setting the freshwater reserve 4 involves the following: (Resource Directed Measures [RDMs]) and 1) Gather economic data for CFR applied to several estuaries in the CFR, e.g. the estuaries on subsistence use (from key Olifants, Breede, Tsitsikamma, Kromme and informants); Seekoei estuaries. Task 2 involves the following: 2) Gather economic data on tourism and 1) Analyse the data for estuaries for which property (from key informants); RDM health studies have been carried 3) Analyse existing data to assess the out in order to test the reliability of indirect (e.g. nursery) value of fisheries; simple predictors of health (e.g. % 4) Augment existing data on non-use mean annual run-off [MAR] and value (survey Western Cape residents); estuary size); 5) Classify and prioritise estuaries in terms 2) Update data on the required of current economic importance; and predictors for CFR estuaries as far as 6) Identify and evaluate economic trade- possible; and offs that need to be considered in 3) Classify, at rapid level, CFR estuaries in conservation planning. terms of health. Task 5. Do conservation planning Task 3. Do a conservation-importance The identification of a network of protected assessment estuaries will require consideration of the The conservation importance of estuaries will representation of different types of estuaries be tackled in terms of the abundance of and estuarine biodiversity and the long-term habitats and species that they contain and in maintenance of species, communities and terms of their ecological functions, including in ecological processes. The conservation plan a broader coastal context. This will build on will also take into account the sensitivity of existing evaluations (e.g. Turpie et al. 2002, systems to perturbation, irreplaceability, the 2004) and the data collected in Task 1. Note vulnerability of particular species, existing that the conservation importance may form an threats and socio-economic trade-offs. The input into but is not the only basis of the relationships between ecosystem health and selection of a set of protected areas. Task 3 (a socio-economic value will be identified and desktop task) involves the following: taken into consideration as far as possible. The 1) Update the data sets described in project will provide recommendations as to the Turpie et al. 2004; and desired protection status of all estuaries within 2) Check and refine the scoring index if the CFR, taking biodiversity importance and necessary and apply the results to the socio-economic criteria into account. It will also updated data to reclassify estuaries in identify estuaries in need of rehabilitation and terms of conservation importance. assess future management options for these. Task 5 involves the following:

1) Identify conservation goals for the CFR, and set quantitative conservation targets for species, vegetation

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

communities and estuary types and quantitative targets for minimum size, connectivity or other design criteria; 2) Review existing conservation areas (with a gap analysis), assessing the extent to which quantitative targets have already been achieved; 3) Review best practice and develop new algorithms for integrating ecological and socio-economic data into the selection process; 4) Select additional estuaries to identify preliminary sets of new conservation areas for consideration by managers as additions to established areas; 5) Make recommendations as to the level or type of conservation for different systems; and 6) Identify and prioritise systems in need of rehabilitation.

Task 6. Workshop to verify and finalise results The results of the above tasks will be presented to key members of the estuarine research and management community during a three-day workshop. This will summarise the regular communication of methods and results throughout the project. The workshop will involve the following: 1) A detailed report-back on all of the above; 2) Test results of the rapid health assessment against expert opinion; 3) The finalisation of the importance scores for estuaries; and 4) The finalisation of protection categories and priorities for rehabilitation.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

6.2 Marine living resources

Strategic Objective: Achieve targets for ecosystem biodiversity and health in terms of the long-term habitat persistence of habitats, species, community structure, biomass and functioning by 2015. RELATED SPHERE ORGAN ACTION TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF GOV. OF STATE Habitat loss and Assess (audit), map and identify Local or provincial Funded: MCM, GIS 2006 Maps degradation problems on a fine scale. level (funded by SANBI, Assessment of health national, provincial provincial authorities Aerial photography or regional government) Implement: Estuarine Health CapeNature, SANParks, Monitoring Programme municipalities, SDFs, MCM Estuarine Health Index Do strategic planning according to National or MCM, Conservation planning 2006 Conservation targets targets set for the CFR region provincial SANBI tools Strategic plan (consider the trajectory of change government for estuaries, e.g. abstraction and climate change). Establish protected areas/zonation. National/ MCM, Conservation planning 2006/7 Network of EPAs provincial, local, CapeNature, SANParks, tools Local zonation schemes community municipalities, SDFs, scientists MCM Estuarine management plans Manage and monitor (biophysical Local or provincial Municipalities, Estuarine management 2009 Implemented EMPs and compliance aspects). conservation agencies, plans conservancies MoUs Water quantity and Identify priority estuaries. National or DWAF, Prioritisation using multi- 2006 National consensus on list quality regional MCM, criteria decision-making of priority estuaries conservation agencies analysis

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Strategic Objective: Achieve targets for ecosystem biodiversity and health in terms of the long-term habitat persistence of habitats, species, community structure, biomass and functioning by 2015. RELATED SPHERE ORGAN ACTION TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF GOV. OF STATE Assess freshwater requirements for Catchment level DWAF RDM protocol for 2015 Resource Quality priority estuaries. estuaries Objectives (RQOs) (quantity, quality and biophysical) Desired state (recommended class) Exploitation of living Do stock assessments of the coast National MCM Standard methods 2010 Data on stock status resources and estuaries on a regular basis. for Include an evaluation/review of priority the life histories of the priority species species. Review management approach National MCM Review 2010 Linefish and bait- (the carrot-and-stick approach) collection regulations that and upgrade linefish and bait- improve stock status of collection regulations. collapsed species and maintain status of others Establish MPAs, MCAs, MMAs, EPAs National, MCM, Conservation planning 2015 Network of MPAs, MMAs, and Estuarine Zonation Areas that provincial or local conservation agencies, tools MCAs and EPAs protect species from municipalities overexploitation and allow stock to (need to consult) Estuarine management Implemented estuarine recover. plans management plans, including zonation scheme Increase compliance enforcement. National, MCM, Legislation 2010 Effective compliance provincial, conservation agencies, MoUs and increased successful local, municipalities, prosecution of community conservancies environmental crimes

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Determination of buffer zones Adapt MPAs and EPAs to mitigate National, MCM Conservation planning 2015 Adapted network of effects of climate change. provincial tools, e.g. fine-scale protected areas conservation planning *Invasive aliens and Assess invasive aliens in estuaries National, MCM, GIS 2010 Map with spatial mariculture (terrestrial, freshwater and marine: provincial Global Ballast Water distribution of invasive vegetation, invertebrates, fish and Management Monitoring aliens birds). Programme, conservation agencies Assess the impact of alien invasives National, MCM Conservation tools 2010 Outline of potential threat on estuarine biodiversity. provincial to estuarine biodiversity Implement the Estuarine Alien National, MCM, Legislation 2015 Systematic eradication of Eradication Programme (if provincial, conservation agencies, invasive species feasible). local municipalities, Funding (freshwater, terrestrial and conservancies marine) Apply stringent regulations on National, MCM Legislation 2010 Strong legal instruments mariculture and investigate the provincial Guidelines for mariculture feasibility of mariculture in estuaries. in estuaries *These threats were dealt with by the task groups following the workshop.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

6.3 Water quantity and quality

Strategic Objective: Determine, implement, monitor and review Resource Quality Objectives (RQOs) (taking into account public health) in order to maintain or restore estuarine structure and function in the best attainable state for five priority estuaries within the CFR by 2010. RELATED ORGAN ACTION SPHERE TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF STATE Water quantity and Ensure that a reserve is determined National, DWAF RDM protocols for 2010 Implemented reserve at quality and that RQOs are set (where regional estuaries priority estuaries necessary), implemented and monitored for priority estuaries. Develop an estuarine health Regional DWAF Estuarine health 2006 Operational estuarine programme (i.e. a Regional MCM programme health programme Monitoring Programme). CapeNature Link RQOs with national, provincial National, DWAF Procedure to incorporate 2010 Integrated Development and local development plans. regional, MCM RQOs into local Plans (IDPs) that include local Provincial authorities management plans estuarine management Municipalities plans based on class and Community RQOs for that estuary Develop guidelines or tools for National, DWAF Guidelines or tools for 2007 Effective guidelines or estuarine management at local regional estuarine management tools for estuarine level for dealing with water-quality at local level for dealing management at local and quantity issues and with water-quality or level for dealing with determining “no-go” development quantity issues water-quality or quantity boundaries (riparian buffer zones). issues

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Strategic Objective: Determine, implement, monitor and review Resource Quality Objectives (RQOs) (taking into account public health) in order to maintain or restore estuarine structure and function in the best attainable state for five priority estuaries within the CFR by 2010. RELATED ORGAN ACTION SPHERE TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF STATE Management Set up Water User Associations National DWAF Existing procedures 2007 Operational estuarine (WUAs) or make use of other form, advisory committee localised bodies (with relevant or WUA that assists in legal mandates) to manage the management of estuary estuary, depending on what is practical – DWAF (2007 for priority estuaries). Draw up interim management National DWAF New strategy 2007 Effective water- action plans to deal with water- Overall management management strategy to quality and quantity issues. plan driven by deal with water demand Department of until reserve is set Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) Draw up an MoU for priority National, DEAT Delineation or delegation 2007 Clearly defined roles and estuaries that will define roles and regional, DWAF of responsibilities responsibilities among responsibilities regarding the provincial, lead agents management of those estuaries. local Identify a champion(s) for estuaries Regional DWAF Champion to implement 2006 Active champion for to drive activities, such as an MCM programme estuaries in CFR estuarine health programme (i.e. regional monitoring). Climate change Actively fund studies to investigate National, DWAF Modelling (numerical 2010 Scenarios highlighting the impact of climate change on regional and conceptual) impact of climate the estuaries of the CFR (e.g. run- Expert opinion change on CFR estuaries off, temperature, evaporation and changes in agriculture).

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

6.4 Infrastructure and development

Strategic Objective: Define estuarine areas, assess their current status and values and formulate appropriate integrated management plans to regulate development and other activities impacting upon them, with particular reference to cumulative impacts by 2008. RELATED ORGAN ACTION SPHERE TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF STATE Uncontrolled/inappropriate For each estuary: Define what Provincial Local Provincial env. SEA 2007 Spatial plans delineating development , including constitutes the “estuary space” agency, estuarine space. structure within the and what would be appropriate Spatial Development estuarine basins themselves development (if any) within it. Municipalities (local Frameworks (SDFs) Determined nature and and district) levels of appropriate Thereafter persuade and NEMA (EIA regulations) development for capacitate provincial and local Provincial land-use Coastal Management individual systems land-use decision-makers to abide planning agency Act by outcomes Estuarine mamgmet PCMPs plans developed that Obtain legal Status for outcomes BDM act incorporate spatial plans (of definition process), in the form of SDFs, Provincial Coastal Ecological Cumulative Local/ Provincial Management Plans, NEMA Policy Assessment authorities abide by guidelines and / or methodology plans Geographical area provisions, Bioregional Plan proclamations Obtained legal status for etc plan from the relevant authorities

*Physical manipulation of Asses nature and scale of physical Local Provincial Policies, operational 2006/7 Revaluated artificial estuarine morphology manipulations are occurring along Provincial environmental agency guidelines, points of manipulation the CFR coastline departure for evaluating manipulation proposals Mitigated for certain Develop policies, operational aspects

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Strategic Objective: Define estuarine areas, assess their current status and values and formulate appropriate integrated management plans to regulate development and other activities impacting upon them, with particular reference to cumulative impacts by 2008. RELATED ORGAN ACTION SPHERE TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF STATE guidelines, points of departure for Permitting processes evaluating manipulation proposals Increase control on Link permit conditions procedures leading to Review the with the Estuarine manipulation acceptability/motivation for Management Plans current manipulations and and/or very explicit set of mitigate IDP Process evaluation criteria which are systematically bound Incorporate in Estuarine up with permit decision- Management Plans and IDPs making processes. *Carrying capacity Determine individual carrying Local Municipalities Develop Carrying 2010 Carrying Capacity part exceedance capacity of estuaries in CFR to Provincial Capacity guidelines of Individual Estuarine Management Plans Forming key foundation in Estuarine Management Plans/IDP *These threats were dealt with by the task groups following the workshop.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

6.5 Climate change

Strategic Objective: Minimise the detrimental impacts of predicted climate change by 2010 through: 1) Taking a long-term precautionary approach to infrastructure development and water-resource planning; 2) Influencing land management in upper and middle catchments to reduce impacts on estuaries; and 3.) Promoting long-term sustainable livelihoods through estuarine management that minimises risks. RELATED ORGAN ACTION SPHERE TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF STATE Developmental Map appropriate development National MCM Predictive analyses etc. 2007 Setback lines on GIS of pressures (e.g. on setback lines also accounting for responsible bodies space for predicted impacts of climate environment to change. respond or evolve), protection of inappropriately sited infrastructures etc. Lack of long-term Implement capacity building in Provincial, Provincial Statutory planning 2007 Establishment of clear link sustainability respect of the environmental municipal Municipal instruments among livelihoods, considerations, importance to socio-economic economics and climate- impacts on fisheries and political issues. change impacts potential etc. Ensure the consideration of estuarine management in the Revision of relevant provincial SDF and EIP, municipal documents (see action integrated development plans, column) spatial planning frameworks and management plans. Changes in Fully implement CMAs and National DWAF et al. Reserve and 2010 Reserve and freshwater inflows, ecological reserves. CMA plans CMA plans done reduced goods and services, amenity value etc. Impacts on mouth Obtain a better understanding of Parastatals, NGOs, National Research, studies, broad Now Practical guidelines

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Global warming, South Africa to help drive the National Top national level World politics, 2010 Ratification and climate change, sea- global acceptance and statesmanship, pressure implementation of level rise, increased implementation of protocols etc. etc. international treaties etc. storminess etc.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

6.6 Institutional and management structures

Get an updated list of estuarine- National MCM Review Now Updated guide to related legislation (e.g. listed estuarine legislation activities under various Acts). Lack of expertise and Structure a process through which Regional, C.A.P.E. Estuaries Protocol 2007 Progress report on capacity we can learn from each other. national Programme Newsletter C.A.P.E. Estuaries MCM Programme Look critically at the education Regional, C.A.P.E. Estuaries Review 2006 Developed education section of the programme. national Programme material for management MCM Lack of relationships Show the benefits of working National, All Cooperative governance 2006 Improved cooperation and trust together. provincial, among levels of local, government community Help, train and capacitate National, MCM Multi-level training 2008 Developed, multi-level managers to improve trust. provincial, DWAF material training material local Provincial authorities Local Get to pilot estuaries fast. Regional C.A.P.E. Estuaries Workshops with target 2005/6 Active involvement in Programme municipalities local municipalities Municipality

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Strategic Objective: Cooperatively manage estuaries, through relevant institutions of management comprising appropriate spheres of government and civil society, according to appropriate management plans by 2010. RELATED ORGAN ACTION SPHERE TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF STATE Estuarine priorities not Incorporate estuarine National, All IDP guidelines 2010 IDPs that include details recognised by local management plans into IDPs. provincial, on estuary issues (via decision makers (e.g. local, Protocol in Coastal Act incorporation of estuarine housing projects more community management plans) important) Requirement from provincial coastal management plans Lack of funding Create synergy through co-funding National, MCM Cooperative governance Now Better return on (e.g. GEF, C.A.P.E., MCM and provincial, DWAF investment DWAF). local, Provincial authorities community Local Lack of legally Draft legislation and develop the National MCM Review of original 2005/6 Detailed guidelines on mandated lead National Estuarine Management DWAF document, National Estuarine agent prepared to Protocol. disaggregation of line Management Protocol take control for functions and addition to certain key aspect guidelines Lack of political will Hold a big political launch of the Regional C.A.P.E. Estuaries Email Now Increased awareness of C.A.P.E. Estuarine Programme. Programme Local media C.A.P.E. Estuaries Television Programme Cape Media Team Very low -profile of Bring out a newsletter. Regional C.A.P.E. Estuaries Email Now Increased awareness of estuaries currently on Programme Local media C.A.P.E. Estuaries national, provincial Television Programme and local level Cape Media Team

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

6.7 Education and awareness

“ Implement capacity building and the packing of resource material and communication programmes for WUAs and forums. Draw up estuary-legalisation guidelines. National, 2006 Good distribution provincial, “ local Develop appropriate training for all National, Training budgets 2006/7 Suite of training courses levels of estuarine governance. provincial, Capacity-building strategy Road show aimed at various levels “ local for appropriate training Career books NETA (/) institutions

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Strategic Objective: Generate education and awareness regarding CFR estuaries by 2010, having: 1) Contributed to integrated, collaborative and informed action and decision making regarding estuaries; 2) Contributed to a sustainable quality of life; 3) Promoted good management practices that will sustain healthy estuarine functioning; 4) Raised awareness of the intrinsic value of estuaries and developed a sense of ownership of estuaries not only among local communities but throughout South Africa; and 5) Raised awareness of and insight into the legal context and obligations of all levels of government. RELATED ORGAN ACTION SPHERE TOOLS DATE DELIVERABLE THREAT OF STATE Lack of strategy, profile, Implement strategic interventions National, Strategic or MTEF planning 2006 Strategies reflecting appropriate awareness and through policy formulation on education provincial, (national, provincial or 2008 education and awareness education in political and awareness at all spheres of local, local) importance and interventions with strategies government. community explicit targets in all C.A.P.E. signatory Organisational structure HR departments, IDP organisations and budget Intervene in or influence budget cycles. “ frameworks and consultant Ensure that the IDP process includes a + briefs IDPs and government strategy budget post. SALGA documentation with clear E&A responsibilities and targets (% of Ensure that the ToRs or job descriptions budget) for staff and consultants include estuarine responsibilities. Focused and strategic training with multi-player effort Lack of capacitated Expose educators to accredited training National, Training institutions 2007 Estuary resource-material learning educators and by appropriate institutions (e.g. provincial, (Goldfields, technikons, 2010 programmes awareness champions Goldfields and tertiary institutions). local universities, learnerships, THETA, PAETA etc. Staff with appropriate and Create in-field formal and informal “ accredited training training programmes and mentorship or coaching programmes to ensure a crop Active mentorship or coaching of capacitated emerging trainers relationships at all levels of (internships). governance

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Report to C.A.P.E. on the progress of the 7. Working Group Regional Estuarine Management Programme; 7.1 C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme Task Ensure the provision of identified national Team and regional funding for the Programme; The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management Communicate outcomes of the Programme Programme is guided by a small Estuarine Task to the various government departments on the appropriate level; and Team comprising the key funding bodies and major role players in the region (Table 2). Ensure the alignment of the C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management Programme with departmental mandates. The objectives of the Estuarine Task Team are to:

Table 2. C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme Task Team

Name Function Organisation Dr K Hamman Biodiversity CapeNature (Chair) Dr AJ Boyd Living Resources and Coastal MCM, DEAT Development (National) Mr E Ramsar DEAT Netshithothole Ms A Belcher/ Water Quantity and Quality (National) DWAF Mr W Enright Mr N Scarr Land Use and Infrastructure (Provincial) Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism (Eastern Cape)

7.2 Estuaries Working Group Programme and assist in future planning by the Programme (e.g. A Working Group was nominated at the Phase II and Phase III); and workshop to assist the Task Team in fulfilling its In addition, where funding allows, obligations regarding the C.A.P.E. Regional assist government departments Estuarine Management Programme (Table 3). (national to local) with the management of estuaries in the The objectives of the Working Group are to: CFR1.

1 Attend scheduled meetings (~two a It is envisaged that the Working Group for the C.A.P.E. year) to discuss issues relating to the Regional Estuarine Management Programme will be C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine similar to the Management Advisory Groups (MAGs) that support the Consultative Advisory Forum (CAF). CAF is an Management Programme; institutional structure under the Marine Living Resources Report to the C.A.P.E. Estuaries Act, with the particular aim of advising the Minister of Programme Task Team; Environmental Affairs and Tourism on scientific matters related to the planning and operations of the exploitation of Provide technical guidance to the living resources, including those in estuaries. The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine establishment of a regional Estuarine Working Group Management Programme; could also be considered a “pilot process” (like the pilot- estuary management plans). In the future, a national Review products and Estuarine Working Group could include other provinces documentation produced by the and provide an ideal forum to debate and finalise estuarine Programme, including individual management planning and to provide recommendations on estuarine issues directly to the responsible estuarine management plans for departments, coastal working groups and/or relevant pilot estuaries; ministers. Review the overall direction of the

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Table 3. Estuaries Working Group

Name Function Organisation Ms L van Niekerk (Chair) Estuarine Management, Hydrodynamics CSIR Mr P Joubert Living Resources and Coastal Development SANParks

Mr R Hiseman Conservation Management (Regional) CapeNature

Mr J du Plessis/ Conservation Management (Local) CapeNature Mr M Prophet

Mr SJ Lamberth Estuarine, Marine and Freshwater Fish, Fisheries MCM, DEAT Management Mr N Scarr Land Use and Infrastructure (Provincial) Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and Tourism (Eastern Cape) Dr JK Turpie Estuarine Biodiversity, Resource Economics, Anchor Environmental Estuarine Birds Prof. J Adams/ Estuarine Vegetation Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Dr T Borman Prof. T Wooldridge/ Estuarine Invertebrates Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Mr Sean Deyzel Ms A Belcher Linkage with Larger Catchment Issues and DWAF River Health Programme Champion Ms C Petersen River Health Programme Champion, Estuarine CapeNature Hydrodynamics, River Geomorphology

7.3 Technical Advisors to the Working Group

In addition to the establishment of the Working Group, a number of people with line functions at specific estuaries as well as specialists in certain areas who can be consulted on specific estuarine- related issues if and when their inputs are required was listed (Table 4):

Table 4. Technical Advisors to the Working Group

Name Function Organisation Dr A Whitfield Estuarine Fish and Health SAIAB Dr R Nel Conservation Planning and Management (Regional) KZNWildlife Dr T Williams Birds, Ecology, Conservation Management CapeNature Mr P Huizinga Hydrodynamics, Sediment Dynamics CapeNature Ms J Coleman Education and Awareness Mr A Theron Sediment Dynamics, Climate Change, Seal-level Rise CSIR Ms S Taljaard Estuarine Water Quality CSIR Mr C Cullinan/ Environmental Legislation EnAct Mr N Smith Dr D van Driel Local Estuarine Management Cape Metro Council (CMC) Dr G Mars Local Community Involvement and Funding Hessequa Environmental Advisory Committee Dr D Hay Co-management and Involvement of Local Estuarine KwaZulu-Natal University Communities in Estuarine Management Ms N Wilson Breede River Conservancy CapeNature

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

8. Pilot Estuaries

Table 5. Ranking of CFR estuaries (ordered from west to east) in terms of type, size (ha) and updated biodiversity importance score. Estuary types are classified as river mouths (R), permanently open (O), temporarily open/closed (C), estuarine bays (B) and estuarine lakes (L) (adapted from Turpie 2004).

Biodiversity Size SA No. Estuary Type importance Comments (ha) rank score Comprehensive water reserve (DWAF) C.A.P.E. Cederberg initiative Very high biodiversity importance Very high demand for water abstraction 1 Olifants O 701.69 98.5 2 High nutrient load from agricultural return flow Gillnet fishery in estuary causing sever degradation Local fishing management structure (including alternative and sustainable livelihoods projects) 2 Verlorenvlei L 71.5 57 Sandveld Groundwater Project Skuifraam Berg Estuary Monitoring Project (DWAF) Planned comprehensive reserve Planned Ramsar site 3 Berg (Groot) O 3615 98.4 3 High biodiversity importance High-user conflict Local forum (Laer Groot Berg Bewarings Assosiasie) Municipal reserve Highly modified 4 Rietvlei/Diep C 515 69.9 65 High-user conflict Local forum (Friends of Rietvlei) Disa (Hout Local forum (Friends of Hout Bay) 5 R 36.1 177 Bay) Table Mountain National Park Local forum (Friends of 6 Wildevoëlvlei C 75.79 77.9 39 Wildevoëlvlei/Kommetjie Environmental Action Group) Table Mountain National Park 7 Bokramspruit C 15.0 244 Local forum (Kommetjie Environmental Action Group) 8 Schuster C 15.0 245 Municipal reserve 9 Krom C 29.6 202 Local forum (Friends of Silvermine) 10 Silvermine C 6.52 41.8 160 CMC rehabilitation project Medium/high biodiversity importance 11 Sand C 155.48 76.3 44 Planned municipal reserve Local forum (Sandvlei Trust) 12 Eerste C 10.2 38.3 171 New MPA New MPA 13 Lourens C 7.09 38.3 172 Local forum (Friends of Lourens River) Sir Lowry's 14 C 2.95 29.5 204 Pass 15 Steenbras O 1.88 18.5 236 16 Rooiels C 10.84 43.3 156

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Biodiversity Size SA No. Estuary Type importance Comments (ha) rank score 17 Buffels (East) C 17.28 46.5 138 Kogelberg Biome 18 Palmiet O 33 63.9 78 EFR Kogelberg Biome Bot/ 19 L 1 698.4 96.3 8 High biodiversity importance Kleinmond Local forum (Friends of Botvlei) 20 Onrus C 41.13 57.4 95 Local forum (Friends of Onrus) Link to terrestrial nature reserve Link to Marine Protected Area Very high biodiversity importance High water demand 21 Klein L 2 958.9 95.9 9 Artificial breaching Low-lying developments Local forum (Klein River Advisory Committee) - Inactive at present 22 Uilskraals C 104.7 75.3 49 23 Ratel C 10 30.9 196 Ramsar site Link to terrestrial nature reserve Link to Marine Protected Area C.A.P.E. Agulhas Plain Initiative High biodiversity importance Need to link to Soetedalsvlei in 24 Heuningnes O 172.51 83.5 24 management plan Use to close, managed as permanently open Sedimentation Potential backflooding of agricultural land Klip- 25 C 13.5 251 drifsfontein Intermediate water reserve (DWAF) High water demand High biodiversity importance High-user conflict on estuary 26 Breede 2 O 455.28 86.8 19 MCM/CapeNature/River Rangers compliance initiative Active local forum (Breede River Rangers) High conflict with boating activities High importance Wetlands rehabilitation project 27 Duiwenhoks O 203.07 83.6 23 (Department of Agriculture) Next to potential MPA Local forum (Vermaaklikheid) Part of new Marine Protected Area C.A.P.E. Gouritz Initiative 28 Goukou 3 O 154.76 79.9 34 Hessequa Municipality busy with EMP Medium/high biodiversity importance High conflict w.r.t. boating activities

2 The Breede River Rangers and CapeNature are starting a process by which they want to develop an Estuarine Management Plan based on available data but they need guidance on the carrying capacity of the estuary.

3 The Goukou Estuary provides a working model of how the process can be run. An “Action Plan for the Goukou Catchment” has been consolidated through public participation and only requires funding to draft the Estuarine Management Plan. This funding can be provided either through C.A.P.E. or the Gouritz Initiative.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Biodiversity Size SA No. Estuary Type importance Comments (ha) rank score Gouritz initiative 29 Gouritz 4 O 112.58 75.5 46 Medium/high biodiversity importance Local forum (Gouritz Trust) 30 Blinde C 25.8 215 31 Hartenbos C 40.59 64.5 77 Highly modified 32 Klein Brak C 96 58.0 93 Planned reserve Planned comprehensive/intermediate reserve 33 Groot Brak C 113.92 75.4 47 Local forum (Great Brak Environmental Committee) Intermediate Reserve 34 Maalgate C 13.5 31.5 191 35 Gwaing C 13.6 250 36 Kaaimans O 8 27.5 209 Ramsar 37 Wilderness L 82.5 27 Wilderness Lakes National Park Ramsar Wilderness Lakes National Park 38 Swartvlei L 1 076.6 96.5 7 High biodiversity importance Rapid Reserve Nature reserve 39 Goukamma C 270 67.8 69 MPA Rapid Reserve Part of SANParks High-user conflict in and around estuary Intermediate Reserve 40 Knysna B 3 594 100 1 Very high biodiversity importance Subsistence Fishery Forum Landscape Initiative Planned Intermediate Water Reserve (DWAF) 41 Noetzie C 8 20.1 231 Rapid Reserve 42 Piesang C 92.24 70.8 62 Nature reserve 43 Keurbooms O 295.17 88.3 18 Planned reserve High biodiversity importance 44 Matjies/Bitou C 23.4 220 45 Sout (East) O 52.22 57.9 94 Tsitsikamma National Park 46 Groot (West) C 39.28 62.4 82 Tsitsikamma National Park 47 Bloukrans R 52.1 113 Tsitsikamma National Park 48 Lottering R 17 30.6 198 Tsitsikamma National Park 49 Elandsbos R 6 24.1 219 Tsitsikamma National Park 50 Storms R 37.6 174 Tsitsikamma National Park 51 Elands R 16.0 242 Tsitsikamma National Park 52 Groot (East) R 19.3 234 Tsitsikamma National Park Huisklip Reserve 53 Tsitsikamma C 21.8 229 Rapid Reserve 54 Klipdrif C 18.5 237 55 Slang C 7.9 256 Intermediate reserve Highly modified (100% MAR dam 56 Kromme O 240.34 86.4 20 above estuary, little potential for rehabilitation)

4 The Gouritz Trust has set aside R40 000 for the drafting of an Estuarine Management Plan and would look favourably on a co- funding model.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Biodiversity Size SA No. Estuary Type importance Comments (ha) rank score Local forum Reserve Rapid Highly modified (system can 57 Seekoei C 132.22 75.4 48 potentially be rehabilitated) Nature reserve 58 Kabeljous C 117.94 75.8 45 High biodiversity importance C.A.P.E. Baviaanskloof Initiative Water Research Commission Estuarine Biophysical Study (2000) Agricultural return flow (nutrient load) Bank erosion Extensive developed pressures expected Important for Dusky Kob, but heavy angling pressure 59 Gamtoos O 467.03 90.9 16 Significant fresh water abstraction Municipality has some management capacity. Existing Spatial Development Framework acknowledges the need for appropriate and adequate management of the system Relatively pristine: little morphological manipulation, little channel infrastructure, steady baseflow 60 Van Stadens C 28 46.3 139 61 Maitland C 0.2 34.8 181 High biodiversity importance Environmental flow requirement 62 Swartkops O 499 92.0 12 High-user conflict Local forum (Swartkops Trust)

8.1 Selection Criteria

The criteria that were considered in the municipalities or active forums and selection of pilot estuaries for the C.A.P.E. conservancies; and Estuaries Programme include: Data availability.

Estuarine Ecological flow The procedure developed for determining the requirement (“Reserves”); freshwater requirements for estuaries High biodiversity importance; (“Reserves”), under the National Water Act (Act Links to other initiatives of the 36 of 1998), includes methods for evaluating the C.A.P.E. project; ecological processes and setting of ecological Links to a Terrestrial or Marine management objectives. These methods Protected Area; include the determination of: Relatively little user conflict in and Ecological health; around the estuary to The desired state for an estuary (i.e. accommodate the short first phase the Recommended Ecological of the Programme (Phase II will Category); target high-user conflict systems Management objectives (e.g. once the process has been Ecological Resource Quality developed); Objectives); and Political will in the form of interested Long-term monitoring programmes.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Since the above-mentioned are important aspects required for the successful At least one pilot site should be from the Eastern development of detailed management plans Cape to represent the management issues compatible with long-term conservation and from that part of the region. co-operative governance in the region, it is strongly recommended that estuaries for which Selecting a range of different estuarine types reserve determination studies have already (e.g. permanently open estuaries, temporarily been completed, or are in progress, be open estuaries, estuarine bays and estuarine included in the final selection. lakes) would also be beneficial in the development of the guidelines for estuarine The emphasis on limited user conflict in and management in the region, as they could have around pilot estuaries relates to the short time different management requirements. frame in which Phase I of the C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management Programme needs to Based on the above stated rankings and demonstrate results. Phase II intends to target criteria, a shortlist of estuaries that meet these high-user conflict systems once the overall requirements was compiled. This was presented process has been developed. Nevertheless, the and expanded at the workshop. The following C.A.P.E. Estuaries Workshop participants estuaries were identified by the workshop recommended that one pilot estuary with high- participants as possible pilot sites: user conflict be included to develop some understanding of the key issues and processes Olifants required to handle such a situation. The Berg workshop participants believed that in Diep circumstances where an active local forum Lourens and/or a strong management authority already Bot exist, this will assist in expediting the conflict- Klein resolution process and assist in the Heuningnes development of the local vision and objectives. Breede Knysna was earmarked as the ideal estuary for such a test case. Duiwenhoks Goukou In addition, it was also felt that we needed to Gouritz select at least one system for which little data Goukamma are available (e.g. where no reserve has been Swartvlei done), as this represents the situation for a large Knysna number of CFR estuaries. This would require Keurbooms significant method development, especially in Kromme the sector dealing with water quantity and Seekoei quality. Gamtoos

Swartkops The C.A.P.E. Programme also strongly emphasises the need to link with other C.A.P.E. initiatives (e.g. the Cederberg, Agulhas Plain and Gouritz) to strengthen planning integration processes.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Figure 2. Locality map indicating the potential pilot estuaries

8.2 Final selection

The Working Group was tasked with compiling the final selection base on the above input. Dr A Boyd indicated that MCM would also fund the development of an estuarine management plan in the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal to test the approach in other parts of the country.

The Working Group selected the following pilot sites for estuarine management in the Western Cape region: Olifants; Klein; Heuningnes; Breede; Knysna.

It was decided by the Task Group that the input from the Eastern Cape Provincial Coastal Committee would be sought regarding the final selection of an Eastern Cape Estuary. The Eastern Cape Provincial Coastal Committee selected the Gamtoos Estuary as the pilot site within that province.

In addition, the C.A.P.E. Estuaries task team also supported the development of an Estuarine Management Plan for the Goukou Estuary based on the consultative process followed by Goukou Environmental Committee on behalf of the Hessequa Municipality (as described in Appendix G of the C.A.P.E Estuaries Programme Workshop by Dr G Mars).

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

9. Future Research and and programmes; Local estuarine management initiatives Development Needs (e.g. the Goukou, Gouritz, Breede and Groot Brak); and The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management St Lucia Monitoring Programme. Programme does not intend to redevelop existing methodologies and tools. Instead, it In terms of developing technologies for intends to incorporate or extend current management, the Programme intends rather to approaches on the table to strengthen its focus on the most critical areas lacking goals. management tools, such as state-of-estuary reporting, rapid health assessment and The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management recreational carrying-capacity analysis. Programme also recognises the importance of a number of other initiatives in the country and, A number of existing techniques and through the involvement of its various team methodologies are listed below: members and sub-projects, intends to collaborate with the following: Eastern Cape Estuaries Programme Phase I and Phase II; Provincial coastal management plans

Type Tool RDMs (reserve determinations) SEA Resource economics Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme: Sustainable Use Protocol Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme: Biodiversity Protocol Objective setting Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme: Co-management Protocol (setting local and development vision) of management Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme: Rehabilitation Protocol strategies Multi-criteria analysis

Driver-pressure-state-impact-response approach EIA Operational management plans Environmental Management Plans (EMP) Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme: Strategic Adaptive Management Estuarine Management Plans ( Estuarine zoning scheme Management IDPs plans SDFs and Land Use Management systems (LUMs) Catchment management plans Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme: Land Use Protocol Resource Monitoring Procedures for Estuaries (RDMs) Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme: Monitoring Protocol Monitoring tools Co-ordinated Water Bird Counts (CWAC) National linefish survey State-of-the-environment reporting

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Preliminary needs identified during the workshop:

Method/tool Who? Estuarine Health Monitoring Programme C.A.P.E. Estuaries Refinement of prioritisation of estuaries Programme, MCM, Cumulative assessment methodology for estuaries, especially required form a ecological DWAF, perspective municipalities Carrying-capacity analysis (e.g. boating) Spatial extent of estuarine area for CFR Development of newsletter to communicate progress of Programme Reviewed and updated list of estuarine-related legislation MCM Reviewed and developed guidelines for National Estuarine Management Protocol Developed resource guidelines for all levels (best-practice guidelines) Development of procedure incorporating RQO into local management plans DWAF Development of management strategy dealing with estuarine freshwater requirements where no reserve is done (to stop dishing out of base flows) Development of guidelines and tools for estuarine management at local level to deal with water-quality and quantity issues Development of predictive tools for climate change DWAF, MCM Development of multi-level education materials C.A.P.E., DWAF, MCM, WRC, ECEP SEA used more comprehensively as tool to guide development Provincial authorities, larger municipalities Legal status given to spatial planning tools DEAT, DWAF, provincial authorities

A generic framework to deal with a number of applied to estuaries requires an holistic the activities impacting on the health of approach that is integrated with all other estuaries (especially development and sectors. infrastructure category) is urgently required. For all threats we should look in the first instance at The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management what generic approaches may prevail, and Programme will support the development of a thereafter adapt and apply them to individual number of the above-mentioned systems, or groups of systems. Estuaries are a methodologies or tools for estuarine collective resource with collective value, which management. Where this might not be possible is a powerful argument for the development of due to budgetary constraints, the relevant ambitious management plans at a local level. government departments will be approached Within this context general rules may apply. For for assistance regarding method development. example, it may be viable, and desirable, to make statements about the carrying capacity of all estuaries in the CFR, to guide formulation of carrying capacities of individual systems.

Estuarine management requires the recognition of the importance of maintaining the integrity of an estuary and its surrounds, and planning development in a manner which takes account of the need to protect this integrity. Integrated coastal zone management as

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

10. Way Forward …

The C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine Management rehabilitation in the CFR will also be Programme comprises the following six tasks: identified and ranked. 1) The development of the overarching vision, objectives and management This sub-project was initiated in strategies for the estuaries of the CFR November 2005 under the leadership (this has been partially completed); of Dr JK Turpie, Anchor Environmental 2) The design of individual estuarine Consultants. management plans for pilot estuaries; 3) A review of the implementation design Task 2: Design of individual estuarine of the individual estuarine management plans for pilot estuaries management plans; 4) A review of the Regional Estuarine Management Programme; 2.1 Draft a generic outline for the design of 5) The implementation of estuarine estuarine management plans based management plans; and on an ecosystems approach. Develop 6) The finalisation of the C.A.P.E. Regional or adapt methods to determine: Management Programme. Physical carrying capacity (e.g. boating, recreation and tourism); Task 1: Development of the overarching Ecological carrying capacity and zonation (e.g. sustainable vision, objectives and management exploitation levels and strategies for the estuaries of the CFR livelihoods); The economic value of the goods

and service provided by estuaries; 1.1 Conduct the C.A.P.E. Regional and Estuarine Workshop to determine the Techniques to resolve multi-user vision, objectives and management conflicts in a South African strategies in September 2005. estuarine management context (e.g. poor data, limited 1.2 Classify and prioritise the estuaries of understanding and limited the CFR on the basis of health, resources [both human and conservation and economic financial]). importance (e.g. tourism). The classification and prioritisation will 2.2 Evaluate the present ecological health incorporate the findings of existing and of the pilot estuaries, taking into future national and regional account impacts relating to water evaluations done for DWAF and/or quantity and quality, land use and DEAT. This sub-task will also identify infrastructure and the exploitation of estuaries to be included in a network of living resources. DWAF has developed EPAs in the CFR that will provide for an estuarine health index to assist in this conservation, environmental regard (based on specific requirements education and research as well as under the National Water Act of 1998). contribute to sustaining fishing The existing DWAF method will activities. It is crucial that staff from the therefore be applied to assess present management authorities (e.g. MCM, health, with adaptations, where and if the Western Cape Nature Conservation required. In the interim, where detailed Board and local municipalities) be information on present health is not included in this task. As part of the available for any of the pilot estuaries, prioritisation study, estuaries in need of it is proposed that DWAF fund desktop or rapid assessments.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Resource (both human and 2.3 Determine a local vision and financial) allocations of the plan. objectives. DWAF has developed a (This might require changing or method to determine the future expanding the legal mandate of ecological status (i.e. ecological some of the local authorities and a reallocation of financial category) and ecological quality resources from different spheres of objectives for estuaries (based on government.) specific requirements under the

National Water Act of 1998). The existing DWAF method for setting the Task 3: Review of the implementation ecological vision and objectives will design of the individual estuarine therefore be applied with adaptations, management plans where and if required, by a specialist

team. 3.1 Evaluate the individual estuarine

management plans by the Working This information will be provided to the Group (with input from other individual task teams to take into stakeholders, where required), account in setting individual local extracting key learning points from visions and objectives. The visions and each. This will be done after the objectives also need to incorporate completion of the design of the aspects such as physical and different individual estuarine ecological carrying capacity, current management plan designs. and potential goods and services

provided, current and potential 3.2 Communicate key learning points to activities posing threats and national local authorities and stakeholders of and regional (CFR) objectives. This will the pilot study areas and recommend be done in consultation with improvements to individual plans stakeholders in a workshop. where deemed necessary.

2.4 Draft individual management strategies for the pilot estuaries for Task 4: Review of the Regional Estuarine inclusion in individual estuarine Management Programme management plans (as defined by the proposed National Estuarine 4.1 Convene a broader stakeholder Management Protocol). The workshop to communicate and review management strategies would require progress on the Regional Estuarine details on the: Management Programme to date to Type and intensity of use in areas ensure continuous alignment with any zoned for specific purposes; new developments in policy and Demarcation of dynamic or legislation (e.g. the National hazardous areas not to be Environmental Management: Coastal developed; and Estuarine Bill). Detailed compliance plan and the monitoring thereof; Task 5: Implementation of estuarine Detailed integrated monitoring plan and assessment procedures; management plans Awareness and education programmes to be introduced in 5.1 Revise the individual estuarine order to gather public support management plans by the local and understanding of the estuarine management teams based biodiversity and economic on outcomes of Task 3 and Task 4 importance that estuaries provide (where required) in order to provide a to the region; and

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

systematic and effective integrated the brief for an estuarine monitoring management approach for the region. and assessment programme. Following the outcome of this workshop, the 5.2 Implement the management strategies, as following will be determined: defined in the revised individual 1) An approach for the design of an estuarine management plans. These estuarine monitoring and will typically be categorised into: assessment programme; Water quantity and quality; 2) A work plan; The exploitation of marine living 3) Resource requirements (both resources; and human and capital); Land use and infrastructure. 4) A schedule; and 5) Deliverables. This task would require the local authorities of the pilot-estuary sites to Note: This task needs to align its implement the individual estuarine outcomes with the requirements of the management plans. This would require National Recreational Linefish Survey (MCM), RDMs – Reserve (DWAF) and the alignment of mandates, funding and the River Health Programme (DEAT and personnel on the ground with the EMP’s. DWAF). Resource managers are requested to

evaluate both the successes and the failures of the various strategies and to Task 6: Finalisation of the C.A.P.E. provide feedback on the Regional Management Programme implementation process. 6.1 Finalise the review and revision of the 5.3 The adoption of the pilot estuarine pilot estuarine management plans, management plans would require including an evaluation of the overall substantial capacity building and effectiveness of the C.A.P.E. Regional training of local authorities at the pilot- Estuarine Management Programme. estuary sites. All effort should be made This process should be guided by the so that the required resources (both Working Group but will need input from human and financial) are available for various local stakeholders and this. authorities on its overall success and effectiveness. 5.4 Establish monitoring and assessment programmes in order to measure the 6.2 Develop training modules and manuals effectiveness of the individual estuarine for the implementation of estuarine management plans and the progress management programmes in the towards achieving the overarching Cape region, capturing the knowledge objectives and strategies of the and insights gathered during Phase I. C.A.P.E. Regional Estuarine These can be aimed at, for example, Management Programme. It is on-the-ground managers as well as for envisaged that this Programme will training purposes in schools and then form the basis for the universities. establishment of a national estuarine monitoring and assessment It is recommended that the lead programme, which falls within the researcher(s) compile draft training mandates of both DEAT and DWAF. modules based on existing or planned material and present these to the It is envisaged that this task would relevant estuarine managers. As initiate a stakeholder workshop material relating to water quantity and (consisting of the lead authorities and quality and to infrastructure and some estuarine scientists) to determine development is currently being drafted

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

in other programmes, it is envisaged that the primary focus of the training material should be on aspects relating to the exploitation of living resources and the monitoring of resources (including some customisation of water and development-related material).

It is recommended that this align with current initiatives being developed for estuaries by: DWAF (FETwater) and the WRC (Eastern Cape Estuaries Programme training for local managers).

Note: Products need to be developed by scientists and managers currently working in the field of estuarine research and management in order to be of value and to provide in-depth, up-to- date guidance.

6.3 Implement training and capacity building with regard to the management of estuaries in CFR regions.

This would require the training and/or development of staff within relevant management authorities to conduct effective estuarine management and decision making under the auspices of the proposed National Estuarine Management Protocol currently being developed by DEAT. This task focuses on providing training to estuarine managers outside the scope of the pilot estuary sites.

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Table 6. Proposed scheduling of Phase I of the C.A.P.E. Estuaries programme

2008/ FUNDING PHASE/TASK 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 9 SOURCE Q1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 PROJECT COORDINATION GEF WORKING GROUP MANAGEMENT MCM TASK 1: VISION, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 1.1 Vision & objectives workshop, establish working group & pilot estuaries MCM 1.2 Classify and prioritise protected areas and rehabilitation MCM TASK 2: INDIVIDUAL EMPs 2.1 Establish a generic method to develop EMPs MCM/GEF 2.2a. Initiate rapid ecological health assessments DWAF b. Initiate detailed ecological health assessments DWAF 2.3 Draw up local visions and objectives DWAF/GEF 2.4 Individual EMPs: Develop & stakeholder comment GEF TASK 3: REVIEW OF INDIVIDUAL EMPs 3.1 Review individual plans. GEF 3.2 Communicate key learning to authorities. GEF TASK 4: REVIEW OF PROJECT 4.1 Workshop to review the project MCM TASK 5: IMPLEMENTATION OF INDIVIDUAL EMPs 5.1 Revise individual plans. Unplanned 5.2 Implement EMPs. Unplanned 5.3 Implement capacity building and training. Unplanned 5.4 Design & implement estuarine monitoring programme MCM TASK 6: FINALISATION 6.1 Review the implementation of pilot EMPs. Unplanned 6.2 Finalise training modules and manuals. MCM 6.3 Finalise capacity building and training programmes. Unplanned

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Appendices

APPENDIX A: NATIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL ...... 1 APPENDIX B: INTRODUCTION...... 5 APPENDIX C: VISION ...... 8 APPENDIX D: STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES ...... 10 APPENDIX E: MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES...... 13 APPENDIX F: WORKING GROUP NOMINATIONS ...... 16 APPENDIX G: INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATIONS ...... 18 APPENDIX H: PILOT ESTUARIES ...... 27 APPENDIX I: FINAL COMMENTS...... 29

APPENDICES

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX A: NATIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL

Extracted from: Recommendations on a framework for effective cooperative governance of South African estuaries by Van Niekerk and Taljaard 2003, funded by the Water Research Commission (WRC)

One tool that was repeatedly highlighted in the various discussions was the National Estuarine Management Protocol proposed under the National Environmental Management: Coastal Zone Bill.

The National Estuarine Management Protocol sets out to promote the effective cooperative governance of estuaries by means of a legal and institutional framework. The focus is on statutory provisions for cooperative governance, taking into account current principles, policy, legislation, regulations and practice. Because of the diverse interests and roles and responsibilities of management authorities for estuaries (e.g. national and provincial government, local municipalities, SANParks, Nature Conservation), a legally defensible National Estuarine Management Protocol was developed that would assist with defining responsibilities and coordination, particularly among the lead agencies, in a structured manner. Although such a Protocol had to ensure uniformity in the overall approach to estuarine management is South Africa, it also had to recognise that the various estuaries along the South African coast have different, site-specific management requirements often unique to an individual system.

The proposed National Estuarine Management Protocol (Figure 3) views management as an iterative process. The Protocol conforms closely to that for integrated development planning in that the thrust in both processes is strategic. To ensure effective implementation, the Protocol needs to be incorporated into legislation, the most direct avenue being considered to be through the new National Environmental Management: Coastal Zone Bill.

The different components of the Management Protocol follow a cyclic, adaptive management approach and are described in further detail below:

Strategic vision and objectives need to be set for both the biophysical and the socio-economic environments. The objectives are set at two levels, namely:

Strategic vision and objectives: These are set on a national and/or provincial or regional level. Estuaries do not operate in isolation but are connected, albeit indirectly, to other estuarine systems in a region and even globally (e.g. through fish and bird migration). As a result, certain objectives need to be set on a higher level to ensure overall sustainability (taking into account social equity, economic growth and ecological integrity). For estuaries, a strategic vision and strategic objectives therefore need to be defined on both a national and a regional (or provincial) level, with agreement among different departments on certain key requirements (e.g. strategic developments planned in different regions or conservation status on a national or a regional level). Local vision and objectives: These are site-specific and need to be set for individual estuaries. To ensure the long-term sustainability of estuaries, it is crucial that the vision and objectives of the lower tiers of government are aligned with those of national and regional government departments. However, this does not mean that local authorities and communities cannot take the initiative when appropriate, i.e. forcing national and provincial authorities to act in a bottom-up approach. In addition, the vision and objectives set for a particular estuary by the various management and control authorities should also be in alignment.

APPENDICES, PAGE 1

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Management strategies are defined at two levels, namely:

National or regional management strategies: Management strategies and plans should be developed on national and regional or provincial levels to guide management on all levels ultimately to achieve the strategic vision and objectives set for estuaries. National or regional management strategies need to be elaborate, providing the necessary guidelines for national, regional (provincial) and local initiatives. Local management strategies: Detailed management strategies and plans must be developed on a local level to guide local managers to achieve site-specific ecological and socio-economic objectives set for a particular estuary, taking into account national or regional management strategies. Local management strategies, including an estuarine zoning scheme, should be incorporated into an estuarine management plan which, in turn, should be incorporated into Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) or municipal coastal management programmes for the area.

Planning and operations relate primarily to actions (categorised into water quality and quantity, land-use and infrastructure development or the exploitation of marine living resources) that need to be taken into consideration in the planning and operation of activities or developments in and around estuaries.

Monitoring can be divided into two categories, namely:

Strategic monitoring: This refers to monitoring programmes through which long-term data sets are collected to establish natural variability and trends as a result of human interference. Data collected from such monitoring programmes are usually those used for state-of-the-environment reporting. Compliance monitoring: This is related to specific activities or developments in and around estuaries. The primary aim of these monitoring programmes is to establish whether the operation of such activities and developments complies with predetermined critical limits and with the ecological and socio-economic objectives of the estuarine environment on which it may have an impact.

Assessment and evaluation are the feedback loop that ensures the ultimate success of the management process. Assessments and evaluations are performed both at a strategic level and on specific activities and developments.

Strategic assessment and evaluation are required to establish the degree of long-term natural variability as well as the potential trajectory of change associated with human interference. The assessment and evaluation of specific activities or developments, on the other hand, entail compliance testing against critical limits set for processes and actions associated with the activity or development as well as against measurable ecological and socio-economic objectives set for a particular estuary.

Using the structure of the Protocol as a basis, the statutory framework for cooperative governance as well as the state and private-sector actors that should participate within the different components of estuarine management process can be developed. These actors and their responsibilities vary with each tier of government (local, provincial and national) and each component in the management process. Guidance will be provided for determining who is responsible, what the legal mandate is, who should participate and who should be kept informed.

On a national scale, the lead agents (the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism [DEAT] and the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry [DWAF]), under the auspices of the Committee for Environmental Co- ordination (established under the DWAF National Environmental Act), would have responsibility for the process. This Committee would inform and be informed by national government departments and at provincial level by coastal

APPENDICES, PAGE 2

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

committees established under the Coastal Zone Bill and by estuary advisory groups. The coastal committees would also inform and be informed by Catchment Management Agencies, established under the National Water Act. At the level of local government, interaction would be with the municipal integrated development structure and planning process established under the Municipal Systems Act, with Water User Associations (WUAs) established under the National Water Act and with civil society through estuary forums.

Finally, the effective cooperative governance of South African estuaries can be achieved only through integrating the scientific, managerial and legal initiatives currently taking place in this country. The tool to achieve this would be the National Estuarine Management Protocol.

Dr A Boyd gave a brief outline of the proposed section in the Bill delineating the Protocol. Chapter Five of the Bill deals with the requirement for a National Estuarine Management Protocol and the content thereof. The Bill requires that estuaries be managed in a coordinated and efficient manner in consultation with DWAF. It also stipulates the requirements for estuarine management plans and states that the development of these plans must be consistent with a National Estuarine Management Protocol.

Such a Protocol should determine the vision, objectives and management strategies, set standards and develop guidelines regarding how estuaries should be managed.

The Bill is in draft format and is currently still subject to change.

APPENDICES, PAGE 3

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Figure 3: Proposed National Management Protocol for Estuaries

APPENDICES, PAGE 4

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX B: INTRODUCTION

MCM introduction to the C.A.P.E. meeting (Dr A J Boyd)

From the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism’s MCM Branch, welcome too.

This workshop will hopefully be quite a milestone for us because it brings all role players together, not just to discuss matters in general but also so that, together, we can achieve specific objectives regarding estuary management in the C.A.P.E. region.

In a nutshell, the C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme has two core areas: firstly, obtaining a blueprint for the protection of estuarine biodiversity throughout the area; and, secondly (but just as importantly), piloting a coordinated management system at a number of selected estuaries. This system will meet the requirements of individual departments in a coordinated way, whilst allowing individual estuarine management plans, with local input, to be drawn up and implemented. The systematic approach has been called a “National Estuarine Management Protocol” and it comprises a chapter in the new Coastal Management Bill, the legislation of which will take up much of the policy contained in the White Paper for Sustainable Coastal Development in SA.

So, what we aim to achieve should be aligned with future legislation. I am pleased that we also have representatives from provinces other than the Western Cape here. Some of these persons have tried to implement estuary management structures in different ways. Much of the work in the Eastern Cape (through the Eastern Cape Estuary Management Programme) has focused on local estuary management structures and the bringing about of “independently-constituted” estuary management forums. Some of the more successful sites have been at the Tyolumnqa Estuary and at the Mtentu estuary. In KZN, the presence of a strong, well-staffed provincial agency (EKZNW) as well as a provincial coastal committee with an estuaries subcommittee has allowed for planning at the provincial level to make good progress – even if the outcomes of deliberations are often not particularly encouraging. An example here is the “coast in crisis” meeting held yesterday. Also expected is a person from the Northern Cape and that province is making big strides in setting up a management plan for the Orange.

So, whilst it is likely that the outcomes of this C.A.P.E. meeting will approach things in a different way to what is happening in KZN and the Eastern Cape, I think we should look (at this stage, anyway) at the different approaches being mainly different in their emphasis and, hopefully, many aspects will be complementary. The C.A.P.E. approach will be outlined shortly by Lara (van Niekerk), who has been centrally involved in the process.

But, just for emphasis: 1) South Africa has 255 functioning estuaries of five main types and additional sub-types; 2) Estuaries in South Africa (like other countries) have different legislation dealing with issues like living resources, water, the environment and biodiversity, and development; and 3) There are different levels of responsibility for planning and implementation, from local through intermediate (like catchments) to provincial, national and international. And the C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme is subject to all of these.

So, it won’t be an easy two days! And thanks to everyone for their enthusiasm.

Questions after introductory talks:

Mr N Scarr: What work was done thus far?

APPENDICES, PAGE 5

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Dr A Boyd: Based on various discussions and the work done as part of the Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme, the consensus view coming from various institutions and organisations is the lack of a coherent blueprint to manage estuaries holistically. This Programme will go some way towards addressing this aspect. In addition, it will aim to assist in helping the development of legislation for nationwide application.

Mr N Scarr: The national and provincial departments represent two streams on opposites sides of the planet. There is some need on a provincial level to be convinced that the correct elements are there that will put the two streams together.

Mr W Botes: Focusing on the outcome of the strategic analysis – strengths and weaknesses/threats and opportunities – may not give you your measurable objectives, as some objectives may not be related to a threat.

Mr L Barwell: This comment is valid and the workshop takes your point but the Programme is not starting from scratch but building on what has been identified before (e.g. from the National Estuaries Workshop).

Ms Lara van Niekerk: The setting of measurable achievable targets (i.e. critical limits) requires significant scientific or management input. In many cases, this will require a sub-project, such as the C.A.P.E. Estuarine Prioritisation Project, to define these targets in more detail. The C.A.P.E. Programme should work towards setting these targets on various levels in the next five years.

Dr D van Driel: Who are we? Estuarine management involves national, provincial and local level of government. As we have wall-to-wall local-level legislation, we need to involve local government more.

Mr L Barwell: Need to make this sexy to get others involved.

Mr S Lamberth: We cannot compartmentalise the various levels of governance for estuaries. We need to identify in the regions who the competent managers are and assist them. We need to do this region-by-region.

Dr A Boyd: Not imbalance, we have provinces that are stationed at particular estuaries, i.e. although provinces, they work on a local level. Outcome needs to be fed to local government.

Ms J Coleman: The local government is aware of their lack of knowledge. What is of importance is the fact that estuaries do not feature high on the local authorities’ priorities. The C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme needs to convince them that they need to be involved. One should start with the major municipalities, e.g. Buffalo City.

Mr N Scarr: Required a breakdown of the role players, as he believes the consultation process was flawed.

Mr L Barwell: This is one of the challenges of the Programme: Need to identify who else should be involved.

Ms L van Niekerk: The project was designed at very short notice, as, a week before the final deadline for C.A.P.E. projects, somebody noticed that no estuarine component was on the table. The consultant tasked with designing sub- projects for freshwater and watersheds called an emergency meeting at the CSIR and we invited DEAT and DWAF to develop a proposal for the C.A.P.E. estuaries. DEAT offered its support, as it thought the National Estuarine Management Protocol was concept testing on a regional scale. The project was designed at very short notice (e.g. days) and was seen as a long shot to getting some funding to strengthen estuarine management in the region. Went well through the review process (validation). We grabbed this opportunity.

APPENDICES, PAGE 6

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Prof. B Allanson: Emphasised the point that local authorities should be involved and empowered. Excellent strategy in an ideal world but we need to make it workable. We need to get ahead, as developers are making hay as we speak! We need to educate local authorities to be able to say “no” to developers.

Dr G Mars: How many municipalities in the CFR area? About 15. At least get the Minister of Local Government to send one member of the municipalities to attend this.

Mr P Joubert: Municipalities lack understanding. If we manage scientifically to get a framework together, we can use blackmail to get the staff who are responsible for the work here. If we can take this Minister of Local Government to issue instructions to get this going. We can help; they are looking to us for guidance.

Mr L Barwell: Need to be incorporated in action plans.

Mr A Purves: We know the constraints of local authorities. We need to capacity-build.

Ms J Coleman: SARGA is one of the most critical links in working with municipalities!

Mr W Botes: Estuaries are a national asset. Many more institutions can be reached through extended public participation.

Dr A Boyd: Various levels of responsibility currently in this room. There is a better composition than we give ourselves credit for, as a number of people here represent more than one interest.

Dr D Hay: No economic, social and research objectives in the listed objectives (will provide).

Mr N Scarr: The economics profiles need to be more explicit. We need to make sure that biodiversity includes landscapes, not only species.

Mr M Prophet: CapeNature are co-governing in many instances using the current legislation. The lead agency on the ground is receiving a funded mandate. Agencies are looking for partners at provincial level but it is not always happening.

Dr A Boyd: Funding is a multi-level responsibility, not only that of DEAT. All organisations have environmental responsibilities and should be funded within those organisations’ own structures. New requirements put on local government clearly falling under MCM should be funded by them.

APPENDICES, PAGE 7

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX C: VISION

Team: Dr JK Turpie, Prof. B Allanson, Dr K Hamman, S Lamberth and Dr G Mars

The workshop participants were asked to evaluate the draft vision and propose key words needed to make it more applicable to the Cape Floral Region (CFR). An example of a vision is “I see a green desert”. A team under the leadership of Dr JK Turpie was then appointed to develop our vision based on these key words.

Draft Vision: The unique characteristics and opportunities presented by the estuaries of the CFR are recognised, appreciated and catered for through properly integrated management.

Key words nominated by the audience for inclusion into the vision: National, provincial, local and communities Cooperative governance Estuaries; functional ecosystems Aquatic links, not isolation Socio-economics – sustainable utilisation Responsibility and accountability – action C.A.P.E.’s overarching vision and mission statement Not only uniqueness Recognise the implication of long-term climate change and its role Education and training component (local government officials) – local government will not budge until legislation and regulations force them to - stick as well as carrot Adaptive planning Not more legislation – rather focus on the implementation of existing legislation Decisions that are made must be implemented Look at the structure, vision and mission objectives C.A.P.E. focused on biodiversity; this should also have this Understanding how estuaries work (e.g. sustained research) Recreational use Check-list for local government Education Estuarine health assessment Links to catchment management (systems approach) Remember: Vision is like a dream We cannot stay where we are – we need to change

FORMAL VISION: The estuaries of the CFR sustain spiritual and economic well-being through their biophysical attributes and production of goods and services, which are made possible by the maintenance of their biodiversity and ecosystem functions (integrity).

APPENDICES, PAGE 8

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

VISION FOR THE PEOPLE: Our estuaries are beautiful, rich in plants and animals, they attract visitors, sustain our livelihoods and uplift our spirits.

Comments on the vision:

Dr A Boyd: The vision does not just encapsulate the processes that you can see – management should grow into the vision. We should not ignore the draft vision.

Mr N Scarr: Happy but concerned regarding the biodiversity; consider using “integrity” rather than “functions”. Beautiful can also be contentious. Mr S Lamberth: Not “integrity”; the wording must remain as “functions”, as it has a definite meaning.

Dr D van Driel: I agree but, in South Africa today, we have wall-to-wall municipalities. Municipal officials will not identify with this easily; they are more interested in the technical stuff, i.e. estuaries have no spiritual value for them.

Mr A Purvis: I do not agree with that, as the southern Cape estuaries are a major economic asset to the municipalities of the region. The spiritual and biodiversity benefits derived from them directly contribute to our well- being; it is of direct benefit to the entire municipality.

Dr K Hamman: The formal vision will be for the funding bodies and provide measurable elements of what we are trying to manage for the scientific community. The informal vision is for the people.

Prof. B Allanson: The sponsors and funding bodies would identify with the formal vision.

APPENDICES, PAGE 9

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX D: STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

The workshop session revolved around: Developing strategic objectives for the key threats facing CFR estuaries; Doing a threat gap analysis to see what threats the CFR is facing; and Prioritising threats to CFR estuaries.

Specific Measurable Attainable Relevant Time-based Objective

Comments from the workshop participants are listed below:

Marine Living Resources (Jane Turpie):

Irreversibility Scale Rank Habitat loss/destruction 5 5 25 Flow modification - water abstraction, effluent discharge 4 5 20 Overexploitation of marine living resources outside estuaries 3 5 15 (inshore marine, coastal and freshwater systems) Pollution 3 4 12 Overexploitation of marine living resources in estuaries (fish, 2 5 10 bait and mangroves) Aliens within estuaries – invertebrates & fish 3 3 9 Isolation between systems (e.g. due to mouth closure) 4 2 8 Human disturbance 1 4 4 Mariculture 1 1 2 Climate change 5 ?

Ms L van Niekerk: If you take climate change as irreversible (5) and the scale as the entire CFR region (5), then climate change will be your top threat.

Institutional and Management Structure (Chair: Mr Peet Joubert):

Mr W Botes: If the Task Team is correct, this sounds like a “blueprint for New Orleans”.

Mr N Scarr: All mechanisms are there in the White Paper for sustainable coastal development or NEMA provides for cooperative governance structures. Why is this still an issue?

Mr P Joubert: No lead agency is driving the process. Nobody takes responsibility. There is awareness of the need but no coming together.

Ms J Coleman: I think conflict between local interest groups is a major problem in estuaries.

Dr A Boyd: A delegated, accountable lead agent is very important! The legal requirements for an estuarine management plan are seen as a key element. This project is necessary to start the process and to get the product.

APPENDICES, PAGE 10

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Water Quantity and Quality (Chair: Ms Toni Belcher):

Ms L van Niekerk: We need some interim management guidelines for estuaries where development is going ahead before the reserve is in place. For example, DWAF approved a 1.5 million m3 dam on the Tsitsikamma River that has a 20 million m3 MAR catchment without a reserve.

Ms T Belcher: Yes, I agree. We need to deal with these issues and cannot always have an excuse for not having the reserve in place.

Dr D van Driel: Given a map of the Western Cape, we also need to look at urban estuaries, e.g. the Diep (will address this in the selection of pilot studies).

Mr G Ferreira: Are siltation problems included in water quantity and quality?

Prof. B Allanson: I believe the lack of specific knowledge on estuaries, e.g. estuarine hydrodynamics, is something we urgently need to address.

Ms J Coleman: Will the outcomes of the National Spatial Biodiversity Plan be considered in the selection of pilot estuaries? Ms L van Niekerk: No, they do not form part of the criteria but the biodiversity importance of the various systems and prioritisation sub-project are using the same baseline material. Therefore, it might still become an additional factor.

Land-use and Infrastructure Planning (Chair: Mr Nick Scarr):

Mr A Theron: You are just focusing on issues in close proximity to estuaries; I think that this should be wider, e.g. dams.

Ms J Coleman: In addition to the above, the lack of budget to maintain and expand infrastructure is a real, critical issue, as currently our infrastructure cannot cope with the loads or pressures put on it, e.g. sewage.

Ms T Belcher: We can come up with a plan for each estuary because we have a relatively small number of estuaries in comparison with the KZN or Eastern Cape areas, where there are many more.

Ms B Weston: We must not try to create new vehicles; there are already some in use that make it work. Water conservation and demand management are not emphasised enough. At present, DWAF is asking for these plans before looking at dams etc. We need to increase our awareness.

Ms L van Niekerk: The Western Cape Bulk Water Supply evaluation indicated that, in the CFR winter rainfall area, economics have already driven agriculture to effective demand management and there is not much leeway to get water back from that sector.

Dr A Boyd: The time frames are very important, as the cumulative impact studies need to start as soon as possible.

Ms T Belcher: Estuaries often do not get the emphasis that they should get; that is why this project focuses on estuaries.

APPENDICES, PAGE 11

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Climate Change (Chair: Mr André Theron):

Dr A Whitfield: Look for indicators for climate change, such as species distribution changing.

Mr D Laider: We have some terrestrial examples of die-off as a result of climate change.

Dr K Hamman: How do we go about setback lines?

Mr A Theron: We have to look at it case-specifically. If the mouth remains open, we just set a new level but the problem is more complex because, if the run-off has reduced significantly, the mouth might close and the setback line should be much higher.

Prof. B Allanson: Estuaries have changed substantially over the ages. We need to look at the possibility that climate change might change the properties of our estuaries.

Ms T Belcher: Impacts far away from estuaries may also have effects on their health (e.g. bird migration patterns).

Education and Awareness (Chair: Mr Chris Martens):

Ms J Coleman: Communication is top-heavy in governments. People think that, if they do marketing, then they do education.

Dr A Boyd: Lots of materials are already available, e.g. the Eastern Cape. Ms L Van Niekerk: But the material is not getting where it should be going, so we should streamline the process.

Ms J Coleman: You also need to watch out for good material that is not in the right format.

Mr C Martens: Very important that education material must be accessible from all levels.

Mr S Lamberth: Sustainable quality of life? Rather say good estuarine management will improve quality of life. DEAT has a large education budget but the bulk of the budget goes to ineffective people. The question is maybe rather how the budget is managed, as the budget is there but not used effectively?

Ms B Weston: DWAF has an “idiot’s guide on water legislation”. It also comprises a diagram of how CMAs are going to work, plus pamphlets. The guide puts emphasis on wetlands. We should emphasise estuaries in Water Week.

APPENDICES, PAGE 12

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX E: MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Workshop participants were instructed to start with top priorities that they selected and develop an action plan to mitigate or overcome these threats so that they do not hinder us in achieving our goal.

What actions do we need to take? Indicate which sphere of government is responsible and which department should be involved? What tools can you use that are already out there and what do we need to develop? Also list the key deliverables when we know that we have reached our objectives.

Prof. B Allanson: Emphasise the point that local authorities should be involved and empowered. Excellent strategy but we need to make it workable.

Living Marine Resources (Chair: Dr Jane Turpie):

Mr P Joubert: The importance attached to outside estuary exploitation might be based on perception?

Mr S Lamberth: The current biomass of fish in estuaries is mainly a reflection of the status of the outside stocks.

Ms L van Niekerk: At the same time, the truly estuarine-dependent fish are the most impacted on, so do not split the two categories or emphasise both?

Prof. T Wooldridge: Agree, as it depends on the scale at which you look at it.

Institutional and Management Structure (Chair: Mr Peet Joubert):

Mr P Joubert: We need to look critically at the education part of the Programme; maybe get experts on board (educators must have insight).

Dr A Boyd: We lack expertise and capacity: Who should drive this? We can learn from each other.

Dr A Boyd: Fragmented legislation is partly a perception; mainly people do not understand legislation.

Water Quantity and Quality (Chair: Ms Toni Belcher):

Ms L van Niekerk: We need commitment to speed up the reserve determination process on the priority estuaries? We should start with at least one biodiversity-important estuary.

Mr S Lamberth: DEAT has delegated to the provincial and/or local level. Does DWAF have any ideas regarding delegating responsibilities? Ms T Belcher: This needs to be investigated, similar to River Health Monitoring, where we have champions outside DWAF.

Mr N Scarr: As soon as the provincial coastal committee becomes involved, it lifts the effort level. We should recognise this, i.e. it is not always only MCM.

APPENDICES, PAGE 13

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Dr JK Turpie: Believe we should prioritise on demand, as all our high-priority estuaries have very high water demands.

Land-use and Infrastructure Planning (Chair: Mr Nick Scarr):

Dr M Barnett: C.A.P.E. has a task team that looks at land-use planning. This task team is giving a lot of attention to how we set requirements around priority areas and incorporate them into land-use planning. This Task Team needs to link up with that team.

Mr P Joubert: We need to work with town planners and municipal planners. If we could have a mini-workshop for those guys it will be very helpful. We need to try to help them to get there! Not information via documents; they need hands-on practical workshops!!!

Mr L Barwell: You are talking about a mutual education programme.

Mr S Lamberth: I believe we actually need very well-trained planners with a good understanding of estuarine and coastal processes; there is a danger in that sometimes there is intentional ignorance. We need a strong “Thou shall approach” that is very prescriptive and descriptive.

In addition, the fine-scale biodiversity planning must be able to reflect the higher decisions of the Programme.

Ms L van Niekerk: A large number of the CFR estuaries run through rural areas, with extensive riparian development. You need to look at agricultural aspects, such as bank destruction.

Mr N Scarr: Agree.

Ms L van Niekerk: We also need to look at land use in estuaries, e.g. recreational carrying capacity should also be included.

Mr N Scarr: Agree.

Dr A Boyd: Are you going to do this at the pilot estuaries, i.e. look at land-use planning? Ultimately, direct estuary management crosses over with land-use management and must be looked at.

Mr N Scarr: This aspect is very important for the pilot sites.

Ms L van Niekerk: In the CFR region, there are a number of examples where competent land-use planners are not readily at the disposal of a local authority. How do you deal with this in the Eastern Cape?

Mr N Scarr: SEA is seen as the bridge. It provides the framework for future decision making on a higher level. SEA, in turn, should inform the SDF.

Mr L Barwell: Is this then delegated to lower authority where possible?

Mr N Scarr: No, SEA is driven as a partnership by province and local and responsibility is not delegated.

Mr S Lamberth: The Protocol will set levels of development that will be allowed (i.e. development limits).

APPENDICES, PAGE 14

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Dr R Nell: KwaZulu-Natal dealt with the fourfold increase in inappropriate development by asking for a moratorium on development. We decided to invoke another set of legislation: the Spatial Conservation Plan for the Province. We are trying to get the MEC to sign off estuaries as most critical and endangered habitats under the Biodiversity Act.

Climate Change (Chair: Mr André Theron):

Mr S Lamberth: There is no explicit reference to modelling applications in your project plan. This will be a key aspect but very expensive. You need to state this so funding can be found.

Dr A Boyd: Setback lines are developed on a provincial level but in consultation with DEAT, which gives permission to developments (through EIAs).

Mr N Scarr: The role of national government is around funding or enabling more generic modelling of climate change to predict the consequences.

Mr A Theron: The determination of setback lines or buffer zones is done on a very ad hoc basis. This is very costly and not the correct approach for estuaries. It would be much more cost-effective to do it on a broader or higher level, as a coordinated approach will provide for a more cost-effective, faster and more accurate product.

Dr K Hamman: SANBI, in collaboration with UCT, is heading a project on climate change and such modelling of the coastline or estuarine systems needs to take cognisance of other initiatives.

Education and Awareness (Chair: Mr Chris Martens):

Dr D van Driel: We should also target specific staff in the municipalities (e.g. storm water, sewage and regulators of developers).

APPENDICES, PAGE 15

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX F: WORKING GROUP NOMINATIONS

Mr N Scarr: The Working Group needs to align with existing structures, such as the coastal committees.

Dr R Nell: The Working Group should have a legislated mandate. Ms L van Niekerk indicated that the Working Group will not start with a legal mandate, as its primary purpose is to guide the C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme and assist it to achieve its goal. The Working Group is a built-in review process.

Mr S Lamberth: The Working Group will be formally set up under C.A.P.E. but there should be agreement that DWAF and DEAT can call upon it for assistance in the region. In addition, formalising the role of the Working Group by means of a high-level DWAF, DEAT or CapeNature MoU can enhance its status and assist government staff sitting on it to fast-track procedures.

Dr K Hamman: This is a C.A.P.E. Working Group – funded by C.A.P.E. Why do we need confirmation from DEAT to run this group? We already have a high level of support. We can just go ahead. Mr S Lambert: It will give the Working Group more power in the long run and speed the decision-making process.

Mr N Scarr: As the process of test driving the Protocol into legislation has a major implication for other coastal provinces, there is a need to keep the other provinces on board. You cannot only test this in one province and then just apply it elsewhere.

Dr D Hay: Should the Eastern Cape and KZN be part of the Working Group? Can they vote or be nominated? K Hamman: Yes, they can vote and be co-opted as specialists but, preferably, the core Working Group should be from the CFR.

Prof. B Allanson: The workshop confirmed Steve’s suggestion that the Working Group should consist of a core group of six to eight people from the CFR but they have the mandate to co-opt others. The workshop agreed.

Dr A Boyd: Whom is the Working Group going report to?

Dr K Hamman: A permanent Estuaries Task Team will be appointed to which the Working Group will report.

Dr D Hay: The Task Team should make the final selection.

Dr K Hamman: The Task Team will go with this recommendation and if we get your agreement. The workshop agreed that it has the mandate, as long as the group is as small as possible.

Mr S Lamberth: The coordinator should be responsible for convening the Working Group.

Dr A Boyd: Are we restricted to a preliminary list? No, the Task Team may nominate individuals not listed, as it has the right to decide whom it wants; these are just some suggestions.

APPENDICES, PAGE 16

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Preliminary list:

MANAGEMENT SCIENCE Peet Joubert Jane Turpie Kas Hamman Steve Lamberth Alan Boyd Lara van Niekerk Rhett Wiseman Piet Huizinga Toni Belcher Tris Wooldridge Nick Scarr Janine Adams Matthew Prophet Tommy Bronman Ronell Nel Allan Whitfield Jeanne du Plessis Tony Williams

The Task Team can consist of members from:

CapeNature DWAF DEAT Local authorities The Province (in the Eastern Cape) The scientific community

Dr K Hamman: Task Team finalised by end of October 2005

APPENDICES, PAGE 17

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX G: INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATIONS eThekwini Municipality (Mr Andrew Mather): Text extracted from: McGwynne, L 2005. Profiling estuaries in IDP planning. Objective 1: Policies and procedures for incorporating information and knowledge on estuaries into the integrated development planning and related processes are established through collaboration between researchers and authorities at local, district and provincial levels. Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme, Phase II.

E’Thekwini Municipality is a large well-resourced municipality located on the east coast of KwaZulu-Natal. The municipality has a population of around three million people living within a municipal area of 2 297km2 (eThekwini Municipality, 2004a). Although the municipal area makes up only 1.4% of the total area of KwaZulu-Natal approximately a third of the province’s population and 60% of its economic activity is located within eThekwini’s borders. The 2004-2005 municipal budget was > R10b (R2.2b on capital expenditure and R8.5b on operating expenditure) (eThekwini Municipality, 2004a).

The municipality has 16 estuaries along its 100km coastline. The estuaries are subject to diverse levels of human use. In addition there are management actions to control specific human activities that impact on estuaries. These management actions would aim to control the following:

abstraction of water from an estuary and/or its catchment; effluent disposal into an estuary and/or its catchment; activities that change sediment loads; dredging; harvesting of living resources; mouth manipulation; non-consumptive recreational use; development of structures that encroach on the water body; and development on the banks and in the catchment.

Institutional arrangements:Geographic Information and Policy Office (GIPO): Currently there is no dedicated coastal management office and only a single staff member in GIPO who serves as the Project Executive: Coastal Policy. The Project Executive (PE) coordinates and leads coastal management efforts, and contributes and comments on iterations of the IDP through interactions with involved staff. Currently he is developing a municipal coastal strategy, which is open for comment by other departments. To promote co-ordination, the PE has established and chairs an eThekwini Coastal Working Group that includes relevant staff members from a variety of municipal components and external stakeholder groups (e.g. relevant national and provincial government departments and NGOs). The PE interacts formally with other municipal components (e.g. Environment Department, Engineering etc.) through the Coastal Working Group. He also has informal and ad hoc contact with these components as the need arises. The PE represents the municipality on the Provincial Coastal Committee and on the Estuaries Sub-committee of the Provincial Coastal Committee. Other sections of GIPO are responsible for the drafting and review of the municipal Integrated Development Plan itself. Development Planning and Management: This component is responsible for all development planning and management and, as such, defines the framework for current and future development on the coast and along estuaries. The Environment Department also falls under the Development Planning and Management component. Parks, Leisure and Culture: This component manages public open space areas and the recreational use of these areas. In particular it manages recreational use on beaches and open areas linked to estuaries.

APPENDICES, PAGE 18

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Water and Sanitation: This component manages water usage and wastewater, which is a significant input into many eThekwini estuaries. Engineering: The coastal stormwater and catchment management component is based within this section, which manages stormwater and coastal engineering and is involved in estuary mouth management

City Manager GIPO Audit Ombuds International & person Governance relations

Deputy City Deputy City Deputy City Deputy City Deputy City Deputy City Manager Manager Manager Manager Manager Manager Sustainable Procurement & Health, Safety & Governance Corporate & Treasury Development & Infrastructure Social Services Human City Enterpris es Resources

City Enterprises Water & Emergency Regional Management Sanitation Services Centres Services & City organizational Fleet Development Cleansing & Solid Waste Business City Hall Finance Support Health Admin & Legal Secretariat Services Procurement

Development Real Planning & Parks, Human Estate Engineering Community Management Leisure Resources & Culture Participation & Action Support Markets Skills Housing Developmen t Communication Economic Dev Transport Metropolitan & Facilitation Authority Police Occupational Health & Safety Electricity

Oganogram of eThekwini Municipality with grey boxes indicating the components that play a role in coastal and estuary management .

Package of plans approach eThekwini Municipality has adopted a ‘package of plans approach’. The ‘package of plans’ is a hierarchical structure and all plans should conform to plans at a higher level. Lower level plans provide greater detail for specific areas. However it should be noted that the Spatial Development Framework (SDF) is effectively the spatial expression of the Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and is reflected in some municipal documentation as a component of the IDP.

The ‘package of plans approach’ comprise: The Long Tem Development Framework (LTDF) outlines a vision of eThekwini as a “quality of life” city by 2020 (eThekwini, 2004a). The LTDF framework emphasises sustainability and indicates that the municipality must ‘balance the social, economic and environmental needs of our society to ensure that all development occurs within the carrying capacity of the natural environment. Integrated Development Plan (IDP): The latest version of the eThekwini IDP was published in June 2004 for the 2003 to 2007 period (eThekwini, 2004a). This version has eight focus areas. Strategic programmes have been identified for each focus area. In addition key performance areas have been adopted for each strategic programme. The IDP does not identify specific projects and only a broad budget allocation is

APPENDICES, PAGE 19

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

outlined that is not linked to strategic programmes. The next IDP iteration is to reflect a stronger link between the IDP programmes and the municipal budget. Spatial Development Framework (SDF): The DSF forms part of the IDP. This plan integrates strategic spatial strategies in various sectors from socio-economic to the environment. The SDF provides an overview of eThekwini’s spatial vision. Spatial Development Plans: eThekwini intends to have four separate Spatial Development Plans (SDPs) for the Northern, Central, Southern and Outer West areas. The Northern and Outer West plans are in the process of completion. The intention of the plans is to ‘provide guidance on the nature and intensity of development that can potentially be sustained on the land’. In particular the plans provide guidance on the preferred land uses in the various locations. The SDPs are catchment based and the municipality is involving all components in the formulation of these plans. SDPs are organised in terms of catchments. This is significant because many estuary management issues originate upstream from the estuary itself. Development planning on a catchment basis provides a significant opportunity for improved estuary management.

Corporate Strategy / Policy Long Term Development Framework

Integrated Development Plan

Spatial Development Framework

Spatial Development Plan Implementation Tools

Local Area Plan

Precinct / Special Area Plan

Land Use Schemes

Local Area Plan: Most Local Area Plans (LAPs) are to be initiated on the completion of the SDPs. However LAPs have been initiated for a few selected areas. It is intended that ultimately the entire area covered by a SDP will be covered by a number of LAPs. The purpose of the LAP is to provide a more detailed response to ‘the peculiar nature of the local area’. Precinct (Special Area) Plan: Precinct plans are intended for areas that require ‘special attention as a result of their unique or special character’. These plans would be at the scale of a road and would contain ‘high levels of detail including architectural themes, landscapes, street furniture etc..’ Pecinct plans could be completed for areas adjacent to or including portions of estuaries.

APPENDICES, PAGE 20

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Land Use Scheme: eThekwini currently has a town-planning scheme that covers some parts of the municipality. With changes in approaches to planning and the implementation of the ‘package of plans’ approach, this scheme is largely outdated. Accordingly the municipality is planning to establish a municipal wide land use scheme that covers the entire municipality and reflects the intent of the various spatial plans. The scheme will outline zoning and built form controls. The land use scheme will apply to the entire municipality including land adjacent to estuaries.

Other strategies, policies and plans: eThekwini Coastal Management Strategy : eThekwini Municipality is in the process of finalising an eThekwini Coastal Management Strategy (CMS) for adoption by Council. Key departments have been consulted during the formulation of the strategy. The initiative to draft the CMS arose from the inclusion of coastal management as a key performance area in the IDP (Mather, pers. comm.). The CMS provides detailed content to the strategic intention of the IDP to address coastal management. The CMS ‘presents the proposed management framework for the municipality’s coastal zone’ and has the overarching aim of ‘protecting, optimising and enhancing this unique and valuable asset’. In particular it ‘sets out to be a systematic, integrated, multi-disciplinary organised approach to ensure that the coastal zone is managed, protected and enhanced while social and economic opportunities are optimised’. Environmental Policy Initiative: An eThekwini Environmental Policy was first developed in 1998. The Municipality is in the process of reviewing this policy. The draft policy initiative sets out the Environmental Management Policy for the Municipality. The policy’s central message is that the environment is a core asset for development and growth and to optimise its benefits, the municipality should invest in its protection and management. The policy is intended to support the implementation of the eThekwini IDP and has also contributed to its content. Environmental Services Management Plan: The eThekwini Environmental Services Management Plan is the approved open space-planning framework for the Municipality. In terms of the plan 63 000ha have been defined as important open space areas that provide significant environmental goods and services. This open space asset has been mapped and is included in the SDF and referred to as the Environmental Asset. The Environmental Services Management Plan outlines various approaches and institutional arrangements that can contribute to securing the open space asset.

Conclusion:

The IDP (and the associated Long Term Development Framework) takes precedence over all other plans, policies and strategies. The legislated intention of the eThekwini IDP is to oversee the entire functioning of the municipality. This is underlined by the Municipal Manager who stated that ‘the city's IDP is the foundation on which our strategies and action plans are built..….. The IDP contains eight plans and everything we do must fit into those plans’. From an estuary management perspective this means that any plans, projects and activities need to be aligned with the IDP. In particular they must conform to the broad vision for the municipality and contribute to its strategic development programmes.

The municipality has opted to include Estuary Management Plans (EMPs) within the ‘Package of Plans’ framework. It is intended that these plans will form part of a coastal management plan for a particular area that will serve as the local area plan in terms of the ‘package of plans.’ EMPs will provide an opportunity to include in the package issues not covered in other plans, such as living resource exploitation and recreational use management.

The Long Term Development Framework, the IDP and the SDF are the umbrella plans under which all eThekwini activities take place. The other components of the ‘package of plans’ (Spatial Development Plans, Local Area Plans, Precinct Plans and Land Use Schemes) are implementing tools. Including EMPs within the ‘package of plans’ should result in these plans influencing those at a higher and lower level. As EMPs fall within the ‘package of plans’, issues

APPENDICES, PAGE 21

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

identified that are in need of funding will be included in the formal framework within which budget allocation takes place.

Regional management challenges include: finalising institutional arrangements; dealing with habitat loss/modifications; water abstraction and funding.

Comments:

Mr A Mather: The municipality has funded all coastal management plans to date; MCM is in the process of making a significant contribution to the process.

Ms B Weston: DWAF is also contributing through funding reserve studies in the metro.

Dr R Nel: KZNWildlife is currently in the process of developing its marine component of the Spatial Conservation Plan for the KZN province.

Lessons from the Eastern Cape/Transkei environment (Dr Duncan Hay):

1. It is all about people: o Management is a social process supported by technical information; o The aim is to influence the behaviour of people; o We need the support of scientists, especially in the social sciences; and o There is a need for incentives, such as “blue flag” estuaries.

2. People are complex, systems are complex!! o Therefore the integration processes are very complex and management systems also become complex; and o Therefore we need to be adaptive and strategic and engage as co-learners and not as experts. Get local levels to start learning about complexity.

3. Estuaries are local land-forms: o Municipalities are critical to our success; o Build relationships of trust, respect and confidence over time; and o Engage in what is important to them.

4. Explicitly link conservation and development objectives, e.g. Mtentu.

5. We need to build on existing successes. Do not dismantle existing local institutions – support them.

6. We need to collaborate with other estuarine programmes in the country so that we can develop a structured process of learning from each other.

Comments:

Dr JK Turpie: Reminded Duncan that complex management issues do not have to have complex plans; often a simple solution works best.

APPENDICES, PAGE 22

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Ms J Coleman: There is a need to bring social scientists on board in estuarine management. We also need to advertise what research is currently happening out there in the estuary domain.

Existing estuarine plan in C.A.P.E. region (Gerrit Mars):

The Goukou River system nestles among three other estuaries of significant importance to the Southern Cape economy. This includes the Langeberg (Hessequa) region, which is transforming from an agriculture-based to tourism-driven environment. Particularly heavy property development and recreational use exponentially increase cumulative human and urban pressure on relatively pristine estuaries.

Economic pressure forces farming to encroach on the wetlands (reservoirs) of these rivers to the extent that the Duivenhoks River was reduced to a storm-water drain with dire consequences for its entire catchments and estuary – relegating it to a basket case with little hope of rehabilitation.

The Environmental Advisory Committee to the local authority commissioned a “Verslikking van die Goukourivier” report and put together an inclusive task team to work towards a blueprint called “Towards the Sustainable Management of the Goukou System”.

Chief amongst its purposes is to create a template that can be rolled over into management plans for the other three estuaries in the Hessequa region: the Gouritz, Breede and Duivenhoks.

It made sense to the team to tackle the Goukou first, as it is uniquely representative of many of our fynbos region’s river systems in that it originates in the Cape Fold Mountains, traverses an intensive agricultural foothill and plain zone and ends in a large and recreationally popular estuary – an estuary that is under pressure from rampant short-term profit-taking in the property development boom.

This estuary has recently been proclaimed part of an MPA.

A key determination factor was the lack of local planning and usage guidance in managing such a system on local and provincial level. Fast changes in the human dynamics around the system outpaced existing planning guidelines, antiquated policing techniques and revealed a complete lack of/or being able to project the impact of decisions around the encroachment of this system.

Infrastructural requirements, such as water supply and sewerage treatment, also predominate.

To this extent, a group consisting of the following parties was compiled: 1) Steve Lambert (MCM) 2) Councillors from the local authority 3) Carl Lotz (Director: Technical Services, Municipality Hessequa) 4) Daan Toerien (Economical Advisory Committee to the Hessequa Municipality) 5) Fanie Roux (Tourism Advisory Committee) 6) Jan Brink (Lower Goukou Conservation Committee) 7) Various municipal departmental heads, including the Municipal Manager 8) Corné Erasmus and Lloyd Sassman (MCM, Department of Environmental Affairs) 9) Wim Filmalter (Department of Agriculture) 10) Rhett Hiseman (CapeNature) 11) Paul Alden (Urban Dynamics) 12) Francois Malherbe (Agricultural Advisory Committee)

APPENDICES, PAGE 23

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

13) Willie Welman (Chairman of the Stilbaai Angling Club, one of the largest active angling clubs in South Africa) 14) Coenie Jones and other colleagues from the local branch of MCM 15) Tommy Brummer (Lower Goukou Boating Club) 16) The convenors, members of the Environmental Advisory Committee 17) Alan Heydorn (Stellenbosch) 18) The facilitators, CSIR Environmentek (L Barwell and L van Niekerk)

A key hurdle initially was to overcome natural apprehension and, to some extent, hostility among groups from all the parties. By adopting the overall management goal that “Existing and future inhabitants and stakeholders of the Hessequa Region should experience the Goukou catchment, river and estuary as a sustainable economic and ecological asset in the long term”, we managed to focus all parties.

The preparation of a blueprint is in its end stages but it is clear that the prospect of achieving this goal may lie too far in the future, given a task of this magnitude. The entire process has been driven by volunteers, with a lot of moral support from the local authority but very little money and administrative capacity. We do not even have an indication of any money budgeted by our municipality for estuarine recreation management for this coming Christmas season, when more than 100 boats per day zoom up and down the river (not even one cent).

On this basis, we would like to appeal to the Government to take over the baton for the following reason: So much has been achieved by getting all the departments, stakeholders and groups to work together - and so much work has gone into this project - and it is so close to fruition and able to be rolled over into three more estuaries in our region – that it would send a very powerful message to other estuarine programmes if the Government is committed to supporting local initiatives.

Conversely, it may be very damaging to our region if there is no further support, now that it is clear that this sort of project cannot be handled at local level only. We will be further behind than when we started off, having lost local buy- in.

A lack of central support would also impact on our ability to implement an MPA and its management plan. We cannot have a National Sea Park with an unhealthy catchment management plan for its estuary.

Comments:

Dr G Mars: We are going where C.A.P.E. should be going: 1) Create, at local government level, capacity to manage the estuaries; 2) Work with the dependency on the catchment and estuary for the well-being of people; 3) Develop and boost it because it is a beautiful environment; if it is not kept like this, it will lose tourism; and 4) Develop a good template for the C.A.P.E. Programme.

Dr D Hay: We have mirrors of this in the Eastern Cape.

Dr G Mars: Local politicians and managers bought in to our process; that is crucial. They are now lobbying for international funding to take this initiative further.

Ms B Weston: You angled it from the goods and services side. One should push conservation from that side. Also focus communication for target audiences.

Dr G Mars: We use the local newspapers to communicate and to inform about progress that is being made and give people explicit recognition for their effort.

APPENDICES, PAGE 24

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Ms J Coleman: Most funding bodies have pro-poor policies. Socio-economic issues must show that what you are going to do is going to benefit the poor.

Dr G Mars: Track record is very important. Funding bodies first look at your track record. Working for Water is now sponsoring a significant project in the Goukou region based on our track record.

Comments on the Prioritisation and Conservation Project (Chair: Dr Jane Turpie):

The time frame of the project is 12 months. The output will also guide the second phase of the project.

Ms B Barbara: Will you type estuaries? Yes, that is the classification part. Some of this is being done by the Resource Conservation Project; it must be linked.

Ms J Coleman: Had some concern around the make-up of the core team; she believes the following specialists also have a role to play: Social scientists or facilitators (ISER [Rhodes] and PLAAS); Sanitation or waste management and infrastructure; Land-use expert; Local municipal specialist (e.g. Gordon Johasan, Municipal Mentoring Programme [EC]); Environmental conservation education (e.g. Ally Ashwell or Eureta Rosenberg); Land tenure or legal expertise (e.g. Mike Coleman); and Cultural and/or archaeological experts.

Ms L van Niekerk: I have a concern around being able to address persistence of species – maybe need to tone down deliverables. In addition, you need run-off from catchments from DWAF. They have to commit for you to be able to do that component in time.

Dr A Boyd: Good idea to describe the project in the proposed newsletter to promote its benefits and outcome.

Prof. B Allanson: This is one task within the Programme. It should have been presented at the beginning.

Dr K Hamman: Idea was to use the knowledge out of the workshop to fine-tune this project, so it was in the right slot.

Regional Monitoring Programme (Lara van Niekerk):

Mr B Botes: Some data are better than no data – look at simple data-collection systems that can be run over a long period.

Dr K Hamman: The monitoring must be linked to SAEON. SAIAB is responsible for the coastal node.

Ms B Weston: DWAF wants to expand their monitoring to include estuaries. DWAF needs to come up with criteria of minimum data requirements for an estuaries health monitoring programme. We can use what comes out of this C.A.P.E. project to inform.

APPENDICES, PAGE 25

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Mr S Lamberth: SAEON does not recognise the importance of estuaries in the CFR. The estuarine requirements are left out of the SAEON fynbos node. It will be very difficult to plug it in now. The alternative is to have a SAEON estuaries node.

Mr L Barwell: If you let them know that estuaries are excluded, SAEON should listen.

Ms T Belcher: A regional estuarine monitoring programme should be mindful of the Water Act, which requires monitoring, and it needs to expand on that. At the same time, the programme must be achievable and thus not too expensive.

Dr A Boyd: A monitoring workshop is to initiate the process. Such a programme could be an opportunity to delegate scientific data requirements to local level. While local government supplies the manpower, national government can provide the equipment infrastructure.

Mr P Huizinga: You need reliable observers if you involve local communities.

Mr R Jelving: CLEO was very important to us. We would like a “blue box” with tools to measure relevant data for estuaries.

Mr S Lamberth: Someone should be contracted to draw up a database to capture data (check SAEON).

Ms J Coleman: You can capture lots of data but what is important is what you are doing with it! The feedback to monitors is important. Ways to get local communities on board include: C.R.E.W. – Custodian of Rare and Endangered Wildflowers – adapt the model for estuary custodianship; Estuary atlassing – based on successful protea, bird and frog atlas projects; People’s biodiversity registers – Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) – lessons for estuaries work involving communities; WESSA Friends Group – Friends of Swartkops and Friends of Liesbeek; Eco-schools – estuary resource pack for schools; and Coastcare/Adopt-a-beach type approach.

Ms S Matthews:A CLEO revival were tried, but did not seen to take of?

Mr P Joubert: There are simple sampling methods available; we should use those.

APPENDICES, PAGE 26

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX H: PILOT ESTUARIES

Mr C Martens: Indicated that the current criteria do not look at clusters of estuaries or connectivity between estuaries. Ms L van Niekerk: Correct, connectivity is an issue but the research community at present does not know how to address or plan for this. Dr A Whitfield: As the project in Phase I is only looking at four to six sites, you will be limited to a specific area and not be able to address a range of management issues.

Mr P Joubert: Don’t be sissies! Choose some difficult ones! Mr N Scarr: Same as Mr Joubert!! Include more complex systems.

Ms J Coleman: It is crucial that one urban estuary that is highly impacted by high utilisation for recreation forms part of the selection. This also highlights the need to bring social scientists on board.

Dr R Nel: The overarching objective for the selection of the sites needs to be stipulated clearly. Are you trying to make a difference in biodiversity conservation? If so, where can we make the largest difference? If we want to iron out the process, which sites would be the most appropriate? We need to state this clearly.

Ms L van Niekerk: The primary objective of the Programme is to develop regional or strategic-level plans and devolve these from the strategic level to the local-level management through the development of local estuarine management plans. In short, the overarching objective is to test the process. Catchment issues should also be included in the case studies. The selection should also look at catchment area. Catchment (e.g. agriculture) needs to be included in setting local objectives.

Dr D Hay: Recommended that the final decision is made by the Task Team. We need to make the decision sooner rather than later – be hard and fast! New need to concede economic and social criteria as well in the process.

Dr A Boyd: The Working Group will advise on the selection of the pilot estuaries. If there are estuaries that should be included, we should list those. In view of the fact that we are testing a process, it would be preferable to have the management issues spread over a suite of pilot estuaries and not all at one site to simplify Phase I.

Dr I Russel: A number of the estuaries have similar characteristics. Should we not include a range of systems of different types and with different levels of data available? Ms L van Niekerk: We have included permanently open and temporarily closed estuaries and estuarine lakes at this stage. The comment regarding a range of data availability (from well-studied to little information available) is very valid. The Task Team has been considering including one unknown system, as it represents a reality for a number of estuaries in the CFR.

Mr W Botes: Looking at pilot estuaries is a bit of a concern. He felt one should rather apply funding to solve immediate problems that have high priority in C.A.P.E. estuaries.

Mr S Lamberth: The plan is the goal; the individual problems are not the issue for this Programme. Problem with Knysna: big and wealthy municipality could ask to supplement funding from this project.

Prof. T Wooldridge: We need to focus on estuaries with high pressures, as we only have five years to make a difference in the region.

APPENDICES, PAGE 27

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

Ms B Weston: Reserves in the Outeniqua area will be done on the Great Brak, Klein Brak and Keurbooms and monitoring on Knysna for reserve. The Olifants, Kromme and Seekoei also had reserves done on them recently. We should also build on the relationship established by the local forums.

Dr D Hay: Indicated that one cannot squash various management activities into a fixed time frame. Ms L van Niekerk: We agree and recognise the drawback but the project forms part of a funding cycle and the first-phase results are expected within three years.

Ms J Coleman: Good communication structures exist: use these; do not start again.

Mr M Prophet: Goukamma and Keurbooms also have issues that should be considered. Also, the Keurbooms may also be incorporated into the Robberg MPAs.

Mr N Scarr: If one considers the length of the coastline of the CFR, the Eastern Cape represents a small component but, when one looks at the number of estuaries, they represent a significant component. The current voting represents a bias towards the Western Cape component.

Mr M Gulekane: The positions of the pilot estuaries need to be indicated on a locality map.

APPENDICES, PAGE 28

REGIONAL ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS March 2006

APPENDIX I: FINAL COMMENTS

Dr D Hay: Investigate the possibility of incentive programmes, such as “blue flag” estuaries (i.e. symbolised estuaries). He also indicated that he will invite members of the Task Team to partake in the activities of the Eastern Cape Estuaries Management Programme.

Ms L van Niekerk: The CSIR is responsible for the compilation of the proceedings of the workshop. Feedback will be by middle to end October 2005. The Draft Proceedings for review by workshop participants will be available by middle November 2005. Final comments will be required by 30 November 2005. Distribution to wider estuarine management and the research community will be by 31 December 2005.

Dr K Hamman: The Task Team will decide on the procurement process for the remainder of the projects in the C.A.P.E. Estuarine Management Programme. The administrative coordinator will be tasked with communicating the roll-out procedure for the Programme.

Once the final pilot sites have been selected by the Task Team, the motivations for the choices need to be clearly explained (i.e. not too scientifically). It is recommended that the process link up with existing networks, e.g. local forums, CMAs and interest groups. Jayne Coleman: A site visit to the relevant municipalities within the pilot sites is strongly recommended before the selection is made public. Ms G Cleaver: The context of the larger Programme and the benefits to the local municipality also need to be highlighted. In addition, the potential link with the prioritisation of C.A.P.E. estuaries also needs to be highlighted at these discussions.

Ms B Weston: National and regional DWAF would like to remain involved in the larger C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme and in the outcomes of the prioritisation of the C.A.P.E. estuaries project. They asked to be kept in the loop regarding developments.

Prof. B Allanson: Thanked Dr K Hamman and the team for their effort.

Dr K Hamman: The position for the C.A.P.E. Estuaries Coordinator has been widely advertised but the response has been disappointing despite the extension of the deadline. CapeNature can now approach key individuals deemed suitable for the position. Can the audience please contact him if they know of someone?

Ms S Mathews: Indicated that the low salary might be the problem or the fact that the advertisement was not clear that it is a half-day post.

Dr JK Turpie: Why not join the coordinator role of different components, e.g. marine and estuaries?

Mr A Purves: The final vote ballots for the various pilot sites represent a bias due to the make-up of the meeting and this means that the eastern areas might have been poorly represented. The Task Team needs to concede this in the final selection.

APPENDICES, PAGE 29