The Plight of the Poort
This little stream will probably receive dozens of tons of silt in the next 3 months if nothing is done……
This mini project is not yet funded. It is just a few weeks before we can expect some heavy rain, and we would like nothing better than to be able to get into this valley and get some eco-logs in place.
Take a look at this short video. If the initiative grabs you, and you would like to contribute to making it happen, drop us a message on the “Contact us” page…….
Replacing Indigenous Forest Patches in the Riparian Zone of the Upper uMngeni River
Re-establishing indigenous forest patches
“The promotion of indigenous deciduous trees for rehabilitation of clearing programmes may be important as there would be no transpiration during periods when water resources are limited”
“The total accumulated sap flow per year for the three individual A. mearnsii and E. grandis trees was 6548 and 7405 La respectively. In contrast, the indigenous species averaged 2934L a, clearly demonstrating the higher water use of the introduced species”
The above statements are just two statements extracted from the publication mentioned above. While one has to be careful not to extract just the information that proves a pre-conceived notion, having read the paper, I think these take-outs are a fair representation of the whole, albeit overly summarised. The paper displays graphs in which is demonstrated how the alien (evergreen) species have a continual high water demand during the year, whereas the deciduous indigenous species, with their winter dormancy, show a very low water demand in the dry winter months. The dry winter months are those in which the river experiences its lowest, or ‘base’ flows, and is also the time of highest irrigation demand along the river.
This additional seasonal understanding of matters goes a long way to fully comprehend the extent of the demonstrated hydrological benefits outlined in the report. This also serves in justifying the expense and difficulty of removing alien invasive species in catchments generally, but more particularly along immediate riparian zones. The applicability of this report to the projects of Upland River Conservation is leveraged even further by the fact that this two year study was done in the heart of our Upper uMngeni Super Catchment project area, on New Forest Farm.
Before having been alerted to this study, we had identified seven small areas where alien invasive species have been removed, and where we hope to establish small indigenous forest patches. There are no doubt other suitable sites as well, but these are the first seven that have been mapped.
This was prompted by the notion that having removed the tree canopy from the river banks, we may have caused a sudden warming. While the river banks were largely unshaded a hundred years ago the more recent slow ingress of the alien canopy may have mitigated slight global warming. With the sudden removal we may have caused the environment to “catch up” on that warming in a short space of time. This has made us mindful of re-establishing tall woody river bank vegetation to achieve a natural level of shading. This shading would comprise mainly tall grassland and some Nchishi , but in at least in some places it means re-forestation with indigenous species.
The sites have been carefully chosen based on observation of where forest patches do occur, and where they might have occurred before the severe alien wattle infestation, which might have displaced them. In several cases, lone indigenous trees were found left standing after the wattle had been felled. In all cases the sites are steep, south-facing slopes along the river or tributary course. These areas are cool, and remain moist enough that they tend not to burn in winter.
In fact, money has already been raised to re-establish one of the seven envisaged forest patches.
With advise from a local indigenous tree nursery, and armed with a species list from another scientific study in the same forest, we plan to first establish the forest precursor shrubs. Once these get going, they are likely to form a frost- free micro-climate and canopy in which the trees themselves have a better chance of surviving the critical first few years. Once that is achieved, we plan to plant the trees themselves. These will of course include evergreen indigenous species, in the interests of maintaining the natural biodiverse mix, so the hydrological benefits may not be as stark as those reported in our opening quotes. The initiative does however represent a return to what conditions may have been before the invasion of alien trees.
In the interim, erosion control and re-grassing has been a priority for the bulk of the cleared river bank areas. Much has been achieved, but there remains a lot to do, especially along the banks of the Furth stream. Re-grassing efforts, and any required erosion control will continue parallel to our reforestation ambitions. We are currently exploring innovative funding solutions for each of the remaining six sites.
We certainly believe that the distinct and easily identifiable outcome of a forest patch, visible on Google Earth from anywhere in the world, might have appeal to funders who would like to be able to see the fruits of their contribution. Added to that, these small forest patches are between 800 and 5000 square metres only, and are therefore not expensive to create.
The tipping point
Exploring what turns an unrealistic environmental dream into a financially viable project, ready for execution on the ground.
At a recent meeting of sugar cane industry players, we learnt how bio-control can be an effective and very cost effective strategy to counter eldana worm. It also became apparent, however, that to convert to biological methods, one has to stop the traditional chemical solution, and then wait until the population of “good bugs” recovers from all the years of spraying, before they can be effective.
It’s that “wait” that’s the problem!
During the wait, the pests could wipe out a crop, or diminish income to the point where the farmer won’t survive the change-over. What businessman would take that risk!
This seems to be a common thread. There is a cost or a risk to converting to more environmentally friendly practices that simply isn’t worth it to the individual farmer, or community who would have to bear that cost or risk.
But what if the beneficiaries of the environmental gains, were to partially back the farmer, or share the risk, in return for the gain that they (and often the farmer) are after?
Let me give you a practical example of a beef farmer on the highland sourveld of KZN. He has a veld farm, and on it he has groves of wattle trees that were there before he was born. If he felled them and converted that land back to veld, he would gain, lets say 60 ha of grazing. But the felling, erosion control, replacement of the woodlot (with one of a more desirable tree species…for storm cover for cattle) , grass planting and five to ten years of weed control, will cost him about R10,000 per hectare.
A farmer recently told me that he had done the sums, and that in the lifetime of him and his son, they will never generate enough beef farming income to cover that. Sixty hectares at R10,000 per hectare: that’s a R600,000 loan from the bank, plus interest. And what NGO would invest R600,000 on a private farm for extra water, the extent of which can’t immediately be measured? The result is that nothing gets done, and the wattle groves stay there. The farmer still wants to get rid of them, and the city below still wants more water, but a generation goes by, wattle seed keeps spreading, and nothing changes.
Maybe we need a catalyst who asks:
How much would company X invest in creating employment opportunities for its CSI score?
How much would municipality Y invest to generate more water to fill the municipal dam?
Is there a risk that can be insured?
How much would the farmer invest to get that land back into beef production?
How much would the local farm-stay put in, to be able to market their venue as part of an environmental project?
How much would the seed company put in as part of an advertisement for their grass seed?
The chances are, that if each of the entities in the above example stretched their budget, right to the brink of what they are comfortable with, and if there was a protagonist with enough passion to get them to the point where they all said “OK, let’s do this!” , that might just be the tipping point that gets the job done and changes the landscape for the better, forever.
At Upland River Conservation we are always searching for the environmental wins that will benefit a catchment (Examples: fencing off river banks, protecting springs, putting in contour belts, planting row crops further from the stream, blocking drains that dried up wet areas, managing for better veld condition……)
We are also thinking about what the costs and risks would be to achieve those wins.
Then we consider who would gain from the work, and in what ways, and how much investment might it justify from them.
We believe that society cannot expect the landowner (farmer or rural community alike) to shoulder the burden of this work. We are passionate about getting the work done. We are looking at building project concepts that reach the tipping point. Call us the passionate protagonist.