Chapter 6: Discussion and Conclusions
6.9 Conclusions
institutions. However, they are not labelled as traditional authority resources because they happen to be located within traditional authority jurisdiction, e.g.
municipality structures such as the library, private farms etc. There are farms in and around the forest which are owned by commercial farmers.
The community understands and has accepted that these farms do not belong to the iNkosi. However, when it comes to Ntabamhlophe indigenous forest, the understanding is not at the same level. Ntabamhlophe community believed the forest belonged to the iNkosi. Historically, the forest was managed by government. There is no recorded evidence which supports that forest management was ever transferred to the community or the Traditional Authority. As reported by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife (2006), Ntabamhlophe indigenous forest is a proclaimed state forest.
community has complex and conflicting motivations. Like Ongoye and eNkandla community, Ntabamhlophe community members are no exception as their motives and preferences may not be easily understood. There could be an influence from the current prevailing socio-political factors between the traditional authority and some individuals in the community.
In South Africa it is believed that the community can play a highly significant role in a Participatory Forest Management programme. However, this can only happen if authority is devolved to the local community (Lawes et al., 2004).
Participatory Forest Management is based on sharing products, responsibilities, control and decisions (Hobley, 1996 cited in Lawes et al., 2004).
If this approach is applied to Ntabamhlophe indigenous state forest, the local community, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife and the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry would be able to make joint decisions over the management of the forest. Hobley (1996) refers to participatory forest management as a mechanism to develop partnership, which will resolve conflict between state and local communities (Hobley, 1996 cited in Lawes et al., 2004). As McKean (2005) writes, the forest is more likely to be protected in the long term if the community has formal tenure. Stakeholders can develop a working management programme to resolve forest management issues.
Under unfavourable legislative and policy conditions and situations where policy implementation is weak, indigenous forests become exposed to serious competing land uses which may lead to deforestation, fragmentation, uncontrolled forest fires and other negative effects (Potvin et al., 2003).
Ntabamhlophe forest is no exception. Local community members are fully aware of the existence of gardening crops in the forest. They regard dagga plantations as a serious threat to the forest because of high levels of crime that are associated with it. At Ntabamhlophe, crime was viewed by respondents as a major hindrance to accessing livelihood resources from the forest.
Natural resource ownership has always been related to rights. In removing rights from people, they then view forests as a resource that they have lost.
What is not clearly understood by communities is the fact that with rights come responsibilities to conserve (McKean, 2006 pers. comm.). At Ntabamhlophe there is a lack of coordination and coherent leadership to direct and guide the indigenous forest conservation initiative. The community has misinterpreted the fact that the forest is not actively managed by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. However, the forest is proclaimed, and as a result, it should be actively managed.
Objective: (ii) to determine the different types of forest products and resource use by the community and their values to the users (cultural, spiritual or economic values). The respondents indicated that their community knows that if the forest is formally protected there would be limited and controlled access to natural resources in the forest (medicinal plant etc.). However, they revealed that they are hit hardest when access to the resources is limited. The forest is the source of their livelihoods and for years they have depended on it.
The respondents indicated that there is a clear understanding and acceptance by the community that indigenous forests provide essential ecosystem services. They believe that Ntabamhlophe forest and the mountain possess high aesthetic values. Respondents revealed that for Ntabamhlophe community the most important “community legacy and heritage” is to be proudly associated with Ntabamhlophe Mountain. Thus, the mountain is a unique feature in their area.
The traditional health practitioners depend almost entirely on indigenous forests to provide medicinal plants for healing. Even if the forest is protected, traditional health practitioners indicated that they would always require access to harvest medicinal plants. Traditionally, the harvesting of medicinal plants is not permitted inside protected areas. Consequently, the protected area and the resource system of conservation which saw nature conservation as pure conservation, and state-enforced protection, has had very limited success and
it is not currently considered as a viable option (Fabricius et al., 2004).
However, at Ntabamhlophe a permit system could also apply.
The Ntabamhlophe community is dynamic, and so is the need for and use of natural resources. This dynamic emphasizes the need to understand the community and their relationship with the environment and their livelihoods.
Consequently, appropriate stakeholder and community representation is important when dealing with an issue which affects community interests. The urgent need for this understanding was highlighted during the survey at Ntabamhlophe through the reflection by the community of eDashi ward. In 1995, the same traditional ward refused to cooperate with Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, the Traditional Authority and other community members to protect the Ntabamhlophe Mountain and the forest. During the study, the focus group felt that all stakeholders and relevant role players should work together towards the conservation of the forest.
The Imbabazane Local Municipality appeared to be keen to protect the Mountain and the forest with possible potential for tourism ventures. In this case, the community aspirations and needs which are represented by the Local Municipality and Traditional Authority should be considered by these two institutions.
Ntabamhlophe indigenous state forest was proclaimed as part of Monk’s Cowl Nature Reserve (Monk’s Cowl State Forest). Technically, it is part of the UDP WHS. However, it was excluded during the submission for World Heritage Site listing in 1999. This was due to the fact that it was considered an isolated forest pocket which could be difficult to manage. However, the forest is important for biodiversity conservation as well as socio-economic values.
All respondents agreed that the forest needs to be conserved, and indicated that they were personally aware of the evidence of unsustainable use.
Consequently they further advised that the problem was serious and, as a result, it required urgent attention to prevent the further abuse of the forest resources.