5.4 Stakeholder Management
5.4.2 Contextualising changes in natural resource abundance
5.4.2.4 Pollution
The key informant interviews with a GGEP property owner (also GGEP management team member), GGEP project manager and eThekwini Municipality personnel revealed that the main sources of pollution in the GGEP are littering by GGEP open space users, sewage as well as garden and household refuse dumping into the GGEP open space. Plastic litter was seen in the forest during a field observation as can be seen in Figure 5.22. In addition, findings from a focus group discussion with the property owners revealed that litter is also present in the streams that run through the open space. (For this study specific types of pollution comprise sewage, garden and household refuse, plastic litter-hereinafter referred to as pollution, for this study).
Figure 5.22: Litter seen in the GGEP open space (Source: Field photographs)
Commenting on the observed litter, one of the property owners made the following observation:
Litter is so much…we usually see the field workers picking up litter and sometimes the Scouts volunteer to pick up litter.
(Property owner 10)
Further, key informant interviews with the GGEP project manager and a member of the management team reveal that the sources of littering in the GGEP open space are linked to both the recreational and extractive users of the GGEP open space. The findings also reveal that the GGEP reminds all users not to litter in the open space through the use of billboards placed at each of the entrances into the GGEP open space. Despite this action, litter persists. Plastic litter is associated with environmental health risks both to humans and terrestrial and aquatic life (Ryan et al., 2009; Mupindu and Mangizvo, 2012). In addition, aesthetically, plastic litter is unpleasant both for terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and for this and other reasons, litter has become a global concern (United Nations Development Programme, 2011; Mupindu and Mangizvo, 2012).
Findings from the focus group discussion with the GGEP property owners, key informant interviews with the GGEP project manager and a member of the management team reveal that sewage emanates from
leaking septic tanks built near the edge of the cliffs while garden and household refuse emanate from some homes adjacent to the GGEP open space. The problem with sewage disposal into the GGEP open space is an addition of nutrients into the ecosystems, which can either induce or inhibit growth of some species at the expense of others. SANBI (2013) cites sewage as one of the water pollutants which affect water quality in South Africa. Nutrient loading is a threat to biodiversity and biogeochemical processes (Woodward et al., 2012) and in nutrient poor habitats it can induce rapid growth of species, consequently affecting species composition and ecosystem productivity (Secretariat of the CBD, 2010). This is especially true for alien species, which by nature are invasive in certain environments but given additional nutrients could exacerbate the problem. On the other hand, pollution can be toxic to animal and plant species, as well as humans (Secretariat of the CBD, 2010). For instance, during a field observation patrol, it was observed that a hydrophilic plant (as identified by local biologist McInnes, 2011) at the bank of a stream within the GGEP forest had wilted (as shown in Figure 5.23) while other species in the on higher ground had not exhibited similar problems. This was especially so for plants of the same species lying on higher ground away from the stream. Since the plant was rooted in the stream and was in the interior of the forest, away from interference by people as there were no established trails at the time, it was assumed that the plant species dried up because of water poisoning. Thus, the cause of wilting could have been chemicals from sewage seepage or other chemicals that may have been disposed into the stream from households.
Figure 5.23: Wilting hydrophilic plant in the GGEP forest as identified by local biologist McInnes (2011) (Source: Field photographs)
Results from the focus group discussion with the GGEP management team reveal that people living adjacent to the GGEP open space dump garden and construction refuse over their fences into the GGEP open space. This is despite awareness and education information that is published on the GGEP website regarding dumping and pollution. On instances where dumping has been detected and the perpetrator identified, the GGEP management conducts individual visits to the perpetrators to explain the essence of the GGEP project and the implications of dumping on conservation efforts in the open space. According to the GGEP management, the perpetrators are usually unaware of the environmental implications of dumping but are cooperative once aware. In a place where conservation of biodiversity is a priority, it is expected that environmental awareness would be a priority as conservation cannot be achieved by management alone but requires community participation if the project is to succeed. This is supported by researchers such as Worster (1973), Miller and Hobbs (2002) and Mupindu and Mangizvo (2012), who recognise the importance of environmental awareness, especially in the urban context where pollution is a challenge. The implication would then be that the GGEP management should view the GGEP community members as partners in conservation not only financially but also through capacity building. As supported by the United Nations (1992) and Ashwell et al. (2006) through Agenda 21 and the Constitution of South Africa, the findings highlight the need for community empowerment to make environmentally sound
decisions in natural resource access and use. This is also in view of the fact that twenty years post CBD, the subject of environmental conservation and sustainability is not clearly understood despite the commitments that the government made by ratifying the CBD.