5.4 Stakeholder Management
5.4.2 Contextualising changes in natural resource abundance
5.4.2.1 Natural Resource harvesting
All the GGEP respondents in the questionnaire survey indicated that they do not harvest any animal or plant products from the GGEP open space. However, they indicated that there are people from outside the GGEP who harvest plant and animal products for medicinal purposes. Findings from the focus group discussion with the Tshelimnyama traditional healers reveal that all Tshelimnyama traditional healers harvest natural resources from the GGEP open space mainly for medicinal purpose. One of the traditional healers stated:
Yes we do get muthi…oh maybe I should not answer on behalf of everyone. I do get muthi from Giba Gorge.
(Traditional healer 6)
However, eight traditional healers indicated that the GGEP open space was not their only source of medicinal plants as highlighted below by one of the respondents:
I get my muthi from Swayimane most of the time. But if it’s urgent I get muthi in the forest that side (pointing towards the side of Giba Gorge) and also from Berea in town.
(Traditional healer 7)
Results from the interviews and focus group discussions conducted with the Tshelimnyama community members also reveal that the traditional healers in the community use commercial harvesters to acquire medicinal plants and animal products during times when they cannot go into the forest because of commitments, illness or unavailability of medicinal plants. The following were some of the comments made about using commercial harvesters:
I used to get muthi for myself but due to illness I usually ask some people to get it for me.
(Traditional healer 2)
It depends, sometimes I get my own muthi and sometimes I also buy my own muthi or send people.
Since we do not get all types of muthi in urban areas, sometime we have to get them from the rural areas, so there are people that go for me to collect those muthi items.
(Traditional Healer 4)
It depends, there is muthi that one cannot find here (referring to Tshelimnyama and surrounding areas) because this place does not have much forest or vegetation hence I often have to go to town and place an order with people that specialise in selling muthi in Durban close to Berea train Station.
(Traditional healer 7)
Commercial harvesters were cited as another group that harvests natural resources in bulk for trading within and outside Durban. Commercial harvesters are an elusive GGEP stakeholder group, which is said to use destructive harvesting practices and whose origin is unknown. However, when probed as to whether they knew where the commercial harvesters obtain their medicinal products, the participants
stated that they did not know. However, they indicated that commercial harvesters supply the Durban market traditional medicine traders and any other interested individual traditional healers in Durban.
Furthermore, findings from the focus group discussions with Tshelimnyama general community members reveal that there are community members who go into the GGEP open space to collect medicinal plants and animal products, hunt animals for food, collect wood for heating and fencing their gardens. This was reiterated by general community members who stated:
Yes, yes, I know there are izangoma who get muthi from there.
(General community member 1)
He is right, I have also seen them going over to the forest.
(General community member 2)
Well for us as black people, the only thing you would find is people using the forest to collect wood, collect muthi like the izinyanga and izangoma.
(General community member 3)
During focus group discussions, all the Tshelimnyama community traditional healers indicated that they use animal and plant products for their medicines such as animal fat, skin, hooves, plant roots, bark, stems and leaves. Figure 5.16 shows storage containers for plants and animal parts used for medicinal purposes inside one of the traditional healer’s consultation room.
Figure 5.16: Containers of traditional medicines inside a traditional healer’s consultation room (Source:
Field photographs)
In combating the practice of natural resource harvesting for medicinal purpose, the GGEP has implemented painting of tree trunks to render the bark unusable for medicines. However, considering the various tree parts demanded for medicinal plant harvesting (roots, leaves and branches) tree trunk painting does not address the problem of medicinal plant harvesting. Thus, even with painted tree trunks, the health of plants and the forest can still be compromised through harvesting roots, leaves and branches except for large trees whose leaves and branches are difficult to access. Jusu and Sanchez (2013) assert that harvesting roots, wood or bark can be fatal to the targeted species. In addition, literature shows that harvesting techniques employed when obtaining medicines from plants and animals, among other things, can cause decline or near-extinction of species (Jusu and Sanchez, 2013; Augustino et al., 2014).
Furthermore, Flory and Clay (2010) assert that unsustainable harvesting of plant parts compromises the structure of the forest ecosystem by exposing the forest floor to sunlight which in turn makes the forest vulnerable to alien species invasion. Tree trunk painting is therefore a temporal distraction to harvesters from harvesting tree bark but does not effectively protect the entire plant from harvesters.
Besides tree trunk painting, the GGEP field workers conduct patrols in the GGEP open space once a week. The patrols are intended to identify unsustainable practices such as animal trapping and also to catch offenders who are prosecuted when caught. However, for patrolling to be effective in such a large open space, it would require full-time patrolling because harvesters conduct their activities any day of the week and anytime of the day. Without full-time patrols, harvesters would still get an opportunity to hunt.
For instance, during a patrol (and field observation) on the 15 of February 2011, it was discovered that commercial harvesters had invaded one large area of the forest and about 41 trees were de-barked and cut as shown in Figure 5.17 (GGEP, undated). Another large scale harvesting incidence was reported in April 2013 where 26 indigenous trees were de-barked. This is an indication that despite conducting patrols on a weekly basis, commercial harvesters still access and harvest the GGEP open space natural resources.
Figure 5.17: Destructive medicinal plant harvesting (Source: Field photographs)
Figure 5.17 highlights some of the destructive harvesting practices used when extracting plant products for medicinal purposes and include de-barking, digging for roots or removal of root bark and cutting off portions of plant stems. Harvesting and hunting for medicinal plants is prohibited in formally managed open spaces and given the urban context where open spaces are scarce and formally managed, it leaves traditional healers without wild grounds to obtain the needed resources for their practice. This can be a negative externality of conserving biodiversity, an assertion consistent with Bob (2010) who states that, given South Africa’s historical context of prohibitive laws during the apartheid regime, restrictions on harvesting medicinal plants may be viewed as measures to suppress traditional healers’ prosperity.
Chapter two, section 27 of the South African constitution and the Bill of Rights provide for sustainable use of natural resources in promoting equitable economic and social development (Jonsson, 2011). This has implications for environmental policy and decision-makers.
Findings from a key informant interview with the traditional healers’ leader and education officer at Silverglen in Chatsworth reveal that the eThekwini Municipality implements and promotes the cultivation of medicinal plants by individual traditional healers. The Tshelimnyama traditional healers have from time to time undergone training on sustainable use, harvest and cultivation of medicinal plants. Five of the Tshelimnyama community traditional healers indicated during focus group discussions that they cultivate some medicinal plants not only in Tshelimnyama but in their villages. One of the participants highlighted this by saying:
Yes I do. I also have my own muthi that I planted at home. When I phone them at home I even ask them to irrigate it for me so that it will not die. Even when I am here too, I plant muthi although sometimes it gets eaten by goats because of lack of grazing land around here I guess.
(Traditional Healer 1)
Despite the expressed willingness to cultivate medicinal plants, the interview revealed that traditional healers have reservations on cultivating some medicinal plants due to the belief that the plants can be harmful to people as highlighted in the following statement:
Not all muthi is planted at home…there is muthi that one cannot plant at home because it is known to attract bad spirits and all these commotions can make people in the family sick or be possessed by bad spirits. Sometimes it happens that when you mix muthi it does something good to your body or heals people but when the stem is there growing in your yard it will cause trouble for you and your family.
(Traditional healers’ leader 1)
The findings presented have highlighted the use of ex situ conservation practices. A successful story of ex situ conservation of medicinal plants in Umlazi Durban is used to motivate traditional healers from all provinces of South Africa to cultivate medicinal plants. This is consistent with the CBD recommendations for ex situ conservation and authors such as Mander et al. (1996) and Okigbo et al. (2008) who highlight the need for ‘conservation through cultivation’, which implies cultivating medicinal plants to supply the traditional medicine industry. The call to ex situ conservation by Government authorities is consistent with trends in developing countries, for instance, in India where medicinal plant cultivation is also used to enhance livelihoods of poor communities (Sati, 2013). This is in view of growing demand from global markets for herbal products, rising pressure for urbanisation, agriculture and settlement and the impact of climate change which have all contributed to significant reduction of natural habitats and species (Prasad, 2009). Thus, cultivation of medicinal plants is viewed as a measure to relieve the remaining wild lands off the pressures thereby facilitating proliferation of medicinal plants (Amuyoyegbe et al., 2012). Medicinal plant cultivation is also an important strategy which governments in developing countries, where the use and extraction of medicinal plants is rife, are embarking on. However, as demonstrated in this study, traditional healing is surrounded by beliefs on the use and cultivation which would render ex-situ cultivation problematic.
Unsustainable natural resource harvesting for medicinal purposes was seen as a threat to ecosystem health as early as 1946 (Williams et al., 2013). It is not only a problem in GGEP but also in many open spaces
such as the eThekwini Municipality’s Silverglen Nature Reserve in Chatsworth Durban. Thus, unsustainable natural resource harvesting in the GGEP is only an example of the extent of the problem both at the provincial and national scales. This finding is supported by the Williams et al. (2013) who highlight commercial overharvesting of natural resources as one of the causes of biodiversity loss in South Africa. The Silverglen Nature Reserve, for example, offers education programmes on sustainable harvesting and propagation of medicinal plants, however, the programmes remain voluntary. The finding highlights a lack of effective legislative framework and programmes to address hunting and plant harvesting for medicinal purposes not only in the GGEP open space but in South Africa as a whole.
Findings from the Tshelimnyama focus group discussions also revealed that the traditional healers practice traditional harvesting methods. The Tshelimnyama traditional healers demonstrated their knowledge of sustainable harvesting practices, for instance, one traditional healer indicated that he learnt from his grandfather that a tree cannot be de-barked when the sun is up but one must wait until late afternoon. When shown the pictures in Figure 17 all the traditional healers expressed their shock on the harvesting methods used and some of the comments expressed regarding traditional harvesting methods and the methods used on the pictures include:
This is not how one should get muthi (pointing a picture in which a tree trunk has been pealed a long way from the top down towards the very low level of the tree near the surface). A correct way of get muthi in a tree like this is pealing a small amount of tree trunk on the side where the sun set and then after that take a wet soil or mud and smear the part that you pealed so that the tree will not try out and die.
(Traditional healer 1)
The law does not allow this. Some of the trees have been totally damaged, the stems are cut and the trees are de-barked in an incorrect manner. The trees will not grow back again, and we will not be able to find muthi again in the bush if people destroy trees or the forest like this. In order for a tree to grow, it must have its bark restored and roots to be covered in soil. The other picture shows animal traps in the forest, so this is not allowed.
(Traditional healer 3)
Well, in order to collect muthi and use the forest appropriately, you need the knowledge of how to cut the trees: my grandfather taught me about these cultural practices. The tree should be de- barked in an area of the trunk facing sunset, and it must also be covered with mud in the de-barked area to allow it to reabsorb the water when the rain comes. The roots should not be totally cut off,
but one should cut one or two roots, and then cover it with soil so that the tree can grow again. This will keep the tree to grow and you will be able to find the tree when you come to harvest again.
(Traditional healer 5)
The Tshelimnyama traditional healers indicated that they practice the traditional knowledge they have about harvesting natural resources. This shows that traditional healers are concerned about sustainability of the wildlands that provide them with the medicinal products. Unlike in the GGEP project, studies such as Bohensky and Maru (2011) and Hill et al. (2012) highlight that sustainable environmental management is moving towards integrating indigenous ecological knowledge with western science. Schlosberg (2013) demonstrates the move towards sustainable relationships between humans and the environment. This has implications for the GGEP project and biodiversity conservation in South Africa.