SANBI & Isimangaliso Quarter 4 Performance; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Election of acting Chairperson

Mr M Modise (ANC) was elected acting Chairperson for the meeting.

South African Biodiversity Institute Annual Report 2020/21

The South African Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) presenters were:

Ms Lorato Sithole - Chief Financial Officer (CFO)

Mr Shonisani Munzhedzi - Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

Ms Beryl Ferguson - Chairperson

Ms Carmel Mbizvo - Head of Biodiversity Science and Policy Advice

Mr Elliot Mashile – Chief Operating Officer (COO)

Dr Tsungai Zengeya – Researcher

Dr John Wilson - Researcher

Dr Theressa Frantz - Researcher.

 

Presenting their fourth quarter performance report, SANBI said their annual performance of SANBI was scored under four programmes:

• The National Botanical and Zoological Gardens (NBG & NZG);
• Biodiversity, Science and Policy Advice;
• Human Capital Development and Transformation:
• Administration.

The overall performance during the quarter was 89%.  SANBI had met its targets on two programmes -- Administration, and Human Capital, Development and Transformation. Only 1 951 beneficiaries out of the set annual target of 8 000 had managed to participate in the ‘Kids in Gardens’ programme in NBGs. Additionally, 2 978 of the targeted 18 000 learners were able to participate in science engagement opportunities. The low number of the beneficiaries and the learners was due to the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions, with restricted school excursions and transport leading to limited bookings at various education centres. The allocation of funds from the Presidential Employment Stimulus Programme to the NBGs and NBZ relieved some of the financial pressure on SANBI’s operations and payroll budgets.

(For more information on SANBI's 2020/21 missed targets, offsets and financial performance, please consult the attached presentation).

Status of biological invasions in South Africa

Ms Ferguson SANBI was a very special organisation, and she was proud to be part of the entity. There were very few bodies in other countries that were responsible for documenting, monitoring and advising on the management of diverse biodiversity at a national level.  Besides being known as a place with beautiful botanical gardens, zoos, and biodiversity educational programmes, SANBI also offered a large body of scientific work. The national report explained the social value and challenges of biodiversity. The report also reported on the biological species invasions and management in the country. The national report was launched this year in May.

Mr Shonisani added that alien invasive species had economic and ecological implications. SANBI was mandated to monitor and report regularly on the status of the invasive species in the country every three years. Every year they pick up on new things and different areas where they need to place emphasis, depending on the pathways and the species that were discovered. The institute also tries to understand the invasiveness of the species and their impact on the biodiversity, socio-economic and ecological implications. The species came in various forms -- plants, reptiles, birds amd amphibians (freshwater or marine).

Dr Zengeya said SANBI had been mandated to remove all the alien species, especially those listed in category A in the alien and invasive species regulations.  The biological invasions were considered as the third largest driver of biodiversity loss in South Africa, as recognised by National Biodiversity Assessment.  The national report was essential in order to:

• Conduct basic inventory and ecological research;
• Assess implications and formulate appropriate policies;
• To set goals and implement management measures in the policies;
• To monitor and evaluate the implemented strategies. The findings were used to improve management and encourage further research

(For more information on the interventions and the links to the reports, please consult the presentation).

Discussion

Mr D Bryant (DA) asked SANBI if they were investigating any potential economic opportunities that could be created by using the by-products of black wattle alien invasive species. Were they reaching out to get the members of the local community to get involved in local hacking projects? Was the house crow on the list of the invasive alien species?  He asked why the City of Cape Town (CoCT) was not included on the list of collaborations by SANBI. He assumed there must have been a lot of collaboration because he knew that the CoCT had an extensive environmental department.

Ms T Mchunu (ANC) said that the presentation highlighted the effect of black wattle on the water resources, indicating that some alien invasive species were problematic and affected the environment. How do SANBI balance utilisation versus control of alien invasive species, keeping in mind the water challenges in the country? Did SANBI conduct research on the effect of blue gum trees, which produce eucalyptus leaves, on the water resources?

Ms C Phillips (DA) said she was aware that the reeds taking over the water resources were not classified as alien invasive species. She asked SANBI if they had any plans to remove the reeds from waterways across the country. Had any research been done on the impact of reeds on water resources?

Ms A Weber (DA) said she agreed with Mr Bryant regarding the economic utilisation of the black wattle.  There was a biological agent called dasineura rubiformis that sterilises the black wattle to prevent the germination of seeds. South African wattle growers did not want to allow the introduction of this biological agent in some areas. Could this biological agent not be used outside areas permitted for firewood and other economic uses, to curb the spread of invasion?

Had SANBI worked with the Centre for Biological Control (CBC) at Rhodes University, because they had documented the successes they had achieved throughout the country in the past five years? What were they going to do about the invasive plants in other dams across South Africa -- besides the ones in Gauteng and Northwest?

SANBI's response

Dr Wilson said that utilisation versus control of alien invasive species was an ongoing interesting and complex global debate. There had been a few studies by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) funded by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) that had looked at the utilisation of alien invasive species. The real issue that had emerged was that the trees that reduce water at the top of the mountains and catchment areas were very expensive to extract commercially.  The trees that could be easily extracted had less impact in terms of invasion. The utilisation approach for alien invasive species had never really worked out globally. Locally, most of the cleared alien invasive plants create fodder for livestock during the drought conditions at a lower density. However, these alien invasive species quickly densify, expand, and form impenetrable thickets, preventing cows from getting to waterways.

Dr Wilson said that SANBI had partnered with local organisations and hack groups had been incredibly important around the country. Local communities had been negatively affected by the house crows, and there was national strategy under development. He was not sure who was leading that in the moment, but he would revert to the Committee with further details. He added that while the invasions around the controls were controlled, SANBI also needed to develop more coordinated efforts.

He apologised for not including the CoCT, since they had partnered with a lot of municipalities around the country, and he was not sure why this was not included in the presentation.

He said that eucalyptus was a very interesting tree because of its tiny, microscopic seeds that allowed it to germinate. It was not invasive, but the problem was they had a very deep root system. For example, when it was on a hillside, it absorbed water and therefore reduced runoff. He added that there was ongoing research to look at how SANBI could find better measures to deal with reduction of water downstream due to invasive trees.

Reeds were a sign of a very healthy riverine system. The reeds contributed to flood protection. In some cases, the conversion to a clearer river might look nicer and be good for biodiversity, and help mitigate to droughts.

Dr Wilson said that SANBI and Rhodes University had partnered with the CBC through discussions about biological agents. The exciting news was that there was a new biological agent for water hyacinth that provided stability in terms of invasive species control. The regional agents worked well in the tropics, but in South Africa every year the plants grew back. The new agent was very promising and he was hopeful that it would provide some control.

He said that he would follow up to establish the root of the conflict between the utilisation of dasineura rubiformis and the wattle growers. The black wattle was highly spread and therefore it would be difficult to prevent it spreading into farming areas. Something that prevented seed production would take a long time before one could see its effects. For example, it had taken 20 years to manage acacia cyclops using biological agents.

Dr Frantz added that through ecological infrastructure for water security, SANBI was looking at the potential economic opportunities using invasive alien invasive species as biomass for charcoal, furniture and other uses, for example, to create livelihoods for local communities.

Follow up questions

Mr Bryant asked if Port Jackson willow was still considered as an invasive plant. Had the hacking efforts helped in some way to reduce the invasions? 

Ms Nonhlanhla Mkhize, Deputy Director-General (DDG): Environmental Programmes, DFFE, said that the Department had a dedicated programme that looked at the use of invasive alien species for economic benefit. The programme had had to be reviewed last year to align to the Department’s mandate of control and management of invasive alien species.  There was a limited focus now in terms of biomass delivery and use and conversion to economically viable products. They had partnered with other Departments of Human Settlements and Infrastructure SA on the use of a product called biomass insulated cement.

Dr Wilson said that the Port Jackson issue was another case where a biological agent took time to kill the trees. However, they were no longer seeing trees that were five years old or older anymore. He added that the Port Jackson willow had a massive seed bank, therefore clearing an area would lead to massive re-growth.

Isimangaliso Wetland Park Annual Report 2020/21

Prof Thandi Nzama, Chairperson of Isimangaliso Wetland Park, introduced the presenting team as Mr Sibusiso Bukhosini, CEO, and Ms Qhamukile Mntambo, CFO.

She said that despite all the challenges posed, the entity had been able to achieve its 61 targets, and had therefore scored 100 % in all its programmes. Isimangaliso had received an unqualified audit report for the 2020/21 financial year, and had worked very hard on the maintenance of the World Heritage Status of the Wetland Park, to ensure that the ecological integrity of the park was upheld. The park's management, monitoring programmes and stakeholder engagements ensured that the local communities understood the significance of biodiversity conservation. The stakeholder engagement ensured that the local communities gained a sense of ownership and subsequently became ambassadors of the park.

Prof Nzama added that the Park was attempting to reduce its reliance on government grants through the promotion of ecotourism and the implementation of its commercialisation strategies. It was at an advanced stage of taking over the tourism facility operations from Esemvelo KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Wildlife. The CEO and his team were finalising the consultation processes with employees and labour unions. She believed that once the commercial strategies were implemented, Isimangaliso would be able to financially sustain itself.

The entity was trying to strengthen its relations with the local communities through a number of skills development and youth empowerment programmes so that they could engage with the activities within the park. The entity had also strengthened its relationship with the Amakhosi and members of the traditional council through comprehensive engagements and meetings to promote transformation of the historically disadvantaged communities living adjacent to the park.

She added that Isimangaliso Wetland Park was financially healthy and was able to generate and increase the park’s revenue through grants, subsidies and administration fees. Appropriately qualified and diverse workers had been retained to deliver the entity’s mandate, encourage optimal performance and to provide a conducive environment for its employees.

Mr Bukhosini said that the during the 2020/21 financial year, the challenges faced by the entity despite the 100 % target achievements had been:

• Fiscal constraints imposed by budget cuts. Capital expenditure had had to be converted into operating expenditure for the entity to survive the financial year, considering that the park was grant funded.
• COVID-19 lockdown restrictions had impacted certain areas in terms of performance. Some targets had had to be adjusted so that they could be deliverable.
• Suspension of the academic calendar had impacted its strategic partnerships with the universities.
• There were also human resource (HR) capacity constraints due to people with living with co-morbidities.

(For more information on the financial figures, please consult the attached presentation).

Discussion

Ms Phillips congratulated the CEO and his team on turning around the relationship between the park and the people in St Lucia. The Committee was thrilled with the change in attitude from the previous to the new CEO.

She said that the cost of the administration block that the Portfolio Committee had seen in January had worked out at around R23 000 per square meter, but the average cost of the building was between R8 000 and R13 000 per square meter. When they previously responded to her parliamentary question, they had said they had had to break some of the areas down, and it was difficult to get materials. She had approached several quantity surveyors in St Lucia, and they had assured her that there was no way the cost should have been more than R13 000 per square meter. She had seen no mention of that issue in the report, and she had never received the bill of quantity she had asked for. She had been informed that although the administration block was just about at rooftop height in January, it was still not completed and there were numerous issues surrounding the contract. She asked for more information on the administration building, because no challenges had been mentioned in the presentation.

Ms Phillips said that the 43% referred to on page nine was misleading -- how could 43% be an achieved target in the fourth quarter? What kind of rehabilitation had been done on page 16?  Where had the sand been removed to?  She was concerned about the key performance indicator (KPI) of 900 on page 27. She could understand if they had underestimated by 10%, but that underestimation was horrendous.  Was the KPI set not too soft and unrealistic?  She also asked for a report on small scale fishermen, saying she was aware that there were a lot of issues there.

Mr Bryant asked for details on the unqualified audit. How would this matter be rectified going forward?

Mr Modise asked the CEO to give the Committee an update on the panel of scientists deployed at the Isimangaliso Wetland Park. Had there been any progress or challenges?  Were the scientists still there?

Isimangaliso Wetland Park's response

Mr Bukhosini thanked Ms Phillips for her encouragement regarding working with local communities. This was happening not only in St Lucia, but all the way from Maphelane to Kosi Bay. 

He said he would like to get qualified information regarding the administration block costs from the quantity surveyors. He was surprised that Ms Philips had not received any response in this regard, because he recalled the Isimangaliso team sending responses.  He believed they had provided her with sufficient and detailed information, but he would check and revert to her again on this matter. He highlighted that the administration building and many other projects had been funded about three years before his arrival, and had been adjudicated only after 2018.  Besides COVID-19, there had been several challenges regarding the price increases and outdated budgets. Given the current fiscal situation, the Isimangaliso Wetland Park team were looking at alternatives to finalise the construction of the building. It was at an advanced stage, a lot of materials were on site, and they just needed to finalise it and make sure that they had enough funds to cover the difference, which was the budget shortfall.

Mr Bukhosini said that the target on slide 9 was 25%, and the park had achieved 43%.  He asked Ms Philips to rephrase the question.

Ms Phillips asked the team why they had set a 25% target for the implementation of the skills plan when they knew they would exceed this target.  If they could get easily achieve 43% against the planned 25 % target, why were they not aiming for 100 %? She added that she was concerned that the targets at Isimangaliso Wetland Park were generally very soft.

Mr Bukhosini said he would check with the HR for guidelines, because the workplace skills plan was a compliance issue. 

He said the park had numerous wetlands, but historical practices such as forestry impacted on the full functioning of the St Lucia wetland.  The target set for wetland rehabilitation was about 2 000 cubic meters – heaps were removed and flattened on the ground in areas where there were no rivers. The heaps blocked the movement of water from one side to the other. If one visited St Lucia now, one would see that the whole area at the eastern side of the park was very wet because water was able to move from one side to the other.

Referring to the KPI of 900 -- the number of non-paying entries to the park -- he said this had been under-estimated because of the COVID-19 situation. They had had to significantly revise numerous targets because of uncertainties. They had not been too sure if the restrictions we going to ease, and the best thing was to be a little bit conservative. They had taken a decision to revise and reduce the target to 900, and this had been presented to the DFFE and Parliament.  It was still not clear even today -- things could change in the next month or so. 

He was not too sure about the question regarding the small–scale fishermen. He was currently engaging with the small-scale fishermen leaders at Kosi bay to establish the issue. It appeared to him that the issue was more historic, in the sense that they had not been consulted, engaged or involved in the decision-making processes at the park. The only issue they had was in the KwaNibela area, where a fisherman had been shot. The other issue was that fishermen in this area were still using the gill fishing method, which was not in line with the operations. He assured the Committee that the park was doing its level best to maintain a good relationship with the small-scale fishermen.

Mr Bukhosini said the unqualified audit was next to a very good audit opinion, and indicated clean administration. Few matters had been raised by the Auditor General (AG), and the park was dealing with issues regarding the historic Katanga contract that was coming to an end in the next financial year. There had been a significant progress in their financial report, as compared to the previous financial year. 

He said that the panel of scientists had been introduced to the park by the DFFE Minister, and the scope of the scientists had been clearly explained to them. They had started engaging with them and offered them certain information. They had conducted the fieldwork at the park and were planning to engage with some of the stakeholders. They had also taken them on site to witness the issues faced by the park. He had presented the data issues which had been submitted by a previously appointed scientist by the World Bank, who had not delivered on his objectives. The wetland park had presented the newly collected data to the panel of scientists. He added that the Committee would get a report on the system performance once the process was concluded. They currently had no concerns regarding their work.

Ms Phillips said that the shooting of a fisherman had been one of her concerns, and she had also been told that there were some poaching activities in the area of the shooting, where illegal fishermen thought they were legal. She was pleased the issue was being resolved, and asked to be kept updated on the daily issues faced by the fishermen. 

Concluding comments

The Chairperson thanked the presenters and people who took a keen interest in the developments of the DFFE and its entities. He welcomed the Committee Members back after their local government election campaigns.

Ms Maggie Sotyu. Deputy Minister, DFFE, congratulated the Isimangaliso Wetland Park for the work well done.

Mr Bryant said that communication during the meeting had been interrupted by load-shedding, and he asked if it was possible to make an appeal to the secretariat to urgently consider having physical meetings again. The hybrid and virtual meetings they were not always convenient, especially during load-shedding.

The Chairperson noted Mr Bryant’s concern, and said they would revert to the Committee for consideration and more recommendations on what needed to happen.

He added that he was expecting more progress and improvement from SANBI.

The meeting was adjourned.