ThirstyTreesNoWaterClimateConfusion
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Page1
1
Page2
Thirsty tree plantations, no water left and climate confusion: What
version of Sustainable Development are we leaving our children?
By Liane Greeff of EcoDoc Africa
Tel: +27 (0) 83 415 2365
Email: liane@kingsley.co.za
For GeaSphere Tel: +27 (0) 13 733 5267
Email: owen@soft.co.za
www.geasphere.co.za
Title illustration and illustrations of eucalyptus and pine trees
using water were commissioned from Janet Botes. Tel: +27
(0) 72 331 5057 Email: janetbotes@yahoo.com
All photographs were taken by Liane Greeff, except for the photographs of the
community interviews which were filmed by Deirdre May for the GeaSphere
Documentary Pulp Friction.
With thanks to Roy MacGregor for constant support and advice
and to Wally Menne for valuable editorial recommendations.
Made possible with financial support from the Siemenpuu Foundation and the
Swedish Society for nature Conservation, SSNC. The views herein shall not
necessarily be taken to reflect the official opinion of the Siemenpuu Foundation or
SSNC
2
Page3
Contents
Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 4
Limited water and recurring drought in the Eastern Cape _________________________ 8
How much water do timber plantations consume? ______________________________ 9
The evolving history of timber plantations and water research ___________________ 12
Timber plantations and other invasive alien plants _____________________________ 20
Community experiences of water scarcity and food insecurity ____________________ 23
Timber plantations and fire ________________________________________________ 25
Climate Change Predictions for South Africa and the double burden of the Clean
Development Mechanism _________________________________________________ 27
Timber Plantations and payment for water ___________________________________ 30
The pulp and paper industry _______________________________________________ 32
Conclusion ______________________________________________________________ 34
References: _____________________________________________________________ 35
3
Page4
Introduction
The main tenet of this paper is that there is not
enough water available for South Africa‟s current and
planned development programme, and that there is a
need to examine the nexus between our scarce water
resources, potential significant climate change
impacts, and the decision to plant more water
intensive timber plantations. Coupled with this
conundrum are the issues of food security, or the lack
thereof, and the potential water and food security
impact of non plantation alien invasive plants,
including the uncontrolled expansion of invasive
timber plantation species such as Black Wattle, Pines
and Eucalyptus taking over valuable land and water
resources.
This paper will attempt to weave many related
threads together in a way that links with the broader
sustainable development issues that our whole planet
is facing, and our current collision course with an
unknown climatic crisis. One definition of madness
proposed by Einstein is when people do the same
thing over and over again and expect a different
outcome, and there is a related cliché says that if you
keep on doing what you are doing you will arrive
where you are headed. Right now we are not headed
in the right direction, and that is why so many recent films are exploring the end
of humanity – “2012”, “The Age of Stupid”, “Knowing”, whilst others are painting a
picture of humanity in crisis such as “Children of men” and “Avatar”. The archivist
in “The Age of Stupid” asks the question: Why didn‟t our generation do something
when we knew that we had to and we still could make a difference, and “Avatar”
highlights the sharp contrast between living in and with Nature versus destroying
Nature in order to obtain a resource. Just because a plantation consists of trees,
and trees are a key component of forests, does not mean that plantations are
forests, and all the language that implies that they are, is misleading. In similar
vein to “Avatar”, converting pristine grasslands to timber plantations in order to
obtain a needed but economically undervalued and wastefully used resource both
for national use and for export to earn foreign currency; and to neglect the larger
and longer term impacts that this will have on water security, our rivers,
biodiversity, food security, climate change, etc. is one more step in robbing our
children of the Earth as we found it.
4
Page5
There is no ambiguity about alien trees consuming water excessively, and there is
no ambiguity in terms of southern Africa being one of the driest regions of the
world, or that South Africa has been classified as the 30 th most dry country on the
planet. There is no ambiguity in that scientists have predicted that climate change
will affect Africa disproportionately and that southern Africa in particular is likely to
experience less rainfall over most of the region, with longer dry periods and
increased storm events. According to recent statistics (Blignaut and Van Heerden,
2009) South Africa is already using 98% of the available water with 12 of its 19
water management catchments experiencing a water deficit. Further, the
Department of Water Affairs and Environment (Formerly Water and Forestry)
predicts that, South Africa will have a water deficit of 1.7% by 2025.
The deficits in many of the Water Management Areas do not necessarily imply that
water use exceeds the amount available but that the allowance for the ecological 1
reserve cannot be met at current levels of use – this means river systems are
being deprived of the minimum flow needed to maintain their basic ecological
functions. Whilst the requirements for the Reserve are based on estimates at
present, in many areas, there is no allowance to sustain the ecological viability of
the resource, and substantial changes will be needed when the Reserve is
implemented (DEAT, 2009).
These statements are not ambiguous, but in combination they portray a very bleak
picture of water availability in the future. Indeed, the UNEP 2008 report
“Freshwater under Threat: Africa” states that projected figures for 2025 suggest
that per capita water availability will decrease and that “the projections for Malawi
and South Africa look particularly bleak”. This scenario could be exacerbated if
countries such as Lesotho want more access to water stored in the Lesotho
Highlands Water Project dams.
1 The ecological reserve in South Africa refers to the quantity and quality of water that is required
to: (1) satisfy the basic needs of all people who are or who may be supplied from a water resource,
and (2) to protect the aquatic ecosystems in order to secure ecologically sustainable development
and use of the relevant water resource.
5
Page6
Blignaut and Van Heerden (2009) in their paper entitled “Is Water Shedding 2
Next?” state: “water use cannot continue to grow at current rates indefinitely
given the supply constraints and the likely decline in the water availability due to
change in climatic conditions, and the socio-economic and demographic pressure
to increase the use of potable water for domestic use and to allocate water to
higher value added industries. Something has to change, and fast.”
They reviewed the 12 flagship projects of the South African Government‟s
Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (AsgiSA) and noted that
the first six of the flagship projects which includes the Umzimvubu Catchment and
Timber Industries Development Initiative in the Eastern Cape are all water
intensive and that it seems as if “these projects were identified in complete
isolation from the fact that South Africa is a water-scarce and arid country.”
Their analysis reveals that macro-economic planning in South Africa needs to take
much greater cognisance of natural resource constraints, which are likely to
worsen due to climate change and the spread of invasive alien plants. Quoting
Cullis et al 2007, they say that is it estimated that if left unchecked unmanaged
invasive alien plants could consume as much as 16% of the water in the near
future.
In their concluding statement
they state: Yes, water
shedding is next “if macroeconomic
decision making is
not conducted in such as way
as to acknowledge and plan
with implicit resource
constraints and bio-physical
and hydrological patterns and
features.” Water security,
they warn is much more serious from a livelihoods and health perspective than
electricity because there is no alternative. In his plenary address to the Second
Africa Water Week (November 2009), it was said by Trevor Manuel that “Water is
life”, and unlike electricity there are no alternatives, which makes water scarcity a
matter of national security.
2 Shedding is a term used recently in “load shedding” which referred to the recent practice of
interrupting electricity supply or rotating electricity supply between different users in order to share
the burden of insufficient supply of electricity between different users in South Africa. The question
raised by Blignaut and Van Heerden refers to the immanent under-supply of water which will
necessitate some form of restriction or limitation.
6
Page7
In an updated paper, Blignaut and Van Heerden (2009) state “introducing the
proposed [AsgiSA] programmes in a business as usual and water intensive manner
will strengthen the current growth in the demand for water. This will bring forward
or accelerate the need for introducing water rationing among sectors.” And they
reiterate that whilst rationing is imminent the reality has not yet led to a rethink of
macro-economic policies, and hence there is a sense of complacency whereas in
fact there is an urgent need for proactive measures towards water
conservation.
In September last year the Water Research Commission (WRC) released a press
statement which stated that one of their latest studies has revealed that SA has
even less water than was previously estimated. This was based on data from new
technology and on integrated surface and ground water resources. The project
leader, Brian Middleton, stated: “According to this study, our assessment of
surface water resources, for example, shows that we have 4% less than we
estimated in the 1995 study. If we were allocating water according to the higher
estimates made in previous studies, we would find that there is simply not the
water available to meet our needs.” According to the WRC study, South Africa‟s
mean annual runoff was just over 49 000 million cubic metres of water; utilisable
groundwater exploitation potential was estimated at about 10 000 million cubic
metres per annum (and 25% less during drought conditions). The report also
highlighted concerns around the quality of South Africa‟s water. The WRC
believed that this study will influence South Africa‟s development sectors including
timber plantations.
A recent World Bank sponsored study by the McKinsey Group brought to light that
South Africa, by 2030, will face a shortage of 2.7 million m³ water. Dr Roelof
Botha pointed out that according to the McKinsey research, 40% of available water
worldwide is utilised for agricultural purposes. If adequate arrangements are not
made, food security could also come under threat. Additionally because South
Africa has low rainfall, few large rivers and has relatively restricted under-surface
water sources, which are often polluted, this makes South Africa dependent on its
neighbouring countries and existing projects in Lesotho. Dr Botha also included
water pollution in cities and the mining industry as key threats to the country's
water security (Water Security, 2010).
7
Page8
Based on this discussion it is clear that South Africa is running out of available
water even faster than we previously thought and as a country we need to
urgently rethink our development agenda. We should not launch any new water
intensive projects unless completely confident that there will be sufficient water
taking into consideration potential climate change impacts and invasive alien plant
invasions. The need for the precautionary principle to be implemented is very clear
– i.e. assume the worst case scenario with respect to actions whose outcomes are
uncertain, in this case water scarcity and the increasing likelihood of water
restrictions across all sectors.
Population growth is another area of uncertainty with some statisticians believing
that the population will decrease due to early deaths caused by HIV/Aids. The
National Water Resources Strategy (2004) has predicted that a low population
growth will lead to 50 million people in South Africa by 2025 and a high population
growth path outcome will be closer to 55 million people. It is unclear whether this
has taken into account the political and environmental refugees that are flocking to
South Africa from the rest of Africa.
Limited water and recurring drought in the Eastern Cape
What does all of this mean for the timber plantations
in South Africa and the proposed expansion of the
Eastern Cape timber industry? In terms of the
current planning and the Forestry Broad Based Black
Economic Empowerment Charter (BBBEE),
government aims to establish an additional 150 000
ha of timber in the Eastern Cape and between 30
000 and 40 000 hectares in KwaZulu-Natal. This is
being assisted by the special-purpose vehicle AsgiSA
Eastern Cape (Pty) Limited which is intended to
assist in driving the implementation of the plantation
programme in key areas (DWAF website). The
question is whether these water intensive plans are
feasible or whether they will effectively accelerate
the introduction of water restrictions, or the development of further engineering
solutions with their broad range of negative environmental impacts.
The current drought in the Eastern Cape is exacerbating the situation, and one
question we can ask is that if the proposed new timber plantations had already
been planted, what would their impact be on the current drought situation, and
existing water users? However, drought seems to be a recurring phenomenon in
the Eastern Cape, with media reports indicating that parts of the province had
8
Page9
been or were being considered for declaration as disaster areas in February 2009,
July 2009, and again in January 2010 (SABC, 2010, Gumenge, 2010; Dispatch
Online). In July 2009 the army was called in to assist the Eastern Cape
government in dealing with the drought. Water Affairs Minister Sonjica is reported
to have stated: “We have a crisis when it comes to water in the Eastern Cape” and
she cited the drought as evidence of how climate change was impacting on the
province, with predictions that within the next 20 years the province would be
semi-desert. She said: “We already have scientific evidence that the rivers in the
eastern part of the Eastern Cape are drying up.” (Dispatch Online, 2009)
The potential climate change implications for South Africa are discussed in more
detail in a later section of this paper, together with concerns around the Kyoto
Protocol Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) that is being used to promote new
plantations that will compound the problem of water shortages.
This brings us to the critical matter of how much water is consumed by timber
plantations and other related uses such as paper production. The following
sections represent an exploration of the science around timber plantations and
water use, which for the non-hydrologist is very confusing and very contradictory,
and like most sciences is also a function of perspective. Industry scientists tend to
be more conservative in their estimates of water use than environmentalists and
everyone else is in the middle somewhere. South Africa is however, renowned for
being world leaders in the research on plantations and water use. So these
following sections are intended to highlight areas which are particularly confusing
and where clarity is needed.
How much water do timber plantations consume?
According to Statistics SA (2009) in their discussion document entitled “Water
Accounts for South Africa: 2000” they include a number of tables depicting water
flow accounts of supply and use of water for South Africa for the year 2000. Table
17 highlights that South Africa receives approximately 611 600 million m3 of
annual rainfall per year, of which 83% is directly evaporated or used by the
natural vegetation and the remaining 17% (105 528 million m3) is available for
Gross Annual Runoff, of which about 68 274 million m3 is used by the various
sectors in South Africa. (The rest of the water flows remain in the natural
environment to augment surface water, groundwater and ecological reserve). In
describing how this water is used by the various sectors, the report states: “In
2000 water use in South Africa was driven by the agricultural sector, about 94%
(64 065 million m3), mostly for dryland crops (45 000 million m3 or 66%) and
forestry (10 828 million m3 or 16%), while irrigation consumed only 12% of
water (7 920 million m3) and livestock and game only 313 million m3. Leaving the
rest of the economy with 6% of the total water use by sectors in South Africa”.
9
Page10
This figure of 10 828 million cubic metres for
timber plantations includes the water that the
trees suck up through transpiration, whilst the
NWRS figure (below) refers to the reduction in
stream flow. The easiest way to visualise just how
much water plantation trees use in terms of
evapotranspiration i.e. 10 828 million cubic
metres, you just need to imagine four of the five
biggest dams in South Africa – the Pongolapoort,
Sterkfontein, Vaal and Vanderkloof dams, and
know that plantation trees transpire and use more
water than the dams can store (their combined
storage amounts to 10 681 million m3 (SANCOLD,
2009)).
The National Water Resources Strategy (First
Edition, 2004) indicates that for the same year –
2000 - the incremental water use of the timber
plantations (in excess of the natural vegetation)
amounted to 1 460 million m3 for South Africa as
a whole, which is basically 1/10 th of the SSA
Report and represents 3% of South Africa‟s water
use (Blignaut and Van Heerden,2009) and
according to DEAT plantations cover 1.7 million
hectares and demand 1.5 million m3 per year (3.3%) of the available water
resources in South Africa. The following section investigates how these figures are
calculated.
In the film “Pulping the Future” produced by GeaSphere (2009) the same question
was asked – how much water does timber production use in South Africa. The
rationale they used was based on South Africa having 1.5 million hectares of
managed plantations and then estimating that each hectare has at least 1000
trees, and using the conservative estimate that each tree uses at least 25 litres per
day (equivalent to the South African free basic water allowance). The
1.5 million ha x 1000 trees x 25 litres/day amounts to timber plantations using
37.5 billion litres of water per day (37.5 million m3 per day). This was compared
with a South African population of 50 million people getting a free basic water
allocation of 25 litres per person per day, which amounts to 1.25 billion litres per
day. GeaSphere‟s conclusion was that timber plantations use 30 times more water
each day than the entire population‟s free basic water allocation.
10
Page11
However one interprets the statistics, it is clear that timber plantations are using a
significant amount of South Africa‟s natural water resources, and a figure of 1460
million m3 is equivalent to the amount of water used by industry, slightly less than
the amount of water used for urban and domestic purposes, although much less
than the amount used by agriculture (CSIR, 1999a).
However, what makes timber production very different from most other water
uses is that the trees use the water before it gets into the stream flows, which
means that once the trees are planted the increase in water-use is committed
indefinitely. Further, according to DWAF (2000), timber plantations are “often
placed in the headwaters of rivers and unlike other water users, like
irrigation, industry and domestic, forestry cannot be switched off during
periods of drought. Restrictions on water use cannot be imposed in
periods of need”. This is a critical management consideration. Additionally,
according to the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism in the State of
the Environment Report, they mention that the major concern “is that plantations
reduce the in-stream flow (that is, the amount of water in streams and rivers)
during drier, low-flow periods when there is less rainfall (for example, during
winter in inland areas and during summer in the Western Cape)”. According to
this same report, as much as 1.71 million ha of natural habitat, mainly grassland
and fynbos, have been cleared for timber plantations, and this has greatly
threatened the biodiversity resources offered by these biomes. The impact on
groundwater, which is substantial, will be covered in the next section.
11
Page12
The evolving history of timber plantations and water
research
The history of timber plantations and their impact on water resources has been
very succinctly summarised in a paper by Chapman (CSIR, 2006) where he
describes how in the early part of the 20 th Century evidence of declining
streamflow downstream of the plantations was mounting, and after the Fourth
Empire Forestry Conference was held in South Africa in 1935, the Jonkershoek
Forest Research Station was established that same year near Stellenbosch. By
1938 measurement of rainfall and stream flow was underway and other
experimental sites were established elsewhere in South Africa. The experimental
design was based on gathering baseline water data by comparing two unplanted
catchments, and then planting one to timber. The difference in the runoff
between the two catchments after planting timber could then be ascribed to the
plantations.
Jonkershoek Plantation Research Station, Western Cape
The Jonkershoek paired catchment experiments consisting of eight catchments
ranging from 27 – 246 ha were established, with relatively steep slopes, with
strong seasonal rainfall gradients, and mean annual rainfalls of about 1 200 mm
on the lower slopes that can go as high as 3 000- 3 600 mm at the top of the
valley. The percentages of catchment planted ranged from 36 – 98% with pine
species, mostly P. radiatae (Chapman, 2008).
The findings of the experiments indicated that the onset of stream flow reductions
became evident in the data when the P. radiatae reached 5 years (up till 5 years
12
Page13
compensated by groundwater), and peak reduction occurred at about 15 years,
followed by a gentle decline in water use. According to Chapman (EcoDoc Africa,
2010), a rule of thumb formula they used was that for every 10% of the
catchment planted to pines, they expected a 30 to 40 mm reduction in stream
flow.
Chapman was very clear about the scientific data supporting the direct impact that
timber plantations have on water resources, with eucalypts using approximately
600mm of rainfall equivalent and pines using about 400-450mm of rainfall
equivalent. When he was asked about the amount of water used per tree per day,
he replied that hydrologically speaking this was not a very useful measurement of
water use as they prefer to use area and rainfall equivalent, but generally speaking
a eucalyptus tree will use anything from 100 to one thousand litres of water per
day and a pine from 50 to 600 litres of water per day. The amount of water varied
according to tree species, age, position in landscape, size, the size of its canopy,
how close it is to a river and whether it growing by itself or as part of a plantation.
Pine Trees Use 400 – 450mm rainfall equivalent
Eucalyptus trees use 600 – 650 mm rainfall equivalent
No plantations big stream
Pine Plantation: Rainfall of 600mm and
above stream reduced
Eucalyptus Plantation: Rainfall above
600mm/a and stream reduced
Rainfall of 600mm/a or less and the
stream dries up completely
13
Page14
One of the reasons for the higher use of water by eucalypts is their ability to grow
deep roots. The exact measurements vary with Scott and le Maitre (1998) stating
that roots of eucalyptus trees can penetrate 50 metres or more into the soil profile
in contrast to hard woody indigenous trees whose root systems penetrating about
seven metres. Even young eucalyptus trees of three years of age can already have
root systems penetrating and extracting water to depths of 10 metres. Other
researchers have estimated the roots reach 30 metres in South Africa and 50
metres elsewhere (Dye et al. 1997, Chapman, 2006). Due to these deep roots the
eucalypts are able to “mine” water from the water table, contributing to the
desiccation of a catchment. In a South African catchment with deep soils and
planted with eucalypts, the perennial stream dried up completely and only began
to flow again 3-4 years after the trees were removed (while ground water recharge
took place). The trees had used all the rainfall (about 1200 mm/annum) as
well as ground water (Dye et al., 1997; Scott et al., 2000). Streamflow only reappeared
after the soil profile had become saturated again. Farley et al. (2005)
recorded eight instances where eucalypts stopped the streamflow completely.
Other factors that affect the timber plantation water usage include:
the water retention capacity of the soil, and the depth to which trees can
extend their roots - which effectively determines the quantity of soil water
and its rate of consumption by the trees. Soils that are deep and have
more available water can support higher rates of water extraction and
higher rates of tree growth for longer than soils that are shallower or have
less plant available water.
The age of the trees is another factor in water use - older and bigger trees
use water faster than smaller and younger trees. However, this remains
true whilst the tree is relatively fast growing. When vigour of growth
declines, the rate of water use also declines. According to Chapman this
has important implications for predicting streamflow reduction, and he
referenced Versfeld (1997) who showed how failure to account for agestructure
of plantations in a catchment could give rise to a prediction error
of nearly 60% in calculating streamflow reduction.
Plantation trees also use more water than the grasslands that they often
replace because they are evergreen - and transpire during winter - whereas
grasses are dormant in winter (Jacobson, 2003).
Whitmore (1972) from the Department of Water Affairs undertook a preliminary
assessment of the effects of plantations on run-off in Catchment Control Areas in
the KwaZulu-Natal Midlands where plantations of wattle (75%), as well as pines
and eucalypts had expanded steadily until the 1950s when a slump in the price of
14
Page15
wattle bark led to clear felling and a reduction in the planted area. Subsequently
timber plantations of pines and eucalyptus trees expanded rapidly into the areas
cleared of wattle as well as agricultural land. Whitmore stated: “It has been
estimated that 30-50% of the land at present afforested could be used for
agriculture.”
He concluded that “based on the data, assumptions and methods used in this
analysis it would seem that each km 2 afforested in the CCA [Catchment Control
Areas in the KwaZulu-Natal Midlands] is associated with the loss of about 200,000
m 3 of water” and that the “fact that these reductions exceed the mean run-off in
some seasons can be explained by the fact that the trees have access to surface
flow, interflow and ground water draining from non-afforested parts of the
catchment - in effect, water piracy occurs.”
Experiments at the Mokobulaan research catchments on the Mpumalanga
escarpment showed stream flow reductions following the planting of grassland
with both eucalyptus (E.grandis) and pine (Pinus patula), and the subsequent
response in stream flow after the eucalyptus plantation was clearcut (Scott and
Lesch, 1997). In these experiments, a whole catchment was planted with
eucalyptus resulting in a statistically significant decrease in stream flow in the third
year after planting and the stream dried up completely in the ninth year. When the
eucalyptus trees were 16 years old they were clearcut, but full perennial stream
flow did not return until five years later. Similarly, planting of an entire catchment
with P. patula produced a significant decrease in stream flow in the fourth year
after planting and caused the stream to dry up completely in the twelfth year after
planting.
Whilst Scott and Lesch
(1997) reported that the
drying up of the streams
was not surprising as the
annual runoff was lower
than the expected
reductions owing to the
full catchment area being
planted, they were
surprised at the delayed
return of stream flow in
the clearcut catchment
and they attributed this to the soil mantle acting like a large reservoir and the long
roots of the eucalypts “desiccating” these deep, soil-water stores. Only after these
soil water stores had been replenished did the stream flow return to normal. The
15
Page16
table below summarises results of stream flow reductions after plantations had
been established from some of the South African catchment experiments.
Stream flow reductions after plantation of some South African catchments
(The reductions have been calculated proportional to 100% of the catchment planted
for average age of trees at maximum stream flow reduction) From Scott et al 2009
P=pinus E=Eucalyptus
Location Catchment Tree Ave Age
(years)
Mean
Annual
Rainfall
(mm)
Jonkershoek Bosboukloof P 23 1127 324
Biesievlei P 20 1298 316
Tierkloof P 20 1319 526
Lambrechtbos A P 20 315
Lambrechtbos B P 15 1145 314
Cathedral CP2 P 29 1431 607
Peak CP3 P 20 1431 517
Mokobulaan Mok-A E 10 1166 366
Mok-B P 20 1180 182
Westfalia Westfal-D E 10 1253 321
Runoff
Reduction
(mm)
Smith (1991) reported that when pines were removed to test the effects of
deforestation on catchment water yield at Witklip, near White River in
Mpumalanga - the results showed that clearcutting led to "a significant increase in
catchment water yield of approximately 280 mm/annum during the first 4 years
after completion of treatment”. Further he found a 50mm/annum increase for
every 10% of the catchment cleared of plantations.
According to Scott, Le Maitre and Fairbanks (1998) early estimates for stream flow
reduction were estimated for the Afforestation Permit System (APS) using a
modification of the Nanni curve, which were based on hydrological studies of
grassland and pine plantations at Cathedral peak in the Drakensberg. These were
replaced by the Van der Zel curves which were able to predict the effects of two
different types of rotation lengths of plantations but could not differentiate
between species or location.
As competition for increasingly scarce water resources grew, newer improved
approaches were needed. The CSIR developed an approach which included a
range of factors that contribute to water use and that could be used in a computer
model to simulate the effects of planting or clearcutting. Factors included rainfall
(MAP), tree species and growth potential, surface runoff, class of catchment,
rotation length (period between clearcuts) and magisterial district.
The results of the Scott et al (1998) modelling approach led to some significant
results, which revealed the important difference between impacts of timber
16
Page17
plantations on total flows versus the impact on low flows, and how this differs
between different tree species. This contributed to the Afforestation Permit System
issuing permits based on timber species rather than just on plantation area. The
difference between total and low flow reductions can be significant especially in
catchments where most of the sub-catchments produce little or no low flow and
they gave the example of the Letaba River where only 3.6% of the catchment area
is planted but the stream flow reductions are close to 9% and 28% for total and
low flows respectively (Scott et al, 1998).
As plantations are concentrated in the higher rainfall regions, they consume a
disproportionately large share of the stream flow, especially the low dry season
flows. So whilst the estimates are that plantations reduced national average
annual stream flow by 3.2% (1 417 million cubic metres) the low flow reductions
are much higher and said to be almost 8% (101 million m3).
Mpumalanga with the highest concentration of plantations – over 7% of the land
area - experiences reductions of about 10% for total flows and 18% of low flows.
This amount for the entire province – means that actual plantation water usage
could be as much as equivalent to 130% of runoff from the plantation footprint.
Scott (1998) calculated an average net effect of timber growing on total South
African water resources to be a reduction of 98.6 mm/year which was lower than
the Department of Water Affairs estimate of 113.6 mm/year. This applies to
normal years not during droughts, so even if you take the two numbers and
average them to get a result of 105 mm/year this actually represents consumption
of more than 20% of the national average precipitation of 450mm, by only 1,2%
of the total land surface area of South Africa (122 million ha).
Source GeaSphere and TimberWatch and Department of Environment Affairs
Another important finding was that the best means of reducing the impacts of
plantations on water resources was to reduce the proportion of each individual
catchment that was planted to timber and to keep the riparian and wetland zones
free of trees and to shorten the rotations, and at a broader scale to maintain an
17
Page18
average normal age class distribution within each catchment and this would even
out the differences in flow reduction and reduce the peak flow reductions. Still,
Scott et all (1998) said there are a number of uncertainties and changes in the
assumptions that can lead to much higher figures in water use such as increasing
the use of fertilisers can increase water use, and the shorter lag time in
subsequent rotations of pine trees, and that planting in mist belt areas or places
where there are frequent long, low intensity storms can increase water uptake.
This later approach excluded approximately 10% of the catchment land as modern
plantations are required to leave the riparian zones clear as it is claimed that the
trees use two to three times less water if they are planted outside of riparian
zones.
Scott et al (1998) included a number of tables in their paper which are very useful
and some of the more significant results are shown below:
Illustrative Examples of Total and Low Flow Reductions (based on Scott et al,
1998)
River System Area (Ha) Area Planted to
timber (Ha)
Runoff Reduction (%)
Total Low
Olifants 7 350 308 88 055 3.7 11.2
Southern Cape 716 825 75616 9.4 12.3
Mpumalanga 2 857 158 336 294 14.8 22.4
Escarpment
South Africa 121 734 527 1 436 684 3.2 7.8
Summary of reductions at secondary catchment level (Scott, 1998, Table 6)
W5 Great Usutu 808 491 193 133 13 19.4
X3 Sabie & Sand 631 016 79 190 18.9 36.8
X1 Komati 861 824 79 649 9 13.2
These figures indicate that for some catchments the results are quite extreme –
such as the Sabie and Sand River Catchments where the total flow is reduced by
almost 20% and the low flow by almost 37%. The low flows on the Mpumalanga
escarpment are reduced by just over 22%. One of the well known and devastating
illustrations of the impact of plantations on a single river is the example of the
Klaserie River, which
originates at Mariepskop,
Limpopo Province. The water
measurements reflected in the
table below were taken where
the river crosses the road
between Tzaneen and
18
Page19
Nelspruit, beneath the mountain. All that had changed between 1935 and 1964
was the progressive establishment of plantations in the catchment area (and
possibly climate change).
Change in runoff from the Klaserie River, Mariepskop.
Source: GeaSphere Website (from Van der Schyff and Schoonraaad, 1971)
Period
Rainfall (mm)
Mariepskop
Run Off (m3)
Klaserie River
1935 - 40 1 729 143.07 million
1941 - 45 1 122 48.72 million
1946 - 50 1 332 38.43 million
1955 - 60 2 060 28.72 million
1961 - 64 1 308 16.58 million
According to Scott et al (1998) the highest impacts on low flow are in the Limpopo
Province “where small areas [of plantations] are confined to humid upper
catchments that are the principle source of dry-season flow in otherwise dry
secondary catchments”. This means there is very little remaining flow for the rest
of the catchment that has a limited alternative source of water.
Gush (2006) explained the methodology of quantifying stream flow reductions
resulting from timber plantations using time series simulation modelling, in this
case the ACRU agrohydrological rainfall-runoff modelling system which enables the
simulation of a wider range of plantation situations than those represented by the
paired catchment experiments upon which the earlier models were based. A
verification phase of the ACRU Model used these earlier paired catchment
experiments. For the national simulations they used a simplified water balance
equation where precipitation was equal to the evapotranspiration plus stream flow.
The stream flow reductions were simulated for eucalyptus and pine and water and
soils depths of all the relevant quaternary catchments, and depicted in the form of
spatial maps.
Findings included that the
simulation of the low flows
was less successful than for
the total flows, and they
discovered that the model
was not accounting for the
large water storage capacity
of the soil and the year-toyear
carry over of storage or
usage. They also found that
19
Page20
when compared with observed data, that the evapotranspiration rates of the
eucalyptus plantations were being significantly under-simulated. They concluded
that the stream flow may have been simulated correctly for the wrong reasons.
Despite this shortcoming, which is being remedied, these national stream flow
reduction tables have been accepted as a working solution for immediate
application in water resource management decision processes to do with
plantations.
From Jarmain et al 2009. (SFRA = Stream Flow Reduction Activities)
Gush has also been involved in a CSIR study that found that plantations of
indigenous trees such as the Outeniqua yellowwood, sneezewood and the white
stinkwood, may be economically more viable when it comes to the value of the
timber and impact on scarce water resources than the current alien species used
in timber plantations. Apparently the improved performance of the indigenous
systems based on economic criteria is because they have lower maintenance costs
with substantially larger product prices. In addition, further economic benefits from
indigenous plantations may be gained from by-products such as traditional
medicine, fruits, recreation, climate-change mitigation through carbon storage and
tourism. According to Gush they are working on developing concrete
recommendations and are expanding the research to indigenous trees growing in
different bioclimatic zones, and to start site/species matching in the most wateruse
efficient species." This could also go some distance towards ameliorating the
community impacts described below.
Timber plantations and other invasive alien plants
The above section details the amount of managed timber plantations where
estimates of land under plantations vary around 1.5 million hectares. The land
under invasive alien plants which include the timber species of pines, wattles and
20
Page21
eucalypts as well as other invaders is even more than that – around 1.7 million
hectares, and as they invade the riparian zones of rivers and wetlands their water
use is exponentially higher.
These fast-growing alien tree species were introduced from Australia (eucalypts
and wattle) and America and Europe (pines) in order to maximize timber
production. Some of these species spread rapidly through the lack of natural seed
predators in South Africa, invading areas disturbed by increased human activity, as
well as riparian and wetland habitats and high mountain catchments (DEAT, State
of the Environment Report). Chapman (EcoDoc Africa, 2010) highlighted the fact
that many of the species used in plantations are highly invasive, including the pine
species at Jonkershoek – Pinus radiata and Pinus pinaster. He said if you look up
to the peaks you can see the pines have invaded the higher peaks, and the
eucalyptus trees are known for invading rivers – such as the Berg River and
Riviersonderend in the southern Cape. This has a serious effect on the water
runoff of the high catchments of the Cape and the Drakensberg as well as being a
significant protected area management issue (not to mention privately owned
land).
Another issue is that pines are also a fire influenced species so when they are
exposed to fire, they are stimulated to release seeds, which can result in a massive
invasions that out compete indigenous flora (EcoDoc Africa, 2010). Of the 1436
000 hectares of timber plantation, 35% is eucalyptus (505 785ha), 57% is pine
and 8% is wattle.
Cullis, Görgens and Marais (2007) found in their study on the impact of invasive
alien plants in high rainfall and catchment areas on the total water yield, that
invasive alien plants currently use 4% of water in South Africa, but that this figure
could go up to 16% if the plants continue to spread as per current conditions.
21
Page22
This is a vital finding that needs to be taken seriously especially when one takes
into account the unknown future impact of climate change and according to some
studies, rising temperatures can result in species that are not invasive now
becoming invasive.
The graphic provided by Working for Water illustrates the same point:
A study by Görgens and van Wilgen (2004) revealed that when riparian and nonriparian
invasive alien plants were removed from catchments at Witklip
(Mpumalanga) and Biesiesvlei (Western Cape) - clearing riparian pines and scrub
increased stream flow by approximately two or three times the amount that
clearing non-riparian zones made available.
What is confusing is why these invasive species continue to be grown even though
we understand the significance of their impact. Those that grow wattle, one of the
most invasive species in the country have lobbied government to prevent it being
classed as a weed, so it is still being planted. According to Chapman, wattle is out
of control and is spreading all over Southern Africa. Similarly wherever, one finds
alien tree plantations, one finds that the indigenous forests and non-planted
grasslands and fynbos soon become invaded.
There is concern also that climate change will have an impact on the invasiveness
of some species, with the fear that some plant species that are currently not
invasive may also become so.
22
Page23
Community experiences of water scarcity and food
insecurity
According to Karumbidza (2005), studies in the northern KwaZulu-Natal indicated
that over a period of 20 years, grasslands converted to plantations suffered a
staggering 82% reduction in stream flow with the impact of water flow reduction
being particularly crucial in the dry season. In rural community areas, especially in
the study area, the loss of surface water has severely negative implications for
people‟s ability to survive. Karumbidza‟s research showed that plantations cause
small springs, streams and ponds to disappear, and that this forced people to
move into ecologically sensitive marginal areas to find water for their livestock and
vegetable gardening. He quotes one of the senior women in Sabokwe, Mrs Ziqubu
(April, 2005) who argued: “The thing is that we compete for water with these
plantations. They use up a lot of water. I remember when we go here in 1996, the
stream close to our garden was running perennially because the eucalyptus trees
were not here….Since [the company planted trees], water has become scarcer.
The stream is drying up. The land, which we had to drain because it was swampy,
has become very dry. We used to dig very small wells to water the reclaimed land.
Now we have to dig deeper and we get the water from far away. Water for
drinking has also equally become scarce. We also have to fetch water for our
cattle, chickens and goats, besides the water for domestic consumption. This
makes the work for women even harder.
Research by GeaSphere has reached the same conclusions with communities in
Mpumalanga. Interviews recorded in the documentary “Pulping the Future”
(GeaSphere, 2009) highlighted the example of the sangoma (traditional healer)
Mrs Manyike who could no longer find the muthi (medicinal) plants that grow on
the river bank, nor the ones that grow in the moist soils up the hill because
everywhere the streams and soils have dried up due to the plantations.
Additionally and even more seriously is the long history of land dispossession of
South African majority populations through the history of colonialism and
23
Page24
apartheid, and the timber plantations have been intrinsically part of that process of
land dispossession which is why about 40% of plantations are the being claimed
as ancestral lands through the land restitution process. This has resulted in
plantations exploring community plantations programmes.
Food security is an increasingly vital issue and is linked to the affordability of food
and how communities can access it. The ongoing encroachment of non-food crops
onto grazing and agricultural land will continue to erode the amount of staple food
available and increasing scarcity will lead to higher prices which contribute to
malnutrition and a host of other social problems. Sinagugu Zikulu from Northern
KwaZulu-Natal (Geasphere, 2009) wrote about his visit to the area of Mtubatuba
where he comes from that "all families had converted their land into either sugar
cane or gum tree plantations. The result was that all the local springs and local
streams were drying up. There were long queues at what used to be a permanent
spring… The grazing lands for cattle were gone, as gumtrees had replaced all the
grasslands ...people had to rely on shops for grocery supplies every month. These
commercial crops were not food crops. People who had no money to buy groceries
starved. Mielie crops surrounded by gum plantations turned yellow as roots were
spreading all over the place. …" Similarly, Msweli (GeaSphere, 2009) wrote about
the impacts of timber plantations on the rural communities of Swaziland:"It is
thanks to Sappi and Mondi that today about a fifth of land that was productive,
used to grow food and for cattle grazing, and used to grow grass to build houses,
has been turned into money making forest." He said that both the timber
plantations and the sugar cane crops had destroyed traditional community living
because both crops tend "to destroy the community by amassing vast land and
destroying the community life that has been part of our culture for years, and that
many of these plantations have come about from the mass eviction of people from
their productive lands onto non-productive land, and that this has resulted in the
“massive food shortages in Swaziland.”
24
Page25
This issue is an increasingly worldwide phenomenon and is seen by many as the
new form of colonialism in Africa. Indeed Vidal (2010) reported that 50 million
hectares of land in Africa – an area double the size of the United Kingdom - has
been acquired by rich countries to guarantee their own food supplies in a world
where global food shortages is increasing. He said that it was ironic that a country
like Ethiopia where hunger is prevalent is offering 3 million hectares of its most
fertile land for growing food for rich countries rather than for themselves. Timber
plantations where much of the produce is being used to support excessive per
capita use of resources in developed world contexts is inextricably part of resource
colonialism which ultimately deprives local people (and local biodiversity) from
using that land and associated resources. This is a core issue that we as a species
need to deliberate in our increasingly urgent need to find ecologically and
economically sustainable ways of living on Earth, ways of living with the concept of
sufficiency rather than constant acquisition, and to find ways of determining when
enough is enough.
Timber plantations and fire
According to Chapman (EcoDoc Africa, 2010) the pines and eucalyptus trees have
a much greater biomass than indigenous fynbos and grasslands, and therefore
when fires come through the plantations, the heat generated is much, much
greater than normal fires, and effectively „cook‟ the soils. Hot fires increase the
hydrophobicity of the soils which means the soils repel water instead of absorbing
it. This results in rainfall running straight off the soil surface and very quickly
generates a lot of kinetic energy that causes soil erosion. This also does not help
to replenish ground water and according to DEAT (State of Environment Report)
soil erosion in turn has a negative impact on water quality through the
sedimentation of wetlands, rivers and streams. This is why Chapman says that it is
not advisable to have alien plantations in a fire-dominated landscape.
Industrial timber plantations suffer extensive financial losses every year as
uncontrolled fires destroy plantations, buildings and equipment. According to
Godsmark (2007) fire damaged a total of 64 000 ha in South Africa in the first
eight months of 2007 and an additional 20 000 in Swaziland. According to his
statistics, the amount that had been fire damaged from 1980 to 2006 amounted to
387 000 with an average fire damage of 14 300 ha per annum.
According to the Working for Fire Website, fires of all sorts produce a mixture of
gases and particles known as smoke, which negatively impacts on global climate,
air quality and human health. These veld fires in South Africa generate every year
about:
64 thousand tons of methane,
76 thousand tons of non-methane hydrocarbons,
39 thousand tons of nitric oxide,
25
Page26
6 thousand tons of nitrous oxide and about
40 thousand tons of smoke particles per year. They also produce about
12 million tons of carbon dioxide (some of which gets reabsorbed when the
vegetation grows and therefore stable fire regimes are theoretically „carbon
neutral')
This is not true for the other trace gases, which remain net emissions. Thus a
change in fire frequency and/or extent leads to a change in greenhouse gas
emissions, which can be accurately quantified. It is worth noting that methane is
about 22 times worse than carbon dioxide in terms of climate impact, and this
does not get reabsorbed, but does dissipate after about 10 years.
According to Owen (2008) fire plays a natural and essential role in the formation
and maintenance of southern African grasslands and is called the 'life blood' of the
grassland. The bulk of the biomass in grassland is made up of rootstocks and
bulbs, and because they are underground the grassland recovers quickly from fires
which usually occur during the late winter / early spring - just before the first
spring rains. During this period the grass is extremely dry, and there is a high
probability of lightning strikes. However, grassland should not be burnt too often,
and the removal of fire has a very negative impact on the biome, and some plants
which are fire dependant for germination will die out. This is true also for the
fynbos of the Western Cape.
When fire is excluded from an area due to plantations the adjacent grasslands or
fynbos do not burn for many years, with the result that they develop a large fuel
load that when eventually burned releases great heat that affectively sterilises the
seed bank in the area. This is what happened at Silvermine and other parts of the
Cape peninsula in 2000. In some areas the strict fire management regime near
plantations has resulted in the grasslands being burnt at the wrong time of the
year, which degrades them and affects germination.
26
Page27
Climate Change Predictions for South Africa and the double
burden of the Clean Development Mechanism
Chapman believes that the Jonkershoek data sets provide a vital opportunity for
studying the evolution of climate change in South Africa, as they consist of over 70
years of detailed data. Apparently since the records began, rainfall in Jonkershoek
has declined by approximately 14%, and the runoff from the pristine catchments
has declined by approximately 20%. He stated that on average 500mm rainfall
equivalent per annum has been lost since the Jonkershoek research began, which
is significant because the high mountains are the sources of water for the lower
catchments.
The data indicates that the nature of the rainfall is also changing – and that this is
likely to continue because as the atmosphere warms, more moisture can be held in
the air, which results in more intense rainfall episodes with longer dry periods in
between (Chapman, 2008). According to DEAT (2009), projected climate changes
in South Africa over the next 50 years indicate that the western parts of the
country will become dryer, that certain areas will experience shorter rainfall
seasons, and that air temperatures will rise, particularly in the interior, and there
will be potentially increased frequency of floods and droughts.
These changes will affect all components of our natural environment and will also
impact on the economy. Scientists are saying that it is too late to focus on
mitigation alone as the climate has changed and that we need to also look at
adaptation. Civil society organisations such as 350.org are trying to get
government to reduce the carbon load in the atmosphere back to 350 parts per
million, which scientists believe will keep the global warming increase below or
equal to 2 degrees Celsius, above which there are a range of tipping points that
may result in climate change getting exponentially out of control.
Because of this need to focus on adaptation, the Department of Environmental
Affairs is saying that this adaptation needs to be incorporated in all strategies that
are linked to planning and decision-making processes at all levels, such as ASGISA.
However this is not happening. In his presentation, Blignaut mentions that whilst
government has the legislation and policies in place, the implementation is not
happening and the ethos is “dynamics as usual” with a conundrum between the
vision of ASGISA and water availability.
Bond, in his presentation to the Carbon Trading Africa Conference (2009)
explained the issue of the CDM (clean development mechanism) which is
embedded in the Kyoto Protocol that enables trading based on carbon offsets. For
example, the carbon emissions of a power station in the USA could be allowed to
continue or expand if the equivalent amount of carbon is absorbed somewhere
27
Page28
else, for instance in a tree
plantation. This is also called
carbon sequestration - removing
carbon (CO2) from the
atmosphere and storing it in
carbon sinks such as oceans,
forests or soils.
George Monbiot, who is
considered to be one of the
cutting-edge thinkers on climate
change, has debunked the notion
of plantations as carbon sink
investments: “When you drain or clear the soil to plant trees, for example, you are
likely to release some carbon, but it is hard to tell how much. Planting trees in one
place might stunt trees elsewhere, as they could dry up a river which was feeding
a forest downstream. Or by protecting your forest against loggers, you might be
driving them into another forest. As global temperatures rise, trees in many places
will begin to die back, releasing the carbon they contain. Forest fires could wipe
them out completely” (Bond, 2009).
Using timber plantations as carbon sinks has been described by some authors as
trading water for carbon - in the article by Jackson et al (2005) titled “Trading
water for carbon with biological carbon sequestration” they emphasise the need to
consider full environmental consequences of carbon sequestration programmes.
Their research of more than 600 observations and climate and economic modelling
showed that substantial losses in stream flow and increased soil salinisation and
acidification occurred together with development of plantations. Their findings
indicated that climate change feedback would probably exacerbate the water
losses rather than offset them.
Another paper by Farley et al (2005) further elaborated on the link between
carbon sequestration programmes using timber plantations and their impact on
water yield. They undertook a global analysis of 26 catchment data sets with over
500 observations, including annual runoff and low flows. Taking the different
variables into account, they found that the annual runoff was reduced on average
by 44% and 31% respectively when grasslands and shrub-lands were planted to
trees. Eucalypts had a larger impact than other trees when planted on grasslands,
reducing runoff by 75% compared to Pines that reduced runoff by 40%. Results
also indicated impacts on low flows and that impacts may be more severe in drier
regions. Their results indicated that in regions where runoff is less than 10% of
the MAR (mean annual rainfall), tree plantations would result in a complete loss of
28
Page29
runoff, and that where natural runoff is 30% of the precipitation, it will be reduced
by at least half after the trees are planted. The authors concluded that where
plantations could cause or intensify water shortages, that this factor should be
explicitly addressed when considering carbon sequestration programs.
Indeed many environmental organisations complain that carbon sequestration
programmes often result in people from developing countries “paying twice” for
climate change – firstly, with the climate change itself, and secondly with the often
devastating impacts that are associated with so-called development projects such
as plantations and large dams.
According to Philip Owen (EcoDoc Africa, 2009) grasslands can absorb more
carbon from the atmosphere than timber plantations, as much of the carbon is
taken underground by organisms such as termites, resulting in the build up of a
carbon reserve underground. Professor Braam van Wyk (Carte Blanche, 2007)
stated that grasslands capture “vast amounts of carbon, and that carbon is taken
underground by organisms, like termites for example, that incorporate the plant
material as part of the humus in the soil, and grassland soils are particularly rich in
humus and therefore stored reserves of carbon." Further, a United Nations
Project, based on work in Mexico, Thailand and Kenya, shows that grasslands
account for more than a quarter of land-based carbon turnover.
This claim has been supported by other researchers. A recent report prepared for
the Department of Environment Affairs, (Taviv et al, 2007) states: “permanent
grasslands used as pastures,
rangelands, and hayfields can
maintain large soil carbon stocks
due to several characteristics -
perennial grasses allocate a high
proportion of photosynthetically
fixed carbon below ground,
maintain plant cover year-round,
and promote the formation of
stable soil aggregates. Grassland
systems that have been degraded in the past or maintained under sub-optimal
management conditions are most conducive to sequestering additional carbon with
improved land management”.
Converting cultivated cropland to grassland typically increases soil carbon at rates
of 0.3 to 1.0 t/ha/a for a period of a few decades. Cultivated organic soils
represent another land restoration opportunity. These lands are a significant
source of agricultural CO2 emissions, with high rates of up to 10 to 20 t/ha/a of
carbon (Ogle in Taviv et al. 2007). Practices such as no-tillage and increasing the
29
Page30
carbon load in the soil may also contribute significantly to sequestration potential,
and if implemented correctly can increase the water retaining potential of the soils
by up 800% (EcoDoc Africa, 2010).
The carbon sequestration programmes in South Africa should look more at how to
improve carbon retention in agricultural soils, and to illustrate this point Francis
Yeatman (EcoDoc Africa, 2010) showed soils where the organic matter had been
increased tenfold from 0.3% to 3%. He said: “one of the things we are finding is
that as you start increasing organic matter and carbon in the soil you improve soil
structure and the sponge like effect of the organic matter retains moisture for so
much longer and you can get an 800% increase in moisture holding capacity of
soil which reduces the amount of irrigation required”. Increased organic matter
results in a more viable soil with more air spaces and each particle in the soil can
be lined with moisture which results in the moisture moving more slowly through
the soil so you end up with both moisture in the soil and good drainage, and much
less need for added water.
Timber Plantations and payment for water
In a pamphlet titled "Foresters understanding what you pay for" the Department
of Water Affairs explained that timber plantations had been declared as a stream
flow reduction activity (SFRA) in terms of the National Water Act 1998, and that
this refers to any dryland practice which reduces the yield of water from that land
(compared to leaving that land in an undisturbed condition) to downstream users.
The pamphlet further states "Industrial forestry is concentrated on 10% of
the land area that produces 60% of this country's water resources.
Industrial plantations represent, to all intents and purposes, a permanent change
of land use from relatively low water use veld or pasture, to a higher water use
crop. This higher water use (= runoff reduction) therefore demands a proper
30
Page31
control in a water scarce country." Declared activities
that reduce stream flow would be charged a water
resource management charge which varied across the
different water management areas. In the 2002/03
financial year that the new water resource management
charge was introduced, plantation owners would pay
between 0.2 and 1 cent per cubic metre. Included in the
pamphlet are the average prices for three water use
sectors with the average water price for domestic and
irrigated being R1.55, for industrial agriculture R0.48 and
timber plantations being the lowest at 0.32c per cubic
metre.
In a speech, Minister Sonjica chided the forestry industry
for its opposition to paying water charges and called on
them to join in a review of the pricing strategy to achieve
a consensus approach. She commented: “Water users
must contribute to the costs of secure water access. So I
was concerned that a representative of Forestry South Africa should tell Parliament
that they may refuse to pay the water resource management charges, which are
essential for the Catchment Management Agencies‟ (CMA) success. …When state
forestry was restructured, we agreed to “cap” the water charge for forestry at R10
per hectare. This amounts to only R15 million for all plantation forests in the
country. Since the turnover of the industry is over R20 billion and the profits of
just one company‟s local division were over R300 million, we do not believe that
this is excessive”.
In his article Tewari (2005) researched the questions of whether commercial
(industrial) forestry (timber plantations) in South Africa should pay for water. He
went through a complicated analysis of timber use and water value and came to
the conclusion that the value of the water is very significant (an amount of
approximately R3.6 billion), and that it accounts for 30% of the R12 billion
revenue of the timber industry being attributable to water alone. The results of his
study indicated that actual water values are much higher than the water
management charge levied on industrial plantations, confirming therefore that
large subsidies are being received by the industry. Tewari believes that since large
subsidies are being transferred to the industry that this makes its value
questionable, and he concludes with the question of whether South Africa should
have more commercial (industrial) plantations or significantly convert
them to grasslands, given that water is such a limiting factor in South Africa.
31
Page32
The pulp and paper industry
Environmental pressure group GeaSphere (2009) has been calling for a halt to the
expansion of the industrial timber plantation model in southern Africa, citing the
exorbitant water use of the timber species as a primary concern. The impacts on
water resources which also evident at the mills where the timber is processed to
pulp and paper, is also a major issue. At least 6kl of water is used to produce one
ton of pulp at the Ngodwana mill, and effluent from the various mills around
southern Africa further pollute rivers, estuaries and the ocean.
During low rainfall periods these pollution impacts become particularly severe, as
the dilution capacity of the rivers is reduced leading to higher levels of chloride
and other chemicals in the system. In the past, accidents at the largest pulp mill in
Southern Africa (Sappi Ngodwana) have resulted in acute poisoning of the river
with dramatic consequences for aquatic life.
Owen asks the question: “If one considers the cumulative impacts that industrial
timber plantations exert on Southern Africa's scarce water resources, it is clear
that this 'export orientated' production model should not be promoted, as the long
term costs far outweigh any short term financial benefits”.
Additionally, paper is one of the resources that is used very wastefully especially
by developed countries, and the campaign called “shrink” is aiming to “stop the
madness of paper over-consumption” (Lang, 2008). In his article he describes a
book called Paper Trails: From Trees to Trash – The True Cost of Paper written by
Mandy Haggith who travelled by train and boat from her home in Scotland to
Sumatra, Indonesia, to do her research. She stated: “I was horrified by how
destructive our paper footprint is,” she says. “I met Indonesian villagers fighting a
land-claim with a paper company that is growing acacia on their community land
to make copy paper for sale in European and North American markets. I asked
them what I could do to help their fight, and they told me to ask people in Europe
to use less copy paper. To show real solidarity with people struggling with
multinational extractive industries, it is not enough for us to shift our consumption
32
Page33
from one brand to some other, hopefully slightly less obnoxious, brand. That only
displaces the problem. Consuming differently is not good enough, we need to
consume less AND differently.”
According to Lang (2007) the pulp and paper industry is the main driver of the
expansion of plantations and consumes over two-thirds of the timber from South
Africa's plantations. He described the two main companies that dominate the pulp
and paper industry in South Africa
which are Sappi and Mondi.
According to Lang, Sappi (formerly
South African Pulp and Paper
Industries Ltd) was registered in
1936 and today owns 465,000
hectares of plantations in South
Africa and 75,000 hectares in
Swaziland. Worldwide, the
company manufactures 5 million
tonnes of paper and 3 million
tonnes of pulp a year. In South
Africa, Sappi is currently expanding its Saiccor dissolving pulp mill‟s capacity by
more than 200,000 tonnes a year. The company also plans to expand pulp
production at its Ngodwana mill by 225,000 tonnes a year. The company is
planning to convert the plantations feeding its mill from pine to eucalyptus. Mondi,
formed in 1967 by Anglo American, one of the world's largest mining companies,
manages 430,000 hectares of plantations. Today Mondi has 35,000 employees in
35 countries. In early 2007, Anglo American announced that it would demerge the
company and Mondi would become independent. Mondi, with its head office in
Austria, has a paper mill in Durban and a wood chip mill and pulp mills at Richards
Bay and Felixton.
Thus according to Owen, these companies are multi-national companies in the true
sense of the world, and the real beneficiaries of their operations are their
international shareholders.
Paper and paperboard consumption increased from over 77 million tons in 1961 to
350 million tons in 2005 representing a five-fold increase (World Resources
Institute Website) with the USA using over 88 million tons in 2005 compared to
South Africa using 3.3 million tons in 2005 (leaving 1.4 million tons for the rest of
sub-Saharan Africa. South Africa had a per capita use of 69 tons per annum in
2005 and USA 297 tons per capita in the same year. Clearly this is excessive.
Recycling figures for paper for South Africa also indicate that there is some room
for improvement with 44% of recyclable paper being recycled (Enviroserve
33
Page34
website), as each ton of paper recycled results in 17 less trees being used and
3m3 of landfill sites saved and there is a reduction of coal based emissions of 1 ton
of CO2 and electricity based emissions of 1.8 tons of CO2 (Paper Recycling
Association of South Africa, www.prase.co.za). This last statistics whilst being
favourable towards recycling actually gives testimony to just how bad it is to waste
paper.
Conclusion
The intention of this article is to share with you some of the issues around just
how thirsty alien trees are and to try and give you an idea of how vast the
plantations are in terms of land area, and the size of the problem with respect to
the shortage of available water that this generation is facing – where we will go
from a possible slight surplus to a deficit within the next decade. This means that
in ten years time (if not now) each new water allocation means that water has to
be taken from someone who already uses it. This has impacts on all of our lives –
affecting what we eat, what we drink, where we can live, etc., and compounding
this scenario is the huge and terrifying unknown of climate change.
Our world has therefore become a scary place to live in, huge disasters seem to be
happening more frequently and the economic system based on resource
exploitation is failing. Scientists are clearly saying that climate change has arrived,
and civil society is clearly saying that our political leaders seem unable or are
disinterested in reaching a global consensus on the part that all must play to
enable future generations to have an Earth where the climate is no more than 2%
hotter than the Earth that we inherited. The quote at the beginning of the article
references “the fear to bring children into this world”, and for me, this fear is real,
and we need to ask ourselves “what kind of future can we offer our children in a
world that seems to be committing suicide.”
34
Page35
It seems that most if not all our steps towards destroying ecosystems are steps in
the direction of disaster, and that our steps towards maintaining and restoring the
natural world are steps towards the definition of sustainability, where future
generations are central, and issues around resource use should be promoting
sufficiency rather than luxury. The scientists say that we need to adapt to climate
change, as we no longer have the luxury of time to focus only on mitigation. Some
say that timber plantations are part of that adaptation whilst this paper has argued
that the costs specifically in terms of water use and biodiversity are too great and
that timber plantations should not be expanded further, and indeed where
possible, removed, and that other forms of carbon sequestration, such as
increasing organic soil concentrations and promoting grassland health, are
preferable.
The statement by Daly (quoted by Blignaut, 2005) has resonance with this world
view, that more and more the limiting factor “is remaining natural capital, not
manmade capital as it used to be. For example, populations of fish, not fishing
boats, limit fish catch world wide” therefore the economic logic says to invest in
the limiting factor, to invest in leaving nature in the best condition possible, and
this includes our grasslands which is the most
under-protected biome in our country.
Our efforts to conserve natural capital will be what
your grandchildren (not mine as I will not have
any) will thank you for, not the resources that we
take from the earth and use before their time.
We can imagine the prairies in North America that
were once full of buffalo and the migrations of
springbok followed by predatory lions that took
days to pass in southern Africa, but future
generations will try to imagine the land that was
once full of prairie or grasslands, that were
converted into timber, into mines, into shopping
malls, into suburbs, into dams and into agriculture
land, and like the Archivist from “The age of
Stupid” they will ask: “Why?”
35
Page36
References:
All references cited are available on the internet, including the GeaSphere and
EcoDoc Africa Documentaries.
Blignaut, J. and Van Heerden, J. 2008 and 2009. (Two versions). Is Water
Shedding Next? University of Pretoria. Working Paper No 141.
Blignaut, J. and Van Heerden, J. 2009. The impact of water scarcity on economic
development initiatives. Water SA Vol 35 No 4 July 2009.
Blignaut, J. 2006. Ecological Restoration: Catalyst for Economic Development.
VryeAfrikaan, Vol. 3(6). 21 April 2006. www.vryeafrikaan.co.za/lees.php?id=540
Blignaut, J. Macro Perspectives on water supply and demand: the implications of
the 6% economic growth rate. Powerpoint Presentation.
Bond, P. 2009. Achieving Environmental Targets: Who Wins and Loses in Carbon
Trading for Emissions Mitigation? Presentation to the Carbon Trading Africa
Conference Climate and African food.
Carte Blanche. 2007. Sudwala Caves drying up due to timber plantations
Documentary. (7 October 2007).
Chapman, R.A. CSIR 2006. Forests and Water – An Overview of Forest Hydrology.
Chapman, RA CSIR. The Jonkershoek Research Catchments.
Chapman, R.A. 2008. Long-term hydrological monitoring at Jonkershoek aids
climate change studies. CSIR
www.saeon.ac.za/eNewsletter/Online/2008/september/doc02
Cullis, J, Görgens, A. and Marais, C. (2007). A strategic study of the impact of
invasive alien plants in the high rainfall catchments and riparian zones of South
Africa on total surface water yield. Water SA 33(1) 35-42. www.wrc.org.za
Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). 2009. State of
Environment Report.
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2000. Water Conservation and
Demand Management Strategy for the Forest Sector in South Africa.
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2004 Media Release. Minister
Sonjica firm on forestry water charges. 17 June 2004
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2002. Foresters understand
what you pay for. Water Resource Management Charges Pamphlet.
36
Page37
EcoDoc Africa. (2009) GeaSphere Earth Matters Documentary on Timber
Plantations www.myvideo.co.za/video/Geasphere-earth-matters-part-one and
www.myvideo.co.za/video/Geasphere-earth-matters-part-two
EcoDoc Africa 2010. A morning with Francis Yeatman: Soil Health and Ecologically
Sustainable Farming Documentary (in process).
EcoDoc Africa Documentary. 2010. Interview with Arthur Chapman at Jonkershoek
Farley, K. Jobbagy, E and Jackson, R (2006). Effects of Afforestation on water
yield: a global synthesis with implications for policy. Global Change Biology (2005)
11, 1-12
Geasphere 2009. Pulping the Future Documentary. See www.geasphere.co.za and
www.YouTube.com
GeaSphere 2009. A Critical Look at the Industrial Timber Plantation Industry.
Godsmark, R. August 2007. The impact of the 2007 Plantation Fires on the SA
Forestry and Forest Products Industry. Forestry South Africa
Görgens and van Wilgen (2004) Invasive alien plants and water resources in
South Africa: Current understanding, predictive ability and research challenges.
South African Journal of Science Vol. 100 27-33.
Gumenge, P. 19 January 2010. Eastern Cape reels - drought persists,
(www.grocotts.co.za/content/eastern-cape-reels-drought-persists-19-01-2010)
Gush, M. 2006. Modelling streamflow reductions resulting from commercial
afforestation in South Africa: From research to application. CSIR.
Hennop, J. 2009. Eastern Cape declared drought disaster area! Dispatch Online.
Jackson, R., Jobbagy, E, Avissar, R., Roy, S., Barrett, D., Cook, C., Farley, K., le
Maitre, D., McCarl, B., and Murray, B. 2005. Trading water for carbon with
biological carbon sequestration. Science. Vol. 310.
Jacobson, M. 2003. Water Policy and Pricing Timber Plantations in South Africa:
Implications for Sustainable Forestry http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ARTICLE/WFC/XII/0308-
C1.HTM
Jarmain, C., Everson, C., Gush, M. and Clulow. A. 2009. The quantification of
green water in South Africa: Advances to support integrated water resources
management. CSIR.
Karumbidza, J. 2005. A Study of the Social and Economic Impacts of Industrial
Tree Plantations in the KwaZulu-Natal Province of South Africa
Lang, C. 2008. Argentina: Scientists confirm that plantations dry up streams and
salinise groundwater. WRM Bulletin no. 128, March 2008.
37
Page38
Lang, C. (2008) Shrink: A new campaign to stop the madness of paper overconsumption.
WRM Bulletin 131, June 2008.
Lang, C. 2007. Pulpmill Water Website. Page on South Africa.
Department of Water Affairs. National Water Resources Strategy (NWRS) First
Edition. 2004.
Owen, P. (2008) Fire and the Grassland. GeaSphere Website.
www.geasphere.co.za
SABC News 3 February 2009. Eastern Cape declares disaster areas owing to
drought.
SANCOLD News May, 2009.
Scott, D. and Lesch,W. 1997. Streamflow responses to afforestation with
Eucalyptus grandis and Pinus patula and to felling in the Mokobulaan experimental
catchments, South Africa. Journal of Hydrology 199 (1997) 360-377
Scott, D and Smith R. 1997. Preliminary empirical models to predict reductions in
total and low flows resulting from afforestation. Water SA 23 (2)
Scott, D and Le Maitre, D. 1998. Interaction between vegetation and groundwater.
Water Research Commission Report, No 730-1-98.
Scott, D. Le Maitre, D and Fairbanks, D. 1998. Forestry and streamflow reductions
in South Africa: A reference system for assessing extent and distribution 1998
Water SA 24 (3)
Smith, R. 1991. Effects of clearfelling pines on water yield in a small Eastern
Transvaal catchment, South Africa. CSIR. Water SA Vol 17 (3)
Statistics South Africa. Discussion Document D0405.1 March 2009. Water Accounts
in South Africa: 2000
Taviv, R., Van der Merwe, M., Scholes, B and Collet, G. (2007) Non-energy
Emissions Agriculture, Forestry and Waste: An input into the Long Term Mitigation
Scenarios process. Prepared for Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism
South Africa (Council for Scientific and Industrial Research)
Tewari, DD. (2005) Should commercial forestry in South Africa pay for water?
Valuing water and its contribution to the industry. Water SA Vol 31 (3) 2005 p 319
- 326
UNEP AMCOW WRC 2008. Freshwater under Threat Vulnerability Assessment of
Freshwater Resources to Environmental Change Africa
38
Page39
Van der Schyff, H and Schoonraad, E. 1971. The Flora of Mariepskop. Bothali 10
(3) 461 - 500
Vidal, J. 2010. Food, Water driving 21 st Century Land Grab. The Observer Online. 7
March 2010.
Water Research Commission (2009) Press Release: Study reveals less water than
previously estimated.
Water Security: International problem - acute in South Africa. 2010.
(www.servicepublication.co.za/index.php/magazine/environment/204-watersecurity)
Whitmore, J. 1972. An estimation of the possible effects of land management
practices on run-off from the Catchment Control Areas in the Natal Midlands.
Technical Note Number 26. Department of Water Affairs Hydrological Research
Division
Working for Fire Website www.workingonfire.org/
World Resources Institute. 2006. South Africa Country Study
http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/forests-grasslands-drylands/country-profile-
165.html
39