March 2003 Cut-Off Low: Consolidated Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
March 2003 Cut-off Low: Consolidated Report Department of Social Services and Poverty Alleviation of the Provincial Government of the Western Cape Co-financed by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation and the Provincial Development Council of the Western Cape Disaster Mitigation for Sustainable Livelihoods Programme (DiMP) University of Cape Town October 2003 i Table of Contents Executive Summary........................................................................................................vi Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................xiv Contributors to the Report............................................................................................xv List of Figures and Tables...........................................................................................xvii Abbreviations and Acronyms ......................................................................................xxi Part I: Background, Conceptual Framework and Methodology....................................1 1.1 Introduction and Context..................................................................................................1 1.1.1 The extreme weather system and its consequences ..................................................1 1.1.2 General overview of areas that reported significant disaster impacts, as well as those specifically classified as experiencing a ‘state of disaster’.......................................1 1.1.3 The March 2003 cut-off low and its relevance to disaster management policy........3 1.1.4 Institutional arrangements for the research and terms of reference ..........................3 1.2 Conceptual Framework for this Study .............................................................................4 1.3 Geographic Focus for the Study.......................................................................................5 1.3.1 General scale and scope of research..........................................................................5 1.3.2 Specific focus on formally declared disaster areas ...................................................5 1.4 Methods Used...................................................................................................................5 1.4.1 Defining the technical requirements of the research team ........................................6 1.4.2 Streamlining data collection and analysis .................................................................6 1.5 Ethical Considerations......................................................................................................7 1.6 Limitations of Research ...................................................................................................7 1.7 Structure of this Report ....................................................................................................8 Part II: The March 2003 Cut-off Low: Extreme Weather, Flood Hydrology and Land- use ...........................................................................................................................9 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................9 2.2 Historical Climatology .....................................................................................................9 2.2.1 Montagu and Swellendam/Breede River: Historic rainfall pattern compared ..........9 2.2.2 Tracking and mapping recorded daily rainfall: 22–25 March 2003 .......................14 2.3 The March 2003 Cut-off Low: Detailed meteorological report.....................................15 2.3.1 The extreme weather system: Onset, spatial extent, duration and severity.............15 2.4 Severe Weather Warnings: Information Dissemination.................................................26 2.4.1 The role of the Cape Town Weather Office............................................................26 2.4.2 The role of the National Weather Office in Pretoria...............................................27 2.4.3 Suggestions for strengthening disseminating warning information........................28 2.5 Flood Hydrology and Hydraulics...................................................................................29 2.5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................29 2.5.2 Field research methods............................................................................................30 2.5.3 Statistical analysis of flood peaks ...........................................................................30 2.5.4 Flood frequencies (return period)............................................................................31 2.5.5 Interpretation of results ...........................................................................................35 2.5.6 Flood volumes and hydrographs .............................................................................44 2.5.7 General observations regarding the impact of the flood event................................54 2.5.8 Conclusions and recommendations.........................................................................55 2.6 Land-use/Land-cover Change in the Kingna River Catchment, Montagu.....................56 2.6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................56 2.6.2. Methods used..........................................................................................................57 ii 2.6.3 Results and their interpretation ...............................................................................58 2.6.4 Limitations of aerial photography for analysing land-use change ..........................58 Part III: Social Risk Assessment...................................................................................60 3.1 Introduction, Identification and Methodology ...............................................................60 3.1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................60 3.1.2 Criteria for identifying communities/households as ‘disaster-affected’ .................61 3.1.3 Parameters for geographic area of study.................................................................62 3.1.4 The challenge in identifying communities as ‘disaster-affected’............................62 3.1.5 Description of data-collecting methods and instruments ........................................67 3.1.6 Limitations of the research......................................................................................69 3.1.7 Ethical considerations .............................................................................................69 3.1.8 Structure of the report .............................................................................................69 3.2 Emergency Responses to the Event, Institutional Support and the Role of Social Relief in the Recovery Process .......................................................................................................70 3.2.1 Background ............................................................................................................70 3.2.2 Emergency response to the event and evacuation of affected households..............71 3.2.2.1 Riverine communities .....................................................................................71 3.2.2.2 Low income housing communities/households of Ashbury and Suurbraak....74 3.2.2.3 Isolated factory workers: Temporary housing for permanent workers............76 3.2.3 The role of local institutions in co-ordinating community relief ............................77 3.2.3.1 Co-ordinating community relief: The establishment of Disaster Relief Committees...................................................................................................................77 3.2.3.2 The process and procedures for distribution of food relief, blankets and mattresses .....................................................................................................................79 3.2.4 Communities/households who were not formally evacuated, but applied for Social Relief ................................................................................................................................81 3.2.4.1 McGregor .........................................................................................................81 3.2.4.2 Smitsville, Barrydale........................................................................................82 3.2.4.3 Zolani, Ashton..................................................................................................82 3.2.4.4 Buffelsjags........................................................................................................83 3.2.5 The role of local institutions in the Social Relief process.......................................83 3.2.5.1 The role of local committees in facilitating the use of Social Relief payouts..84 3.2.5.2 The challenges of achieving long-term sustainable recovery ..........................84 3.3 Communities Who did not Apply for Social Relief, but Experienced Extreme Weather Impacts .................................................................................................................................86 3.3.1 Background .............................................................................................................86