The TMNP Tokai & Cecilia Framework - Compromise or Tokenism?
The shady truth of what will be left of our forests of Cape Town
15 January 2008
By Dr P Thompson, Nicky Schmidt & Tim Hagen
Recent reports about the “compromise” reached regarding the Draft Management Framework produced by SANParks for Tokai and Cecilia are nothing short of misleading. No compromise or agreement has been reached, numerous issues remain unresolved and what has been offered amounts to tokenism in a belated gesture aimed to appear conciliatory – following the sustained pressure of concerned groups and individuals, including several eminent academics. The reality of the situation is far different from what has commonly been reported by most members of the press and one is hard-pressed to believe that the “majority” are “delighted” with the outcome. The thousands of signatures and letters received by one group in particular would seem to indicate a contrary view.
Of the original approximately 660 hectares of shade provided by Tokai and Cecilia plantations, all (pines, most gums and other alien trees, including oaks) will eventually be removed to make way variously for fynbos restoration and what is deemed “transitional planting”. Transitional planting, the “compromise” offering, will effectively consist of small pockets of land, broken into still smaller blocks, given over to a cyclical process of fynbos restoration (eight years), followed by tree planting (20-30 years), followed by felling, followed by further fynbos restoration. Bearing in mind that it may take 15- 20 years – or more – for the trees to reach any kind of shading capacity, areas within the transitional zones will effectively be devoid of shade for periods of approximately 20 years, as first fynbos regenerates, and trees subsequently grow. While these planned transitional zones will at least provide shade some of the time, the large shaded expanses with which the public have long been familiar will cease to exist. Moreover, the public will be restricted to defined paths in these areas, and it has been indicated by a TMNP official that walkers, dogs, horses and bikes will be excluded from all areas of fynbos restoration – as is already apparent from the fenced off areas in Lower Tokai and despite paths shown on the framework maps. It is also possible that should rare or critically endangered species of fynbos be discovered, the transitional zones will be given over in totality to fynbos preservation. SANParks would argue, on the flip side, that should no fynbos regenerate, then the entire felling exercise might be proved to have been a failure. Given current botanical zeal and intervention in the form of new fynbos plantings this latter scenario seems unlikely. The former seems a more likely outcome and it is possible that, in time, the public may lose even the transition zones.
In Tokai, all the existing 400ha of pines are to be removed – a small zone of gums will apparently be left on the northern edge of the current plantation. The permanent shade that is to be planted in the existing lower plantation area will amount to a narrow band of trees approximately 50m wide which will purportedly loop around the circumference of the lower plantation, crossing Orpen Road at two points. The treed strip, which will also serve as a firebreak between the fire dependent fynbos and the urban edge, is said to total a mere 15ha and will have to accommodate horse-riders, mountain-bikers, dog-walkers and walkers - traveling in both directions. It goes without saying that the area will be congested and the opportunity for incidents, high. The existing picnic area will be removed and a new one created below Porter Estate. This area will, naturally, exclude all recreational users other than picnickers.
Located within the limited band of shade in the lower plantation are three proposed areas of transitional planting (amounting to a total of 20 ha) and large tracts exclusively reserved for the restoration and preservation of sand plain fynbos. Given the nature of the planned transitional planting (see above) there will be pockets in those areas that will provide little or no shade for periods of at least 10 – 20 years - and they are likely to be off-limits to most horse-riders, mountain-bikers and dog walkers. Once the fynbos is established – and who knows how long that may take – it is purported that the public may then walk or ride through it provided they adhere to the designated paths.
Included in TMNP’s plans for shade in the upper plantation, is the existing 35 ha Tokai Arboretum which will border a 35 ha area of “transitional planting”. It should be noted, however, that dog walkers, horse-riders and mountain bikers are forbidden in the Arboretum and presumably the same exclusions will exist in the transition zones while fynbos is recovering. It should also be noted that strict access policies exist with regard to the Arboretum - as with all other parts of the TMNP – it is, for example, closed between sunset and sunrise. It is also not confirmed whether the two magnificent stands of old growth blue gums and Giant Redwoods that grow above the Arboretum in the vicinity of the Prinskasteel River will be allowed to remain given that they a) grow along or in the vicinity of the watercourse and b) are aliens.
Of the original approximately 400 ha of shade originally available in Tokai it would appear, after careful study of TMNP maps, that only 15ha of “permanently” treed cover will be available to all members of the public, given that horse-riders, mountain-bikers and dog walkers are excluded from the Arboretum and areas of fynbos restoration (including those in the transitional zones).
In Cecilia, as in Tokai, all pines will be removed. According to TMNP maps, a band of trees will be left along the lower edge of Rhodes Drive and a narrow strip of historical trees will be left on the mountain side of the road. A small stand of gums will also be left abutting Kirstenbosch. While it is purported that of the existing 150ha of shade 35 ha will be left in Cecilia, it should be borne in mind that permanently treed areas will be limited to strips of afromontane in ravines - which are generally inaccessible to most walkers - and along a narrow pathway which starts at Constantia Nek and appears to extend to the current entrance to Cecilia on Rhodes Drive. The compromise offering of a limited belt of transitional planting is planned to extend from Constantia Nek along Rhodes Drive to Kirstenbosch. As in Tokai, TMNP indicate that this zone will be carved into small blocks providing pockets of sun and shade. The bulk of Cecilia will be given over to granite fynbos restoration (of which there is no proof of endangerment).
As with Tokai, the felling of Cecilia leaves recreational users, long used to large expanses of shade, with an extremely limited treed environment. Moreover, to assume that one can enjoy the same recreational activities in fynbos as in the plantations is to fail to take into account the significant differences - and risks - between fynbos and trees. Aside from the lack of shade, lack of visibility in a fynbos environment is a key concern; the shrubby foliage is likely to exacerbate still further incidents of crime in the Park.
TMNP management has suggested that the City provide other shaded recreational space. It should be apparent to all, however, that in a time of severe housing crisis, any politician providing land for the exclusive planting of trees will be committing political suicide. However, since the City appears to have expressed its support of the TMNP Draft Management Framework it should be challenged, housing crisis notwithstanding, and in keeping with the existing cultural landscape and heritage of the area, to promise and ensure that City land, in areas close to Tokai and Cecilia plantations, be planted for the sole purpose of creating shaded recreation to make up for what is being lost – after all, ratepayers were never consulted on the matter. This exercise should be undertaken over and above the City’s proposed plans to green the Cape Flats.
Finally and most critically, it should be borne in mind that what has been presented to the public is merely a fluid framework and TMNP seem unable or unwilling to provide the public with details or with any firm commitments that any of these proposals will be implemented. As such, the public have little or no idea what may lie in store and TMNP management are unwilling to shed any further light. This does beg the question of just how consultative the approach is. Perhaps it is revealing that in conversation, Brett Myrdal, Manager of TMNP, indicated that his intention had been to push through the original SANParks’ plans despite public concern. This would seem to indicate that while TMNP management pays lip service to public participation and consultation processes it would appear to have little real intent of taking public concerns on board. The much-publicized token and unresolved “compromise” offered – and not accepted - and would seem to bear this out.