Questions and Replies

Filter by year

19 March 2021 - NW669

Profile picture: Faber, Mr WF

Faber, Mr WF to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether (a) her department and/or (b) any entity reporting to her makes use of private security firms; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, what is the (i) name of each firm, (ii) purpose, (iii) value and (iv) duration of each specified contract?

Reply:

 

  1. Yes, the table below lists the security contracts by which the Department makes use private security firms:

(i) Name of Firm

(ii) Purpose

(iii) Contract Value

(iv) Duration Contract

SBU and SBO Protection

Services

Guarding Services to protect departmental assets

and personnel at 110 Hamilton Building Pretoria

R2 919 633.12

36 months

National Security and Fire (Port Elizabeth

Guarding Services to protect the departmental

assets and personnel at Port Alfred Office

R10, 050.00

10 months

ADT Security

Guarding Services to protect the departmental

assets and personnel at Port Elizabeth Office

R9, 132.00

36 months

(i) Name of Firm

(ii) Purpose

(iii) Contract Value

(iv) Duration of each Contract

Trident Security

Guarding services to protect the departmental assets and personnel at the Sea Point Aquarium

R187, 500.00

3 months

Royal Security

Guarding services to protect the departmental assets and personnel at Gariep ATDC offices

R272, 300.17

3 months

Bihlale Risk Protection

Guarding services to protect the departmental assets and personnel at Gariep ATDC offices

R435, 968.88

4 months

  1. Yes, the Entities (isimangaliso, SAWS, SANBI, SANParks) makes use of private security firms, and they are listed in the table below:

(i)Name of Firm

(ii)Purpose

(iii)Contract Value

(iv)Duration of Contract

ISIMANGALISO

Sizisizwe Security

To protect isimangaliso including its assets in

different parts of the Park.

R17 251488

36 months

Nkalavasi Security

To protect isimangaliso including its assets in

different parts of the Park.

R17 013 888

36 months

Let2Kuphepha

To protect isimangaliso including its assets in

different parts of the Park.

R13 809 888

36 months

SOUTH AFRICAN WEATHER SERVICES (SAWS)

(i)Name of Firm

(ii)Purpose

(iii)Contract Value

(iv)Duration

of Contract

Maemo Security

Services

Security services to protect SAWS’ assets

and personnel at the Eco-Glades Head Office in Eco Park, Centurion.

R2 219 634.28

31 months

 

Security services to protect SAWS’ assets

and personnel at the Irene Weather Office situated in the Agricultural Research Council (ARC) Campus.

R2315 351.91

36 months

 

Security services to protect SAWS' vacant

land at Part 264 of Garsfontein 374 JR (Waterkloof Heights); Pretoria.

R2 925 287.03

36 months

Fidelity ADT and

Technical

Video alarm monitoring system at Three

Rivers Air Quality Monitoring Station

R36 505.80

24 Months

       
 

24hrs Monitoring and Armed Response on Radar Sites at: East London, Mthatha, Durban, Ottosdal, Bethlehem and Polokwane.

R767 893.01

36 Months

Astron Alarms

24hrs Monitoring and Reaction for De Aar

weather Office

R4 560.00

12 Months

BAI Security

Services

24hrs Monitoring and Reaction for Calvinia

Weather Office

R2 052.00

12 Months

Suidekruis Security Services

24 Hour Monitoring and Reaction for George

Weather Of ce

R5 070.00

12 Months

RQ Alarms

24 Hour Monitoring and Reaction for

Springbok Weather Office

R3 900.00

12 Months

Highbury

Community Development Trust

MoU concluded 5* July 2006 with the

Highbury Community in Mthatha to provide security at Mthatha Radarsite

R159 313.30 for

2020/21 FY, with annual CPIX escalation.

5th July 2005

till either party terminates the MoU

SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY INSTITUTE (SANBI)

 

(i)Name of Firm

(ii)Purpose

(iii)Contract Value

(iv)Duration of Contract

G4S Secure

Solutions

Renter security services and cashier services

through alarm monitoring, access control, guarding, patrolling, armed response, cashier and customer services at Karoo Desert National Botanical Garden

R2,226,287

5 Years

Selkirk Security

Services

Security guarding, patrol duties and access

control at Kirstenbosch National Botanical Garden

R7,777,879

5 Years

Gobizazi Security

Security and cashier services at the

KwaZulu-Natal National Botanical Gardens

R3,379,059

5 Years

Selkirk Security

Company

Campus security, access control, customer

and cashier services, patrolling, alarm monitoring and response at the Pretoria National Botanical Garden

R12,707,681

5 Years

GnG Security

Services

 

Guarding services at the Walter Sisulu

National Botanical Garden

R12,038,026

5 Years

Mmaketse Project

Management Services

 

Guarding and cashier services at

Thohoyandou Botanical Garden

R2,902,395

5 Years

Afri-Guard

 

Security and cashier services which includes

guarding, access and exit control and cash

management for the Free State National

Botanical Garden

R2,444,279

5 Years

Metro Security

 

Security, access and armed response

services at the Harold Porter National Botanical

Garden

R2,528,772

5 Years

Phepha MV

Security Services

 

Guarding, cashier services and armed

response at Lowveld National Botanical Garden

R6,460 255

5 Years

ELDNA Security

Services

Guarding Services to protect SANBI’s

asserts, animals and personnel at SANBI’s

National Zoological Gardens, Pretoria.

13 448 572.36

36 months

Sun Rise Security

Guarding Services to protect SANBI’s

asserts, animals and personnel at SANBI’s

Mokopane Biodiversity Centre.

154 907,27

6 months

SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL PARKS (SANParks)

(i)Name of Firm

(ii)Purpose

(iii)Contract Value

(iv)Duration

of Contract

Tyeks Security

Services

Guarding services to protect SANParks

assets and personnel at Addo Elephant National Park

R990, 553.37

6 months

Raite Security

Services and Consulting

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Augrabies Falls National Park

R182, 413.44

4 months

Tyeks Security

Services

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Camdeboo National Park

R4, 068, 092.00

60 months

South Cape Security

Armed Response and CCTV cameras at Garden Route Scientific Services

R28, 060.00

36 months

RRA Trading CC

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Groenkloof National Park

RS, 269, 714.20

36 months

Jen Foods

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Karoo National Parks

R470, 744.44

18 months

All Sound Security

Armed Response and CCTV cameras at

Knysna Lakes

R30,728.05

36 months

Bangilizwe

Security and T. Centre

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Mountain Zebra National Parks

R336, 000.00

12 months

SmhaRSecuity

Armed Response and CCTV cameras at

Tsitsikamma National Park

R33, 200.00

4 months

Bamogale

Security Solutions

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Tsitsikamma National Park

R1, 250 334.00

36 months

Shelfplett 40

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Tsitsikamma National Parks

R382, 800.00

12 months

Darling Security

Service

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at West Coast National Parks —

Langebaan Gate and R27 Gate

R461,725.00

12 months

AR 24

Armed Response and CCTV cameras at

West Coast National Parks — Langebaan Offices and Mooimaa/r Facilities

R139, 566.00

36 months

Bamogale

Security Solutions

Guarding services to protect assets and

personnel at Wilderness National Parks

R3, 162, 000.00

5 years

M-Sec Security

Armed Response and CCTV cameras at

Wilderness National Parks

R52, 653.57

36 months

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 18/03/2021

19 March 2021 - NW644

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether any recent (a) interventions and/or (b) oversight activities have been actioned by her department in order to facilitate the safe removal of toxic mercury waste substances from the shutdown of a certain chemical factory (name and details furnished); if not, what (i) interventions and/or (ii) oversight processes will immediately be put in place in order to ensure that such substances do no further harm to the surrounding environment; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

a) b) The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) is currently in the process of facilitating the movement of the mercury containing waste materials from Cato Ridge, KwaZuIu- Natal to Switzerland where it is being treated prior to its safe disposal. Since April 2020, 1082 (one thousand and eighty-two) tonnes of this waste has been removed from the Cato Ridge site in 57 (fifty-seven) sea freight containers.

In order to ensure strict regulatory oversight during the extraction, repackaging and transporting of this material, the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, with the support of the political heads of the Department of Water and Sanitation; the Department of Labour; KwaZulu- Natal: Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs and the Ethekwini Metropolitan Municipality formed an Intergovernmental Task Team in order to ensure strict compliance with, amongst others, the following:

On site health and safety by evaluating the outcomes of the biomonitoring that is done on all the employees involved in the extraction and repackaging of this material. Furthermore, and to the extent that it relates to onsite health and safety, a detailed Environmental Monitoring Programme was designed to identify the risks associated with each aspect of the removal process;

Ensure compliance to road transport regulations; and Monitor compliance with the Basel Convention which regulates the transboundary movement of hazardous waste.

There is also further work being undertaken to build a water-related inventory which will enable the authorities to make objective findings relative to the analysis done by the land owner. This information will be used to inform the Terms of Reference for the appointment of the services of an independent specialist to provide an independent recommendation around whether further remediation work is required after the waste is removed from this property.

There is an ongoing risk of theft of this material from the property, despite the many security measures that are being implemented. These incidents are reported to the South African Police Service as and when they occur, and have been elevated to the Minister of Police in order to request additional assistance, given the inherent risks associated with this material. It is anticipated that the removal of this waste will be finalised by June 2022.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

19 March 2021 - NW643

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether she will provide a status update with regard to the Republic's signature and endorsement of the Leaders’ Pledge for Nature, recently adopted at the United Nations Summit on Biodiversity in September 2020; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of the (a) advantages and (b) disadvantages of South Africa's signature and endorsement thereof?

Reply:

 

  1. and (b)

Please draw your attention to the Department’s response to parliamentary question 2298, dated 30 October 2020. The Department’s position in this regard has not changed.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 17/03/2021

19 March 2021 - NW616

Profile picture: Paulsen, Mr N M

Paulsen, Mr N M to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Given that air quality monitoring stations (AQMS) are essential for a country like South Africa that relies heavily on fossil fuels, (a) how often does her department inspect the condition of the AQMS and (b) what measures are in place for her department to react to any adverse measurements at the AQMS?

Reply:

 

There are a total of one hundred and thirty-five (135) Air Quality Monitoring Stations (AQMS) owned by provinces, municipalities and the South African Weather Service (SAWS). While the department provides support to provinces and municipalities on AQMS operations and maintenance, the department does not own the AQMS.

  1. The conditions of AQMS are inspected in line with established standard operating procedures for AQMS operations and management. For routine services, the stations are inspected every two weeks by AQMS technicians. These inspections are guided by checklists which contain a list of activities that should be undertaken by the technicians. The checklist includes physical inspection of the AQMS environmental conditions, the general conditions of all instruments, power supply and air conditioner status, as well as detailed instrument diagnostic checks. The station inspections are documented and reported in line with standard operating procedures. During these inspections, if instruments failures are identified, the instruments are repaired onsite by technicians, where possible. Otherwise, if the technicians cannot repair the instruments because of major faults, the equipment is removed from the AQMS for further repair and maintenance.

In addition to the biweekly visits, every three months, comprehensive inspections are conducted to ensure that data collected from all instruments are credible and accurate. In these visits, the technicians undertake the general inspection and also calibrate and assess the performance of instruments. These visits are regarded as separate quarterly AQMS visits, and there are four visits per station per year.

There are also those situations when the AQMS might stop operating due to unforeseen circumstances such as power failure disruptions on instruments. In these situations, the AQMS are inspected as soon as is possible whenever an incident is identified on the South African Air Quality Information System (SAAQIS) as a disruption in data.

  1. Information from the AQMS is a major driver in air quality management decision making. When adverse measurements are observed at the AQMS, different jurisdictions have tailor-made interventions designed in air quality management plans or other strategic government programs to identify sources contributing to adverse measurements, and to implement necessary air pollution reduction measures. With the regulated air pollution sources such as industries, these interventions include enhanced compliance monitoring and enforcement through the atmospheric emission licencing command and control regime. For non-regulated pollution sources, such as veld-fires, transport, waste burning or residential fuel burning and others, air quality management interventions are designed to target those pollution sources, towards progressive realisation of air that is not harmful to the health and well-being of the public.

 

19 March 2021 - NW615

Profile picture: Paulsen, Mr N M

Paulsen, Mr N M to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Given that during the term of the 5th Parliament the forestry branch undertook to provide evidence of the value of our forests, by what date will the specified report be published?

Reply:

 

The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) calculates the fair value of biological assets on a quarterly and annual basis in terms of the Accounting Policy. The Chief Financial Officer of the DEFF discloses an input of the calculated biological asset report in the Financial Statements (interim Financial Statements and Annual Financial Statements) of the Department quarterly and annually as per the requirements of the Modified Cash Standards. The biological asset valuation report is not published, however, it is submitted to the office of the Auditor-General at the end of each financial year for auditing purposes. For the 2019/20 financial year, the value of the Biological Assets was R775,694,044.00. The Department is in a process of calculating the value for the 2020/21 year for disclosure in the Annual Financial Statements.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF, FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: .18/03/2021

19 March 2021 - NW737

Profile picture: Bryant, Mr D W

Bryant, Mr D W to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether, in light of the fact that the dumping of used tyres appears to have increased across the Republic over the past few years with a significant negative impact on the environment, particularly in parts of Durban as well as in stormwater drains in Cape Town and elsewhere, her department has undertaken any research into the correlation between the tyre levy which was instituted in 2017 and dumping of tyres that could otherwise be reused; if not, (a) why not and (b) what systems are currently in place to address the recycling of used tyres; if so, what are the relevant details;

Reply:

 

  1. No research has been undertaken into the correlation between the Tyre levy and the dumping of tyres.
    1. There has not been evidence to suggest that an in-depth study on correlation of the tyre levy and waste tyre dumping can assist with managing waste tyre environmental pollution. However, some of the funds collected from the tyre levy by the South African Revenue Service (SARS) are made available to the Waste Management Bureau through the Department of Environment, Forestry, and Fisheries for the management of waste tyres.
    2. The Waste Management Bureau supplies waste tyres to processors to facilitate the reuse, recycling and energy recovery.

The Department has appointed the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in terms of Section 29 of the National Environment Management: Waste Act, No. 59 of 2008 to prepare an Industry Waste Management Plan (IndWMP) for tyres. The IndWMP’s intention seeks to address the current challenges that are being experienced with regard to collection, storage and processing.

One of the key objectives of the IndWMP aims to support the establishment of a viable waste tyre processing sector in South Africa which will reduce the negative environmental impacts of waste tyres. The specified actions that would be undertaken as part of the implementation of the IndWMP is to ensure that the following objectives are achieved:

      1. providing surety of supply contracts to processors to support investment in the sector;
      2. supporting investment in pollution abatement technologies and equipment through

incentives on a cost sharing basis;

      1. creating pre-processing capacity at depots;
      2. free delivery of feedstock to processors including the cement and brick-making facilities;
      3. payment of a subsidy in the form of a processing fee to all waste tyre processors, including the cement and brick-making facilities and
      4. development of markets including but not limited to:
        1. Road-building;
        2. Applications in public open spaces; and
        3. Tyre-derived fuels.

At present, the tyre levy goes into the fiscus and the Waste Management Bureau gets an allocation through the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries from National Treasury. The Waste Management Bureau uses the budget that has been allocated to collect waste tyres and promote recycling.

Storage facilities in a number of areas are full. As a temporary measure while awaiting the finalisation of the Section 29 lndWMP, the department is focusing on the following for 2021/22:

  1. To expand storage on a short-term basis through engagement with cement manufacturers, provinces and municipalities.
  1. To increase the number of processing plants that want to use waste tyres for fuel or recycling purposes.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE
: 18/03/2021

19 March 2021 - NW724

Profile picture: Weber, Ms AMM

Weber, Ms AMM to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What criteria and process was followed to appoint a certain person (name and details furnished);whether she has found that the correct procedures were followed in order to fill the vacancy; if not, why not; if so, whether the position was advertised; if not, why not; if so, will she furnish Ms A M M Weber with the (a) actual advertisement of the position, (b) list of names of the applicants attending the interviews and (c) minutes of when the process was completed?

Reply:

  1. An interview process was followed in accordance with the Recruitment Policy of the South African National Parks (SANParks).
  2. I have written to the SANParks Chairperson to ascertain whether the recruitment process followed was in line with the SANParks recruitment policy.
  3. a) The position was advertised nationally, with a closing date of 2 June 2015.
    b) There were five aplicants who attended interviews: Ms B. Mabandla, Ms. T. Kunene, Mr D. Erasmus, Ms. H. Sello and Mr B. Mhlongo
  4. The formal process was duly approved on 6 October 2015, with the panel indicating that the candidate (name furnished) had received the best scores during the interview process and displayed the sufficient, knowledge, experience and competency for the position

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 18/03/2021

19 March 2021 - NW722

Profile picture: Weber, Ms AMM

Weber, Ms AMM to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

1.What criteria and process was followed to appoint a certain person (name and details furnished); 2. whether she has found that the correct procedures were followed in order to fill the vacancy; if not, why not; if so, 3.whether the position was advertised; if not, why not; if so, will she furnish Ms A M M Weber with the (a) actual advertisement of the position, (b) list of names of the applicants attending the interviews and (c) minutes of when the process was completed?

Reply:

 

  1. A recruitment and interview process was followed in accordance with the recruitment policy of the South African National Parks (SANParks).
  2. The Minister has written to the SANParks Chairperson to ascertain whether the recruitment process followed was in line with the SANParks recruitment policy.
  3. a) The position was advertised nationally, with a closing date of 18 February 2014
    b)There were four applicants who attended interviews: Mr J. De Ru, Ms S. Bokwe, Ms. M. Bokaba and Ms. V.N. Malematsa.
    c) The formal process was duly approved on 3 July 2014, with the panel indicating that the candidate (name furnished) had received the best scores during the interview process and displayed the sufficient, knowledge, experience and competency for the position

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FOSTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE:: 18/03/2021

19 March 2021 - NW713

Profile picture: Phillips, Ms C

Phillips, Ms C to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(a) What is the size of the administration building at the isimangaliso Wetland Park, including all outbuildings, garages and/or carports, (b) what is the total budgeted cost of the building and (c) what number of staff members will be accommodated in this building on a daily basis?

Reply:

(a). ISimangaliso has been using prefabricated containers as administration offices since 2004. In 2019/20, approval to build an administration block was granted and funds were allocated. Construction started on 09 January 2020 and is anticipated to be completed in August 2021.

(b). The size of the building constitutes 840 square meters of the ground floor, 600 square meters of the second floor, 120 square meters of the archives room and 75 square meters of the ablution block. There is no parking or garages at the building and parking will be in the existing carports, outside the building.

The total budgeted cost of the building is R35 000 000.

©. The building will accommodate 46 staff members of isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority.

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE
: 18/03/2021

19 March 2021 - NW712

Profile picture: Phillips, Ms C

Phillips, Ms C to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

1.What is the total number of applications in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Act2 of 2000, (PAIA), that (a) her department and (b) the entities reporting to her have received since 1 January 2015; 2.what number of the PAIA applications that were received (a) have not been replied to at all,(b) were replied to, but without answering the questions and (c) were replied to comprehensively with all the information required by the PAIA?

Reply:

The total number of applications in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Act 2 of 2000, (PAIA) received:

THE DEPARTMENT:

TOTAL PAIA APPLICATIONS RECEIVED

FINANCIAL YEAR

53

2015/2016

50

2016/2017

58

2017/2018

68

2018/2019

67

2019/2020

89

2020/2021

Find here: Entities

19 March 2021 - NW700

Profile picture: Bryant, Mr D W

Bryant, Mr D W to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What (a) was the (i) annual income of the Table Mountain National Park (TMNP) (aa) in the 2019-20 financial year and (bb) since 1 April 2020 and (ii) breakdown of each sector of income from (aa) access fees at Cape Point and Boulders Beach, (bb) the Aerial Cableway company, (cc) permits and Wild Cards, (dd) picnic sites, and/or (ee) any other specified forms of income and (b) total amount of this income is reinvested into the TMNP?

Reply:

 

(i) (aa) In the 2019/20 financial year, the Table Mountain National Park generated R371657 366 in revenue.

(bb) Since the start of the 2020/21 financial year, the Table Mountain National Park

generated R23 531114 in revenue.

(ii) The detailed breakdown of each section of income is provided on the table below:

Table 1. Table Mountain National Park Revenue streams

Question

Income Description

2019-20

2020 - 21

   

Apr 2019 Mar 2020

(12 months)

Apr 2020 – Feb 2021
(11 months)

(a)(ii)(aa)

Cape Point

R216 960 043

R 7 496 115

 

Boulders

R90 502 407

R 2498 787

(a)(ii)(bb)

Table Mountain Aerial Cableway

Concession

R39 795 627

R 5 217 361

(a)(ii)(cc)

My Green - and My Activity Card

R3 374 628

R 2 643 888

(a)(ii)(dd)

Picnic Sites

R2 757 167

R 1 251 262

(a)(ii)(ee)

Tourism Income

R7 588 972

R 2 868 400

 

Other

R10 678 522

R 1 555 301

Tourism income includes Accommodation, Recreational Permits, Trail Fees, etc.

 

Other includes the other Filming, Rent Received, etc.

   

Total Revenue

R371657 366

R 23 531 114

  1. The amount re-invested in operations for the 2019/20 financial year was R99 481 040. In the 2020/21 financial year, R74498 832 has been reinvested into operations.

Table 1. Table Mountain National Park Revenue streams

Question

2019•20

Apr 2019 - Mar 2020

Income Description

2020-21

     

(a)(ii)(aa)

Cape Point

 
 

Boulders

 

(a)(ii)(bb)

Table Mountain Aerial Cableway

Concession

R39 795 627

R 5 217 361

(a)(ii)(cc)

My Green - and My Activity Card

R3 374 628

R 2 643 888

(a)(ii)(dd)

Picnic Sites

R2 757 167

R 1 251 262

(a)(ii)(ee)

Tourism Income

R7 588 972

R 2 868 400

 

Other

R10 678 522

R 1 555 301

Tourism Income includes Accommodation, Recreational Permits, Trail

Fees, etc.

 

Other includes the other Filming, Rent

Received, etc.

   

Total Revenue

R371657 366

R23 531 114

b) The amount re-invested in operations for the 2019/20 financial year was R99 481 040. In the 2020/21 financial year, R74 498 832 has been reinvested into operations.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: .18/03/2021

26 February 2021 - NW240

Profile picture: Hendricks, Mr MGE

Hendricks, Mr MGE to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) Whether her department has investigated recent reports of artificial breaching and/or the opening of the Lake St Lucia mouth to carve an artificial link to the beach, despite concerns by several ecologists against such moves and several estuarine experts having recommended that 50 years of artificial manipulation of the mouth should be halted; if not, why not, if so, what are the relevant details; (2) whether she will investigate claims by the isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority that it was merely carting out work to restore functionality of the estuary and not to break open the mouth; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details

Reply:

(1)and (2)

The Minister has noted the widespread public interest in this matter as well as differing scientific views on the most ideal management strategy for the conservation and preservation of this significant World Heritage Site. The Minister has decided to appoint an independent scientifc panel to advise on among others:

    To assess the significance/impacf of the artificial breach and how this impact to the implementation of the Global Environment Facility GEF 5 project interventions and the St Lucia estuary management plan;

  1. To determine the exceptional circumstances, as defined in the estuarine management plan, that lead to the decision to open the mouth, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature;
  2. To establish the impact of the artificial breach on 6 January 2021 on the functioning of the Estuarine Functional Zone(EFZ), as well as the associated environmental, social and economic implications; and
  3. To develop Guidelines for the immediate and ongoing management of the system.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE
: 25/2/2021

26 February 2021 - NW80

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether, given that certain provinces are allegedly not complying with the Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) regulations, her department has conducted an audit to determine which provinces are noncompliant; if not, why not; if so, which provinces are noncompliant; What are the full relevant details of the progress of her department in standardising all environmental legislation and regulations, including bringing all provinces in line with TOPS regulations?

Reply:

Mpumalanga (MP) and the Western Cape Provinces (WC) are currently not implementing the TOPS Regulations. In the case of MP, the Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) which is the conservation management authority in Mpumalanga responsible for the function of biodiversity conservation has indicated serious capacity challenges that have impacted on the ability of the institution to implement the TOPS Regulations. In respect of the WC, Cape Nature

considers the implementation of the TOPS Regulations as an unfunded mandate, given that additional funds are not allocated to Cape Nature for the implementation function.

In 2016, the Department conducted an audit of the capacity requirements for the provincial conservation authorities to implement the revised TOPS Regulations, in particular, personnel to issue permits and conduct inspections in terms of provincial legislation, TOPS and CITES (Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species) Regulations. Capacity challenges were considered when the draft revised TOPS Regulations were finalised; e.g. the impact of provisions that could lead to unnecessary regulatory requirements. The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (the Department) has since amended the TOPS Regulations and species lists.

The revised TOPS Regulations, whilst still ensuring that conservation and regulation of species are not compromised, will be less onerous in respect of the requirements for permits, (e.g. except for a few species such as lion, rhino, leopard and elephant) a person will no longer require a permit for dead specimens. Furthermore, the movement of species between registered game farms does not require a permit.

These amendments are currently in the Parliamentary approval processes following which they will be published for implementation. Mpumalanga and Western Cape povinces have since, through MINMEC, expessed their willingness to implement the amended TOPS Regulations when published for implementation.

?he Department, working with all provinces invested considerable amount of efforts and time in addressing conflict in legislation (i.e. alignment, addressing overlaps and duplications) through the existing sectoral cooperative governance system or intergovernmental processes(Working Groups, MINTECH and MINMEC). A project in this regard is ongoing and wifi intensify once the capacité is enhanced. However, the role of bath National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. °0 of 2004) (NEMBA) and National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act No. 57 of 2003) (NEMPAA) as the principal framework legislation for protected areas, Biodiversity conservation cannot be overlooked in this regard. It must be noted that provinces are also in different stages of aligning their provincial legislation with national biodiversity legislation.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Date: 22/02/2021

26 February 2021 - NW79

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

In light of section 24 of the Constitution of the Republic, 1996, which guarantees the right to every person to an environment that is not hamful to their health or wellbeing and therefore do not subject any person to pollution or ecological degradation, what are the full relevant details of the steps that her department has taken in the Republic to ensure that the roll-out of 5G technology is not harmful to humans and the environment?

Reply:

In terms of the Bill of Rights, included in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa of 1996, everyone has a right to an environment that is protected and that is also not harmful to health or well- being. The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (the Department) has developed !egal instruments to ensure that this right is given effect to, which include, inter alia, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 (as amended) (the EIA Regulations) promulgated in terms of the National Envionmental Management Act, 1988 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA).

Although the EIA Regulations do not address health aspects directly, other impacts associated with masts and/or towers on the eceiving environment are considered, in line with the Department's

constitutional mandate. However, in developing the 3 Listing Notices of the EIA Regulations, the Department was guided by the informed views of the Department of Health (DOH), in relation to the effects of electromagnetic fields. The directorate responsible for Radiation Control in the Department of Health is, in turn, guided by the international Commission on Non-lonising Radiation Control’s (ICNIRP) guidelines insofar as it relates to the regulation of electronic products producing non-ionising electromagnetic fields (EMF), especially from the perspective of human health.

Following an engagement with the DOH, confirmation was obtained that there is no confirmed scientific evidence that points to any health hazard associated with the very low levels of exposure that the general public would typically experience in the vicinity of a cellular base station. DOH further confirmed that it is satisfied that the health of the general public is not being compromised by their exposure to the microwave emissions of cellular base stations (which includes 5G infrastructure). The DOH deems the ICNIRP guidelines to be appropriate to manage potential radiation risks and cautioned that local and other authorities, in considering the environmental impact of any particular base station, do not need to, and should not attempt, fern a public health point of view, set any restrictions with respect to parameters such as the height of the mast, distance to the mast, and duration of exposure.

Since 2 August 2010, the development of masts or towers used for telecommunication broadcasting or radio transmission purposes has been identified as an activity requiring environmental authorisation. In the case where masts or towers exceed IS metres in height, such masts or towers are placed on a site not previously used for this purpose and are to be developed within certain identified geographical areas. Should the mast or tower not meet these criteria or fall outside any one or more identified geographical areas, environmental authorisation is not required, as the potential impact of such developments are not deemed to be significant. Environmental authorisation is also not required if they are attached to existing buildings, masts or rooftops.

?he EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended), through the 3 Listing Notices, identify activities that may result in substantial negative impacts on the environment, and it requires that an environmental authorisation must be obtained prior to commencement with any such identified activities. The EIA Regulations further requires that an environmental impact assessment process is followed in respect of these identified activities and that applications are submitted to the Competent Authority for consideration and decision prior to the commencing with any of such identified activities that may result in substantial negative impacts on the environment. ?his means that an environmental impact

assessment process must be followed in respect of these identified activities, and applications must be submitted to the Competent Authority for consideration.

In line with Section 24(2)(a) of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), the Department has considered all the potential significant impacts associated with cellular masts on the receiving environment. Currently the development of masts or towers used for telecommunication broadcasting or radio transmission purposes has been identified as an activity requiring environmental authorisation, but only where such masts or towers:

exceed 15 metres in height;

are placed on a site not previously used for this purpose;

are to be developed within certain specified geographical areas; and

will not be attached to existing buildings, masts or rooftops.

Should the mast or tower not meet the above criteria, environmental authorisation is not required, as the potential impact of such developments are not deemed to be significant.

The Department, in developing the current enacted Listing Notices (Listing Notices 1, 2 and 3 of the EIA Regulations) was guided by the views of the Department of Health (amongst others) regarding the effects of electromagnetic fields.

The Department of Health, through its Directorate: Radiation Control, considers the World Heath Organisation and the International Commission on Non-lonising Radiation Control (ICNIRP) guidelines to be appropriate to manage potential radiation risks. The Department of Health has indicated that measurement surveys conducted in South Africa and elsewhere have shown that the actual levels of public exposure, as a result of base station emissions, are only a fraction of that of (he ICNIRP guidelines.

In a letter, dated 13 June 2020 (attached as Annexure A), on the health effects of cellular base stations and handsets, the Department of Health (DOH) confirms that presently them is no confirmed scientific evidence that points to any health hazard associated with the very low levels of exposure that the general public would typically experience in the vicinity of a cellular base station, DOH further confirmed it is satisfied that the health of the general public is not being compromised by their exposure to the microwave emissions of cellular base stations. It also clarified that local and other authorities, in considering the environmental impact of any particular base station, do not need to, and should not

akempt, from a public health point of view, set any restrictions with respect to parameters such as the height of the mast, distance to the mast, and duration of exposure.

Therefore, it is implicitly assumed that the normal engineering and security measures, which ae routinely implemented by cellular network providers at base stations, will effectively prevent reasonable members of the public from gaining close access to the actual antennas situated on any mast structue.

The Department may, should the DOH change its position in this regard, or if indeed requested by the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment to do so, reconsider the relevant listing of cellular masts and base stations.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND 7HE ENVIRONMENT

DATE:

26 February 2021 - NW78

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What are the full relevant details of the steps that she has taken with her counterpart in the Communications and Digital Technologies, to ensure that SG technology can be rolled out in the Republic without harming human health and/or causing environmental degradation, particularly in light of the significantly intrusive provisions regarding the installation and deployment of electronic communication networks contemplated by the proposed amendments to the Environment Conservation Act, Act 73 of 1989, and given the precautionary principle embodied in the National Environmental Management Act, Act 108 of 1998?

Reply:

Section 21 of the Electronic Communications Act, 2005 (Act No. 36 of 2005) provides that the Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies has the authority to, in consultation with the Ministers of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs; Rural Development and Land Reform; Water and Environmental Affairs [Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation]; Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment and other relevant institutions, develop a policy and policy directions for !he rapid deployment and provisioning of electronic communications facilities, following which, the Authority must prescribe regulations.

In response to the above, the then Minister of Telecommunication and Postal Services [now Communications and Digital Technologies] wrote to the then Minister of Environmental Affairs (Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment) requesting that an official from the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) be nominated to be part of an Interim Rapid Deployment Steering Committee and Co-ordination Centre (Rapid Deployment and Coordination Center). The Minister's request was acceded to, and a DEFF official was nominated. The nominated ofcial attended meetings scheduled by the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies (DCDT) wherein discussions were held with regard to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulations requirements and possible listed activities that may be triggered by the proposed Rapid Deployment of Electronic Communication Facilities. The nominated official also facilitated engagements between the DCDT and other units within the DEFF that were identified as critical to the process.

The Department also provided written comments on Government Notice No. 43537 published by the DCDT with regard to their proposed Policy and Policy Direction on Rapid Deployment of Electronic Communications Networks and Facilities. The Department remains committed to assisting and providing guidance to the DCDT as and when required.

In relation to reference to ‘the proposed amendments to the Environment Conservation Act, Act 73 of f989’, it should be noted that the Department is not considering any related amendments to the EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended) or the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 106 of 1998) which is the current legislation guiding the management of environmental impact.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 26/02/2021

06 November 2020 - NW2472

Profile picture: Lorimer, Mr JR

Lorimer, Mr JR to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(a) What are the reasons that the fisheries offices of her department are still closed and (b) on what date will they re-open?

Reply:

(a) The Fisheries Offices are closed

The Fishing Sector was identified as an essential service in the provision of food during the National Covid-19 Lockdown. Office-based fisheries staff have been working on rotation since Alert 4 of the Lockdown, but have all returned to office with the commencement of Alert Level 1.

(b) Not applicable

Regards
MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 6/11/2020

06 November 2020 - NW2487

Profile picture: Lorimer, Mr JR

Lorimer, Mr JR to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) Whether, with reference to the Fishing Rights Allocation Process 2015-16 (FRAP), the provisional allocation included a process to inspect the Deputy Director-General’s (DDG) allocations and submit comments to Whistle Blowers (Pty) Ltd, she will furnish Mr J R B Lorimer with the details of the comments submitted; if not, why not; if so, what (a) verification process was followed on the basis of the comments and (b) are the details of how the provisional allocations changed as a result of the comments; (2) whether there was an effective verification process; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (3) (a) how will the FRAP 2020-21 process differ from the process used previously, (b) what steps will be taken during the FRAP 2020-21 to ensure that there are no paper quotas to persons from non-coastal communities; and (c) what will be the role of the Fisheries DDG in the FRAP 2020-21 process?

Reply:

 

  1. The Department received over one thousand (1000) comments, with the majority (876) being submitted in the West Coast Rock Lobster Fishery. These comments are available for inspection at the premises of the Fisheries Branch.

    1. The comments were assessed and analysed by members of the Assessment Panel in each fishery.

    2. The details of how the provisional allocations changed as a result of the comments received can be determined by studying the difference between the Provisonal GPR and the Final GPR.

 

 

 

(2) and (3) a,b,c
It is common knowledge that the FRAP process 2015/16 has been the subject of lengthy litigation some of which continues to this day.

In our view one of the reasons for this was the decision to centralise decision-making in the hands of the Deputy Director-General of the Fisheries Branch, who was subsequently dismissed, by the then Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

In an effort to ensure a fair, transparent and accountable process of FRAP 2020/21 the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries is doing the following:

appointing a number of Delegated Authorities, rather than just one;
augmenting the capacity of the Department via the appointment of external service providers to assist with the various phases of the FRAP process; appointing a Process Observer/Auditing Firm to oversee and audit the process;
the appointment of an independent Legal Team to advise and ensure a legally defensible process;
developing an online application process in order to reduce data-capturing errors.

 


MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT DATE: 05 NOVEMBER 2020

 

06 November 2020 - NW2484

Profile picture: Lorimer, Mr JR

Lorimer, Mr JR to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) (a) What are the reasons that parts of the fishing industry which were given exemption from permits until September have been unable to get their permits renewed and (b)(i) why has the online system been down and (ii) on what date is it envisaged to operate again; (2) Whether she has been informed that the lack of permits has stopped he catching, import and export of fish; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what is she doing to remedy the situation and (b) by what date will the situation be remedied?

Reply:

(1) (a) Despite being given a one and half months notice B apply for new permits, the majority of the industry operators submitted their applications for new permits on the eve of the expiration of the exemption given to them until the end of Alert Level 2 of the National Covid-19 Pandemic Lockdown. Furthermore, a number of fishing seasons also commence in the 9ummer months and right holders are therefore applying for new permits which have ‹exulted in the current backlog. The Department is currently working on clearing a backlog of Permit Applications that have been submitted by the industry.

(b) (i) The Electronic Application System is not down, it is currently operational. The Department is experiencing a slight backlog in processing permits for the reasons explained above.

(ii) The Electronic Application System is currently operational.

  1. A large number of applications that have been submitted to the Department do not meet the minimum application requirements, and have been returned to applicants for resubmission with full and up-to-date documentation æ that the applications can be processed. This causes delays in the Department being able B issue new permits. The Department has also received a large number of new applications since the start of Alert Level 1 Lockdown and is working to clear the backlog.
  2. The Department has engaged with Industry Associations as well as individual applicants to prioritise the processing and issuing of the outstanding permits and licences that meet the requirements and have been submitted to the Department timeously. Staff in the relevant permitting sections will also be working overtime to assist in clearing the backlog.
  3. It is envisaged that the existing backlog should be cleared by mid November 2020.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Date: 6/11/2020

06 November 2020 - NW2406

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) In view of a recent letter, dated 9 October 2020, and signed by more than 350 scientists and conservationists from 40 countries, which calls for global action to protect whales, dolphins and porpoises from extinction and specifically calls on countries like South Africa where there are whales, to take precautionary measures to ensure that these species are being protected from human activities, and to work with regional fishing bodies to ensure that overfishing does not impact whales, what precautionary measures does her department intend b take to ensure(a) the long-term survival of whales and (b) that whales have sufficient access to food during their migration to their breeding grounds; (2) how will her department work together with local fishing authorities to ensure that (a) there is a framework for sustainability and (b) the specified policy framework is adhered to?

Reply:

(a) Whales are fully protected in South African waters. Legal instruments are in place to ensure the long-term survival of whales, including the following:

The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004). In the Threatened or Protected Marine Species Regulations, whales are listed as a threatened or protected species. In terms of these regulations, certain aMvitl99 are prohibited, such as hunting, catching, killing, capturing, importing or exporting of a listed species. Human activities around whales are also regulated.


The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Amendment Act, 2014 (Act No. 21 of 2014) which enables the establishment of marine protected areas to provide sanctuaries for all marine species.

South Africa is also a signatory or party to various international treaties that promote the protection of whales, including Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources(CCMALR) and the International Whaling Commission.

These legal instrument provide optimum conditions for all whale species to recover from past unsustainable whaling practices. In addition, South African re9earcheo play a leading role in international science forums aimed at determining the food requirements of top predators such as whales and setting measures to ensure adequate access to their prey.

(b) Whales eat a variety of prey within South African marine waters and at traditional feeding grounds in the Southern Ocean. In general, whales feed in the polar waters and breed in warmer waters. Feeding time is therefore typically spent away from South Africa in Antarctic and sub-Antarctic waters. The Southern Ocean is managed by agreement, including the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). South Africa is an active member and contributes to deliberations on conservation of the Southern Ocean.

  1. (a) The South African policy and legal framework protects all whale species. The Department plays a meaningful role in International Conventions and Regional Fisheries Management Organisations to ensure that all fisheries are sustainable and that the environment is protected.

(b) The existing policy and legal framework to protect whales is currently being implemented and compliance and enforcement initiatives are in place to aid protection of our marine species.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 6/11/2020

06 November 2020 - NW2457

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) With reference to her reply to question 1995 on 11 September 2020 in relation to the setting of the 2020 trophy hunting quota of 50 elephant, what are the scientific reasons and/or scientific evidence to support the trophy hunting quota of 50 elephant; (2) whether she, when approving the quota, considered the scientific data that shows that removing older male elephant, parlicula8y through trophy hunting has a disastrous impact on the species as a whole; if not, why not; if so, (a) how and (b) on what basis is the 2020 quota of 50 elephants allocated for each province; (3) what (a) is the 2020 elephant trophy hunting quota for each province and (b) are the 9cientific masons and/or scientific evidence for the specific provinces b be allocated with an elephant hunting quota?

Reply:

(1)  The 2020 trophy hunting quota for elephants was set at 106 elephants. However, on average only 50 bulls are hunted annually. Globally, elephant as listed on the IUCN Red List as "Vulnerable“. In South Attica, the species is listed on the regional Red List as “Least Concern"

The national elephant population for South Africa is increasing, and estimated at approximately 30,000 individuals, of which an estimated 24,000 individuals occur within national and provincial reserves collectively, in seven of the nine provinces of South Africa.

The elephant population of South Africa is well managed and activities related to elephants are regulated through the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act 10 of 2004 (NEMBA), specifically the Threatened or Protected Species Regulations (TOPS Regulations), the National Norms and Standards for the Management of Elephants in South Africa (Government Gazette no. 30833), and respective provincial conservation legislation. In addition, local protocols managing elephant trophy hunting, taking into consideration the role of mature bulls, are in place in many areas were t trophy hunting of elephants take place in South Africa. South Africa has an annual national Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) trophy hunting quota of 150 elephants (300 tusks). In managing this quota, provinces are required to conduct calculations of their annual provincial level off-takes. These provincial off-takes are then collated to provide for a national quota.

On a provincial level, the quota is calculated by estimating the total elephant population within the province, multiplied by 19› to obtain the off-take quota for the specific province. Trophy hunting of elephants within South Africa is limited and the allocated annual quota is often not fully utilised. Therefore, trophy hunting is considered as having a negligible impact on elephant populations in South Africa. The 1% trophy hunting off-take is much lower than the average growth rate of the national elephant population.

(2) The study by Elephants for Africa and the University of Exeter, on "The Importance of Old Bulls: Leaders and Followers In Collective Movement of All-Male Groups In African Savannah Elephant", was recently published in September 2020, whereas the determination of the 2020 quota was made prior to the results of the said study. The department and the Provincial Scientific Authority will consider the key findings of the study in making determination of hunting quota for elephant in the future.

However, given the population numbers and the low number of elephant bulls' trophy hunted per annum the impact on populations is likely to be negligible. The Allen e/ at. (2020) study highlights that the off take (trophy hunting) of older mature bulls (considered bulls over 26 years of age) not only removes the prime breeders, but also removes individuals with a central ‹ale in the male society.

In South Africa the majority of bulls hunted are over the age of 50 years and nearing senescence, thus no longer bleeding. It is acknowledged that mature older bulls do play an important role in bull society. However, where low numbers of mature bulls and specifically those nearing senescence are hunted the impact on the population aa a whole and the bull society is likely to be negligible. In addition, elephant have evolved to cope with natural mortalities taking place, with the natural mortality rate of older mature bulls at approximately 1% per annum.

A study conducted by Burke et al, (2008) evaluating the risk and ethical concerns of hunting male elephant has indicated that all responses measured were minor and that the hunting of male elephant in South Africa is ethically acceptable when considering effects on the remaining elephant population. The authors recommended that bulls should be hunted when alone. This recommendation has been captured in the Norms and Standards for Management of Elephant in South Africa

(3) (a) The table below indicates the 2020 elephant trophy hunting quota for each province:
 

Province

Quota No.

Eastern Cape Province

3 Elephants (06 Tusks)

Free State Provinc

0

Gauteng Province

0

KwaZulu-Natal Provinc

15 Elephant(30 Tusks)

Limpopo Province

50 Elephant (100 Tusks)

Mpumalanga Province

40 Elephants (80 Tusks)

North West Province

0

Northern Cape Province

0

Western Cape Province

0

TOTAL

108 Elephants (216 Tusks)


b. See the response to question 1 above

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 6/11/2020

(#)

06 November 2020 - NW2455

Profile picture: Weber, Ms AMM

Weber, Ms AMM to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) Whether, with reference to the 2017 decision by Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs that the game animals, which were the subject of the R183million irregular donation of game animals through the SA Rare Game Breeders Association to so-called politically connected private game farm owners, be returned to the North West Province and the repatriation costs be funded by certain person (name and details furnished), the game animals with their progeny have been returned in full; if not, (a) what number of animals have in fact been returned and (b) on what date are the remaining animals expected to be returned; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) whether the specified person refunded the cost of the repatriation as instructed; if not, what action has been taken to ensure the recovery of the costs; (3) whether the SA Police Service and/or any other judicial body have been requested to investigate the matter; if not, why not; if so, what are the results of the investigation in each case?

Reply:

(1),(2) and (3) The management of the environment and protection of natural resources is a concurrent function between the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries and Provincial Departments responsible for matters related to the environment, Therefore, the issues raised in this question fall within the jurisdiction of the North West Provincial Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation and Tourism. In View of this it is recommended that the matter be referred to the relevant Member of Executive Council (MEC) responsible for environmental affairs in the North West Province.

Regards
MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 6/11/2020
 

05 November 2020 - NW2456

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) With reference to her reply to question 1995, on 11 September 2020, in relation to the setting of the trophy hunting quota of eleven leopards for 2020, what is (a) the total number of wild leopards in the Republic and (b) their distribution in each province; (2) what (a) is the total number of male Leopards in the age range of seven years and above and (b) is the distribution of male leopards in each province; and (3) (a) chat are the scientific reasons and/or scientific evidence for the decision to set the 2020 national trophy hunting quota at eleven leopards, (b)(i) how and (ii) on what basis is the 2020 quota of eleven leopards allocated per province, (c) what (i) is the 2020 leopard hunting quota for each province and (ii) are the scientific reasons and/or scientific evidence for the specific provinces to be allocated with a leopard hunting quota?

Reply:

(1)(a)(b), (2)(a)(b) and (3)(a)

Subsequent to the publication of the non-detriment finding for leopard in 2015, the Department, in liaison with the Scientific Authority, adopted an adaptive approach to determine the annual leopard hunting quota. Population trend data generated through the South African Leopard
Monitoring Project is used to inform decision making on the annual leopard hunting quota. South Africa ensures that leopard hunting is consistent with the sustainable use principles and that it does not have a detrimental impact on the survival of the leopard in the wild. Hunting of leopards in South Africa is therefore managed through:

Restrictions to designated hunting zones where trends in leopard density indicate that populations are stable or increasing, and

Limits to males older than 7 years, which is likely to have a minimal impact on population trends. This is used as an additional precautionary safeguard.

It is again emphasised that only hunting zones where leopard populations are stable and increasing have been designated as eligible for hunting of leopard. Trends in leopard populations were determined by multi state models fitted to leopard density data that wee collected through the Leopard Monitoring Project at 17 monitoring sites between 2013 and 2019. Data from these sites were used to designate hunting zones. As a precautionary measure, only one leopard can be hunted per eligible hunting zone.

(b)(i)(ii)

The 2020 quote of eleven leopards is a country wide quota and not a quota per province. In other words, the total number of leopards that may be hunted in South Africa in 2020 is eleven (11) and not ninety-nine (99) as inferred by be question. The basis for the allocation of the quota is provided in question 3(a) above.

The table below indicates the allocation of the 2020 leopard hunting quota for each province:

Province

Allocated quota

Eastern Cape Province

0

Free State Province

O

Gauteng Province

0

KwaZulu-Natal Province

0

Limpopo Province

nine (9) male leopards of seven years or older

Mpumalanga Province

O

North West Province

No (2) male leopards of seven years or older

Northern Cape Province

0

Western Cape Province

0

(c)(ii)

The basis for the allocation of the quota is provided in question 1-3 above.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 6/11/2020

30 October 2020 - NW2353

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

On what data will her Department set up a meeting to discuss shark fishing quotas, considering that shark numbers are dwindling and that catch-and-release has shown B cause slow and painful death by drowning according to studies?

Reply:

There has been no date set by this Department to specifically discuss 6hark quotas or allocations as yet. Previously, rights in the Demersal Shark Longline sector were allocated by the then Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fi9henes in 2013 and will be expiring at the end of 2020. A Total Applied Effort(TAE) of 5 vessels was allocated in the sector previously.

In May 2020, the Minister appointed an Expert Panel to formally review South Africa's National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks). The Panel was mandated to, among other things, focus on alignment with the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (lPOA-Sharks) of the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), as well as to advise regarding progress on the current plan. The Expert Panel must also make recommendations on the plan generally with a view to improving it and ensuring its proper implementation so as to ensure the Department’s commitment to the long-term sustainable consumptive and non-consumptive use of the species. The Panel is expected to provide the Minister with a report by mid-November 2020

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER 0F FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 30/10/2020

 

30 October 2020 - NW2298

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether she will explain why South Africa has not yet signed the Leaders' Pledge for Nature, which has already been signed by 70 countries, and which will commit South Africa B implement immediately actionable policy in order to ‹averse biodiversity loss over the next decade; if not, why not; if so, what are the full, relevant details?

Reply:

The Leaders' Pledge for Nature deals with a number of issues that are currently the subject of multilateral negotiations within the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), amongst others.

Given the fact that this Leaders' Pledge for Nature is not a multilaterally agreed document, nor did not form part of any multilateral negotiations and that it contains element which are the subject of ongoing negotiations as well as its requirements for a commitment to act and take accountability, it is prudent for any responsible Government to study the actions required and it implications on the country, prior to committing. The Leaders' Pledge for Nature is still open for endorsement and therefore, South Africa may still sign it after careful study of its content and the implications thereof on its biodiversity policy.

Our country remains committed to the implementation of its goals and objectives, and are committed to working towards an adoption of a post-2020 global biodiversity framework at the COP15 of the CBD in Kunming, China next year.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF F0RE8TRY, FISHERES AND THE ENVIRONNENT

DATE: 30/10/2020

30 October 2020 - NW2351

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) (a) What is the reasoning behind the Kruger National Park dropping fences to areas bordering members of the Associated Private Nature Reserves (ANPRs) B allow movement of animals that are meant to be safeguarded in protected areas, allowing for trophy hunting of these protected animals, (b) what are the reasons that the decision to drop the fences to surrounding APNRs was not bought before the Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs, Forestry and Fisheries when it undermines the purpo9e of protecting wildlife in national parks, and (c) whether she will furnish Ms H S Winkler with the concept document for the dropping of fences to the APNRs; (2) what are the terms of the agreement on trophy hunting with the APNRs and (b) who provide oversight; and (3) whether she has been informed of the hunting of a young bull elephant that was shot 18 times in a Kruger National Park APNR in December 2016 in an unethical hunt in front of tourists; if not, chat is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what are the relevant details and (b) what steps has she taken to hold those responsible for the unethical hunt accountable?

Reply:

 

1. (a) The western boundary fence was dropped alongside fourteen (14) Private, Community and State managed conservation areas and was not limited B the Associated Private Nature Reserves (APNR). The reason this include, but are not limited to, support for integrated ecological management, with ecosystem processes, e.g. catchment processes, ecological corridor, climate change processes, natural species migration routes, following a west-east landscape gradient(from the mountain catchment west of the KNP).

The fence dropping is also in fulfillment of the international Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Treaty (GLTFCA, 2002), promoting integrated land use approaches, including the inclusion of Private, Community and State conservation areas into the open conservation estate within South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe. This promotes ecological and socio- economic outcomes, as per Treaty objectives. In addition, the inclusion of these areas is also aligned to South Africa's international commitment to expand the conservation estate in the country.

The fence dropping with Private, Community and State area look place in the late 1990s and early 2000s, as per the above explanation. The GLTFCA Cooperative Agreement (2018), its objectives, associated legislative requirements and workplan were presented to the Portfolio Committee during 2019.

The GLTFCA Cooperative Agreement is the first Agreement that provides a consistent framework for the regularisation of all 14 reserves open to KNP, as guided by the legal framework. The Agreement provides a uniform and consistent management framework based on the protected area and associated legislation. Please find attached a copy of the Agreement(Addendum 1c1-2).

2. (a) Approved protocols need to be formalised within reserves that conduct hunting, as per legislative requirements (NEMPA, NEMBA). Please refer attached Addendum 2 for requirement that need to be met.

(b) The Provincial Conservation authorities; Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) and the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LEDET) are responsible for the regulation of the hunting within these reserves, together with the management structures of such reserves overseeing the management plans and associated practices, such as hunting, in the reserves (NEMPAA Act, 2003{Act No. 57 of 2003)).

3. (a) and (b) SANParks does not allow hunting within the Kruger National Park.

According to information at my disposal, the said elephant bull was hunted in a reserve within the APNR, in accordance with the relevant statutory requirements and the APNR Hunting protocol. Such hunts are overseen by the management structures of the reserves, together with the Provincial Conservation Authorities, they being the regulatory authorities tasked with monitoring compliance with the Protocol. I am advised that during the particular hunt being referred to, no "tourist' besides the hunting party were witness to the hunt. I am also advised that the LEDET provided the documentation to substantiate that the permit were legally issued and that no laws were contravened.

According to information at my disposal, the hunt was legal and took place in accordance with the APNR Hunting Protocol. The APNR off-take committee furthermore reviewed the incident and provided a ruling that the hunt was in accordance with the Protocol. The provincial environmental authority (LEDET) conducted a full investigation into this matter.

Regards

MS BD CREECY, MP

MINISTER 0F FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 30/10/2020

30 October 2020 - NW2352

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What(a) pollutants require mandatory monitoring and reporting in all air quality monitoring stations, (b) are acceptable levels of the specified pollutants and (c) steps are taken once a station reports on excessive levels of pollution at a station of the SA Air Quality Information Systems or a municipal station?

Reply:

 

  1. In terms of Section 9 of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 20 of 2014 (NEMAQA), the Minister is empowered to identify ambient air pollutants which present a threat to human health and well-being of the environment, and to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the identified pollutants. In this regard, the Minister established national ambient air quality standards for particulate matter (PM10. articles with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometres (10-6 m) and PM2.5, particles with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 micrometres), sulphur dioxide (SO2). nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), ozone (O3) and benzene (CsH6). The NAAQS include averaging periods, limit values or concentrations, permitted frequency of exceedance per year, and compliance dates.
  2. The table below shows the ambient standards for the criteria pollutant.
  3. Where excessive levels of pollution at a station are reported by the South African Air Quality Information System or a municipal station, the information is shared with the public to empower them about the possible impacts their human health, as well as to guide them on how to carry out their daily activities to minimise the effects. In addition, tailor-made interventions are designed in air quality management plans or other strategic government programs to identify sources contributing to the pollution levels, and to implement necessary emission reduction measures. Within the regulated pollution sources such as industries, these interventions include enhanced compliance monitoring and enforcements through the atmospheric emission licencing command and control regime. For non-regulated pollution sources, air quality management interventions are designed to target those pollutants with reported excessive levels, towards progressive realisation of air that is not harmful to the health and wellbeing of the public.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 30/10/2020

30 October 2020 - NW2359

Profile picture: Weber, Ms AMM

Weber, Ms AMM to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether she will furnish Ms A M M Weber with the (a) hunting offtakes recommended by SA National Packs (SANParks) for the individual private nature reserves that form part of the Associated Private Nature Reserves for 2020, (b) latest census information on which the decision was based and (c) copies of the letters of recommendation from SANParks to (i) Timbavati Private Nature Reserve, (ii) Balule Nature Reserve, (iii) Umbabat Nature Reserve and (iv) Klaserie Private Nature Reserve regarding 2020 hunting offtakes, noting that the previous Managing Executive of SANParks promised to make the hunting offtake figures public; if not, in each case, why not; if so, chat are the further relevant details in each case?

Reply:

(a) SANParks does not recommend hunting off-takes to the Private, Community and State managed reserves open to Kruger National Park (KNP). SANParks comment on the scientific- based animal off-take reque9B reC9ÏVed from such entities, in 00n9Ultation with the provincial regulatory authorities overseeing the allocation of such quotas; namely Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) and Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environment (LEDET).

(b) Census and scientific reports are submitted by the neighbouring Private, Community and State managed areas, which inform and support the off-take requests. The reports are then considered, and if supported, they are approved by the MTPA and LEDET, as the regulatory authorities. The MTPA and LEDET are the custodians of the Census information.

© SANParks comment on the hunting off-take request (See Addendum 1). The allocation of quotas is approved by the MTPA and LEDET, as the regulatory authorities. Approved quotas can be obtained Atom the aforementioned provincial regulatory authorities. However, some of the reserves publish the off-takes quotas on their websites and within their annual reports.

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE
: 30/10/2020

30 October 2020 - NW2376

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

In light of the fact that eight environment ministry officials have been suspended in relation to a R2 billion tender fraud (details furnished), and her department's undertaking that it would, in due course, implement system recommendations that were outlined in the forensic investigation report, what(a) are the recommendations and (b) is the expected timeline for the implementation of the recommendations?

Reply:

A The forensic investigation report made the following recommendations with regard to improvement to supply chain management processes:

  1. The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) should revise its functionality criteria for tenders such that these is compliance with the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 2000: Preferential Procurement Regulations, 2017.
  2. The DEFF should revise its practice of appointing the same officials to serve on the Bid Specification Committee (BSC) and Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC). The functions of bid specification and evaluation should be segregated in order b minimise the risk of allusion between officials.
  3. The DEFF should implement a system whereby all BSC, BEC and Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) meetings are mechanically bearded. Such recordings should be filed for reference.
  4. The Supply Chain Management (SCM) Directorate should ensue that all minutes of BSC, BEC and BAC meetings are prepared within a reasonable period and filed. Such minutes should be signed by the relevant officials present at such meetings.
  5. The DEFF should cancel all contracts and/or negotiations with bidders who did not meet the mandakry and functional requirement of the bid.

B The following recommendations have been implemented to date:

    1. Criteria far evaluation of tenders have been amended b ensure objectivity and transparency. All Terms of Reference are reviewed by a quality assurer and are approved by the BAC.
    2. BAC meetings are recorded and minutes are prepared timeously. The BAC will only consider tenders for adjudication of the BSC and BEC minutes are included in submission.

The following recommendations will be implemented in due course:

iii. Amendments to the SCM with regard B the BSC and BEC composition

lv. Contracts as currently being reviewed by Counsel to consider any legal risks and to advise regarding the due process that must be followed when contracts are cancelled.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISIJERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE:
27/10/2020

25 September 2020 - NW2140

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What is the (a) compliance status of landfill sites in the Republic, (b)(i) total number and (ii) list of names of landfill sites that are (aa) licensed and (bb) unlicensed in each province and (c)(i) name and (ii) total number of landfill sites that are not compliant with their permits in each province?

Reply:

 

  1. The compliance status of landfill sites in the Republic, according to the Department’s currently

available information, is as contained in the table below:

 

 

PROVINCE

Non-Compliant 0% to 49%

Partially Compliant

50% to 74%

Compliant 75% to 100%

Eastern Cape

7

3

2

Mpumalanga

17

4

4

Gauteng

7

5

5

 

Northern

Cape

9

0

0

North West

11

7

0

KwaZulu

Natal

12

3

9

Western Cape

41

26

24

Limpopo

14

6

16

Free State

6

1

1

TOTAL

124

55

61

 

  1. (i) and (ii) The required information can be sourced from the relevant provincial authorities. (aa), (bb) See (b) above
  2. (i) and (ii) See (b) above.

25 September 2020 - NW2142

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What (a) are the reasons that KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) has not submitted an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), (b) is the deadline for submission of KZN’s AQMP, (c) is de air quality management plan being used in KZN in the absence of an AQMP and (d) are the reasons that (i) many of the air quality monitoring stations are in KZN and (ii) then is no monitoring for PM2.5 and PM10 in other province, as per regulations in accordance with the National Environment Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004)?

Reply:

a). To address capacity challenges in the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province, the Air Quality Management Office was re-established in July 2020, with the appointment of a Director who will be responsible for Air Quality Management. In addition, an official was transferred horn the national Department B work in the Province. The process to develop the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) has been initiated by the Province.

(b). The Act does not explicitly state a deadline for the submis9ion of an AQMP. However, it was expected that when the Act was promulgated, all spheres of government would develop or initiate the process B draft their AQMPs.


©. In the absence of an AQMP, KZN is implementing the current air quality national legislation, i.e. Air Quality Act and the associated regulations.


(d)(i) Ambient monitoring is conducted by all sphere of government and there are a fair number of monitoring stations that are located in KZN. Of the 136 government-owned ambient air quality monitoring stations across the country, 25 of these are located in KZN province (the province has 5 stations under its control, eThekwini Metropolitan has 14 stations, the City of uMhlathuze has 3 stations and Msunduzi local municipality has 3 stations).


(ii). All spheres of government have comprehensive air quality monitoring of PM10 and PM2.5 across the country, as per regulations in accordance with the National Environment Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004). Of the 136 government-owned monitoring stations, nearly all of them monitor PM10. The monitoring of PM2.5 is still confined to the national priority areas and metropolitan municipalities, as the ambient monitoring standard for the pollutant was promulgated years after stations had been commissioned. However, the number of stations monitoring PM2.5 was significantly increased in 2016 through a national project initiated by the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries. As part of this initiative, 20 dual PM10PM2.5 monitors were rolled out into the national monitoring network to support municipal stations that were missing such Pm10/PM2.5 monitors, or had old monitors that needed to be replaced.

 

25 September 2020 - NW2141

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) With reference to the Government Gazette No.43601, what is the Nationale behind the phased-out approach to banning (a) single-use plastic carriers and (b) plastic flat bags as opposed to a stricter timeframe for an outright ban; and

Reply:

 

  1. (a) and (b)

The rationale behind the phasing out (or banning) of plastic carrier bags and plastic flat bags that are not manufactured from recyclate is to promote resource efficiency (that is, the use of recyclate as opposed to virgin material); improve waste management and create a demand for waste materials; increase circularity, recycling and recovery and to improve the design of environmentally sound bags and mitigate the economic impact of an outright ban of plastic carrier and flat bags.

This rationale is the result of extensive research and consultation with relevant stakeholders as well as consideration of international research and best practice.

 

(2). The Department has to consider the implications of any proposed policy interventions and the costs attached thereto as well as transitional measures. One of the critical stages of the Socio- Economic Impact Assessment System procedure is the identification of options, alternative, the implications (social and other) and the costs thereof. À policy recommendation needs B be guided by inter alia, evidence, B avoid unintended consequences. The Department is thereof e currently pursuing a study on single-use plastic products that would inform the policy direction. However, in the interim, the Extended Producer Responsibility is being put in place to manage items such as straws and cutlery. In this regard, the Department has been engaging industry and continues to do so. In addition:


(a).the Department has included straws as part of products to be controlled under Extended Producer Responsibility.

(b). the Department has included plastic cutlery as part of products to be controlled under the Extended Producer Responsibility.

©. The Department has also engaged the Department of Health b amend the Cosmetic Regulations b ban the use of plastic microbeads in cosmetics.

11 September 2020 - NW1963

Profile picture: Whitfield, Mr AG

Whitfield, Mr AG to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What was the total number of live (a) black rhino and (b) white rhino in the Republic (i) in each of the past six financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2020 up to the latest specified date for which information is

Reply:

Rhino numbers are informed by a variety of sources, and complied in report submitted to institutions responsible for the implementation of conservation treaties such æ the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species(CITES). Specific complementary reports are the following:
Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland for bath white and black rhino;
the Non Detriment findings for both white and black chino;
a report from the IUCN Species Survival Commission (IUCN SSC) African and Asian Rhino Specialist Groups; and
TRAFFIC to the CITES Secretariat pursuant to Resolution Conf. 9.14 (Rev. CoP17)

Ms BD CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE:11/09/2020

11 September 2020 - NW2039

Profile picture: De Freitas, Mr MS

De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

What (a) plans does her Department have in place for providing preferential pricing structures for South Africans, as opposed B non-South Africans, which will provide access to South African National Parks (SANParks) properties, (b) research has been done in this regard and (c) are the (i) timeframes, (ii) milestones and (iii) deadlines regarding preferential pricing structures?

Reply:

 

  1. SANParks already implements a differential pricing and fee structure for South Africans and international guests. This differentials system was introduced in 2003, and the effect thereof is that South Africana receive preferential rates as compared to international guests. This was done to improve and expand access to National Parks by South Africans.
  2. Research had been conducted prior b the implementation of the preferential pricing system. SANParks embarked on a benchmarking exercise, comparing our fee structure with similar conservation authorities on the African continent.
  3. SANParks started implementing the Preferential Pricing mechanism in November 2003, and this pricing structure is being implemented currently

i Not applicable as the system is already being implemented

ii Not applicable as the system is already being implemented

iii. Not applicable as the system is already being implemented

Regards

MS BD CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 11/09/2020

11 September 2020 - NW1994

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether an export quota for lion bone is being considered for 2020; if not, why not; Neo, what are the reasons?

Reply:

The judgment of National Council of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v Minister of Environ mental Affairs and Others on the lion bone export quota determination process requested the Minister to give consideration to welfare issues relating to lions in captivity when determining the quota. The Department was, therefore, not able b determine the 2019 lion bone export quota and such determination process was thus deferred.

 

Regards

MS BD CREECY, MP
Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment:

Date: 11/09/2020

11 September 2020 - NW1950

Profile picture: Paulsen, Mr N M

Paulsen, Mr N M to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether, in terms of the allocation of fishing rights to small-scale fishermen, her Department has an indication as b what number of the rights holder (a) are paper quota holders and (b) harvest their own quotas; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?

Reply:

Small-scale fishing rights are allocated to community-based legal entities in the form of co-operatives. These cooperatives as made up of verified and declared small-scale fishers in teas of the Marine Living Resources Act, 2014 (Act No. 5 of 2014). These fishers have met the relevant criteria and proved their historical involvement in fi9hing, as well as deriving a major part of their livelihood from traditional fishing operations. As such, there are no 'Paper Quota Holders' in the Small-scale Fishing Sector.

All fishes that form part of the small-scale fisheries cooperatives are involved in either one of the many fishing operations that include, amongst others, catching, processing and/or marketing of fish.

Regards

Ms BD CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 11/09/2020

16 July 2020 - NW1394

Profile picture: Weber, Ms AMM

Weber, Ms AMM to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) What number of other breeding and preservation facilities are currently in the Kruger National Park; (2) whether any of the other bleeding and preservation facilities suffered similar losses as the roan antelope breeding programme; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (3) whether the Senior Ranger from the roan antelope breeding programme who was dismissed had any verbal and/or written warnings; if so, what (a) number of warnings and (b) were the changes in each case; and (4) whether the specified ranger had a previous disciplinary record; if so, what controls were put in place by the Department in order for him not to regress again?

Reply:

(1) Currently, there are no other animal breeding camps in the Kruger National Park other than the Nwaxitsumbe Roan Bleeding Facility.

(2) In 2012, a total of 45 roan antelope died of Anthrax disease in the Capricorn Breeding Camp during August of that year. The breeding camp was subsequently dismantled in 2014.

(3) Yes, the Senior Ranger from the roan antelope breeding programme was dismissed on 25 April 2014 but challenged his dismissal at the CCMA, and as a result thereof, a Settlement Agreement was reached at the CCMA in terms of which he was re-instated on the 17th of November 2014.

(4) See (3) above

(5) After his reinstatement, the ranger was transferred from Nwanetsi Section to Shangoni Section. There were no further incidents that have been brought to my attention until the incident in 2020

16 July 2020 - NW1393

Profile picture: Weber, Ms AMM

Weber, Ms AMM to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) Whether the Department found that the 12+ roan antelope that died in 2019 had been purchased; if so, (a) from which location(s) were they purchased, (b) from whom were they purchased, (c) on what date(s) were the antelope purchased, (d) what was the cost of each specified antelope and (e) what number of breeding pairs were purchased; (2) whether the Department found that the 12+ roan antelope that died in 2019 had been captured; so, were they captured in the Kruger National Park and moved b the Nwaxitsumbe Breeding Camp; and (3) whether the Department found that the 12+ roan antelope that died in 2019 were donated; if so, (a) why were they donated and (b) what was the value of the donation?

Reply:

 

  1. None of the roan antelope that died in the Nwaxitsumbe Bleeding Camp had been purchased.

They were not captured, nor were they donated and none of them were planned for donation.

a) Not applicable.

b) Not applicable.

c) Not applicable.

d) Not applicable.

e) Not applicable.

(2) None of the roan antelope that died were captured anywhere prior to their death. These particular antelopes were the offspring of roan antelope in the camp. They were originally captured in Malawi as part of a breeding programme and subsequently moved to the Nwaxitsumbe Breeding Camp. They are the result of several generations of breeding in the Kruger National Park.

(3) None of the roan antelope that died had been donated and none were they planned for donation

a) Not applicable.

b) Not applicable.

Regards

MS B CREECY

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 17/7/2020

02 July 2020 - NW1302

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

1. Whether beaches are open under Alert Level 3 to fisherfolk with permit for recreational fishing; if not, why not; if so, what as the relevant details; 2. whether there is a daily curfew for commercial, recreational and small-scale fisherfolk to operate; if so, what are the relevant details; 3. whether marine protected area that permit fishing are open to fisherfolk with permit for recreational fishing; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; 4. whether harbours are open to fisherfolk with permits for recreational fishing; I not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; and 5. what regulations govern the number of individuals who are permitted on private fishing vessels

Reply:

 

  1. Beaches are open under Alert Level 3 to fisherfolk with permits for commercial, small-scale and recreational fishing.
  2. The Disaster Management Regulations and the Fisheries Directive under Alert Level 3 set no curfew for the operations of commercial, recreational and/or small-scale fisherfolk.
  3. During Lockdown Alert Level 3, Marine Protected Areas that are zoned for fishing are still open to fisherfolk with permit for recreational fishing
  4. Commercial Fishing Harbour remain open to fisherfolk with permit for recreational fishing. Although it is important to note that due b security concerns, ports under the National Ports Authority (TNPA) remain heavily regulated, with some ports having a restriction on recreational fishing and others having designated and open areas for the public, with relevant permit, to fish.
  5. Determination of safe staffing levels (or the number of individuals who are permitted on private fishing vessels) is the e9pon9Ïbility of the South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA), and this is done in terms of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1951 (Act No. 57 of 1951) section 68(1),72a(2) and 194(1).

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 2/7/2020

02 July 2020 - NW1276

Profile picture: Roos, Mr AC

Roos, Mr AC to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

In light of the fact that the Department is responsible for implementing control activities and operations on the Roodeplaat dam according to the 2014 Strategic Plan for the integrated Control of Aquatic Weeds in Roodeplaat Dam, what (a) control activities have been undertaken by the Department since the directive to local stakeholders to stop spraying, on 7 February 2020, (b) urgent actions will be taken to deal with the complete average of the rowing course by water hyacinth, and (c) process will be undertaken to ensure that reasonable expenses incurred by the community are reimbursed given that the community surrounding the Roodeplaat Dam needed b step in and fund water hyacinth control activities from December 2018 to February 2020to present an environmental crisis?

Reply:

The control of Roodeplaat Dam is covered under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Department of Environment, forestry and Fisheries (DEFF), and the Department of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation (DHSW&S). DHSW&S appointed DEFF as the implementing agent to control all Invasive Alien Species (AIS) on the dam, including Water Hyacinth (Eichhomia cassipes] which is the major aquatic weed present on the Roodeplaat Dam.

a) The 2014 Strategic Plan for the Control of Aquatics Weeds in Roodeplaat Dam is currently under review due to the National Water Act amendment regarding the application of Section 21 (i) and Section 21 (c) permit applications. This requires that any activities that are implemented on the dam needs to be approved by the DHSW&S. The directive to stop all spraying on Roodeplaat dam was given by the DHSW&S at a stakeholder's meeting held on the 7th of February 2020.


b) DEFF has been working on the permit needed to commence activities on the dam for the manual

removal, biological and potential harvesting of biomass. The Department submitted a proposal for a Section 21 (c) permit for the algal control programme that occurred In March 2020, prior the SA Rowing championships event. This was approved, and assisted the swing event to go ahead due to the removal of the cyanobacterial blooms on the dam. The COVID-19 lockdown temporarily stopped all implementation activities such as the manual removal of the Water Hyacinth biomass from the dam and the release of biocontroI agents.


c) DEFF is currently in the process of directly appointing contractors to manually remove the Water Hyacinth biomass on the dam, but first needs to ensure that and safety compliance measures are in place. Furthermore, COVID-18 risk assessment training must be done with the contractors before allowing them to start work again. The stakeholders around the dam agreed to assist in the control of the Water Hyacinth, in the stakeholder's meeting held on 7 February 2020. DHSW&S informed stakeholders of their responsibilities on the dam, ‹elating b the National Water Act. It was indicated that the stakeholders' assistance in this regard is a responsibility under the National Water Act and, as such, they will not be compensated.

Regards

MS B D CREECY,

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DATE: 3/07/2020

 

02 July 2020 - NW1301

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

1) With reference to the reply to question 834 on 29 May 2020, (a) what progress has the Department made in establishing the stakeholder forum, (b) who has been invited to the specified forum, (c) how is the Department advertising for stakeholder inclusion on the platform, (d) who is the departmental contact person for queries on the stakeholder platform, and (e) is there a time-frame for the establishment of the stakeholder forum; and 2) whether there is a time-frame for th9 69Bbliahment and conclusion of a health study, given the urgency of the health concern in the area; if so, (a) by what date will the health study be commissioned, (b) who will be appointed to conduct the health study on air pollution in the South Durban Basin, and (c) wh0 I9 the contact person/s in the Department commissioned to initiate the health study?

Reply:

1 a) Progress in establishing the stakeholder forum has been severely impacted by the lockdown restrictions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently a stakeholder mapping exercise i9 Underway aimed at ensuring that all affected stakeholders are part of the forum. This exercise is being undertaken in conjunction with the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality and the KwaZulu-Natal Province, which have provided a database of existing air quality stakeholders in the South Durban Basin (SDB).

(b) The stakeholders that have been identified for the mapping exercise and inclusion in the forum are Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO's) /Community Based 0ganÏ98tI0n8 (CBO's) that are active in air quality issues in the SDB, industry organisations in the SDB (specifically those who have an impact on air quality), departments responsible for air quality management across all three spheres of government, academia and any other interested and affected parties that may be identified in due course

(c) As already indicated, the Department is working closely with the municipal and provincial officials who have provided the Department with a database of existing air quality stakeholders. The database has been used to announce the establishment of the forum as well as the stakeholder mapping exercise currently under way. Prior to the lockdown restrictions, the plan was to hold community gatherings in the SDB as a means of introducing the forum. This plan will be implemented once the restrictions Ioosen up enough to allow community gatherings to take place

(d) The contact person in the Department is Vumile Senene (Director: Air Quality Management Service), Tel: (012) 399-9217, Email: vesenene@environment.gov.za

e) Completion of the initial stakeholder mapping and •on-boarding sessions' for stakeholders happened at the end of June 2020. The on-boarding sessions will assist the stakeholder to contribute to the terms of reference for the forum and other related aspects. The first virtual meeting will take place on 22 July 2020 and the Department has already sent out a letter to identified stakeholders introducing the forum.

(2) (a) The process to conduct the South Durban health study has been initiated by the department. The department, eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality and the Provincial government are in the process of concluding the Terms of Reference (TORs) for the study. The TORs will then be consulted with the various stakeholders, which include indU9tdes, non-governmental organisations, community-based organisations and academia. The Department is determined to use available channels to expedite inputs from all affected and interested parties. As such the first stakeholder consultation will be conducted on 22 July 2020 and it will be a virtual meeting given the Covid-19 restrictions on both travel and meeting/gatherings .

b) Once the TORs are finalised, the government Supply Chain Management process will be followed to appoint a qualified and suitable service provider. Any potential service provider is allowed to submit a proposal, which will be evaluated following the Supply Chain Management process and National Treasury Regulations. The plan is to conclude the appointment of the service provider during this financial year and start the actual work in the next financial year (2021/22). Given the financial constraints and the experience with the precious health studies conducted in the Highveld and Vaal Triangle Air shed priority areas, this study is planned for a maximum of 36 months.

c) The National Air Quality Officer, Dr Thuli Khumalo, is the person responsible for the health study. Her contact details are: tkhumalo@encironment.gov.za Tel (012) 3998187.

Regards

MS B D CREECY,

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE EWIRONMENT

DATE: 2/07/2020

02 July 2020 - NW1303

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

By what date does she envisage will the list of prohibited fish species that apply to recreational fishing be aligned with the International Union for Conservator of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species?

Reply:

All the twelve (12) prohibited fish species that apply to the South African recreational fishing sector as listed in Table 4 of the Recreational Fishing Brochure have been listed with the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List of Threatened Species under different categories.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY FISHERIE8 AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Date: 3/7/2020

26 June 2020 - NW1167

Profile picture: De Freitas, Mr MS

De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

With reference to the Kruger National Park and tourist camp sites, what (a) renovation and maintenance plans are in place for each camp for the current financial year, (b) are the timelines, deadlines and timeframes for each camp in this regard, and (c) budget has been allocated for each camp site in each case?

Reply:

 

1167. THE MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT REPLIES:

(a, b & c) On 24 June 2020 the Honourable Minister of Finance, Mr Tito Mboweni, delivered a Supplementary Budget in the National Assembly. Accordingly, all Departments and Entities are required to re-submit their Annual Performance Plans (APP’s).

Once the revised APP of SANParks is submitted to the National Assembly, further information on the maintenance budgets and projects will be available.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT DATE: 25 JUNE 2020

05 June 2020 - NW932

Profile picture: Mey, Mr P

Mey, Mr P to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Whether her Department awarded any tender connected to the Covid-19 pandemic; if not, what is the position in this ega‹d; if so, what (a) are the names of the businesses to whom these tenders were awarded, (b) are the amounts of each Bnder awarded and (c) was the service and/or product \o be supplied by each business;

Reply:

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

(For written reply)

QUESTION NO. 932(NW1221E}

INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.17 of2020 DATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 May 2020

Mr P Mey (FF Plus) to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment:

  1. Whether her Department awarded any tender connected to the Covid-19 pandemic; if not, what is the position in this ega‹d; if so, what (a) are the names of the businesses to whom these tenders were awarded, (b) are the amounts of each Bnder awarded and (c) was the service and/or product \o be supplied by each business;
  2. whether there was any deviation from the standard supply chain management procedures in the awarding of the tandem; if so, (a) why and (b) what are the relevant details in each case;
  3. 3) what was the reason for which each specified business was awaited the specified tender; and whether she will make a statement on the matter2

932. THE MINISTER OF FORE8TRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT REPLIES:

  1. Yes, the Department awarded tenders connected b the COVIŒ19 pandemic as follows:

(a) Name of the businesses/service

Provides

(b) Amount

R'000

(c) Service provided

Multisurge Pty Ltd, Promed

R1 008 780

1900 x (box of 50) masks surgical face

standard and 57 x digital body infrared thermometers.

Promed Technologies (Pty) Ltd

R45 000

5 liters X 500 battle disinfectant

Kanga Business Management

R494 500

3500 Alcohol gel hand sanitisers and 250 boxes of surgical masks

Orange Juice Inve9tr«ent (Pty) Ltd T/A

X-Treme Cleaning Solutions

R138 500

Disinfecting, sanitisation and fogging Foretrust building.

  1. Yes, there was a deviation from the standard supply chain management procedures. The Department utilised the Instruction Note 3 of 2016/17, paragraph 8.2, which states that 'An emergency procurement may occur when there is a serious and unexpected situation that pose an immediate risk B health, life, property or environment which calls an urgency to action and there is insufficient time to invite competitive bids', as well as Instruction Note 5 of 2020/21 Emergency Procurement in response to National State of Disaster.
    1. The Department received a case of an official who were infected with COVID-19 and, as a result, the Department had to disinfect the building æ a matter of emergency.
    2. The Department approached four service providers to submit quotations on an emergency basis, and an order was issued b Orange Juice Investment Pty Ltd T/A X-Treme Cleaning Solutions au they submitted a quotation that met the Department specifications.

(sj

The reason for which each specified business was awarded the specified tender:

The Service Provider, as listed below, submitted quotations that met the Department procurement specifications and RTCOVID19-0@ s§ecificätÏ0FI9 B9 I6sued by National Treasury.

Name of the business /Service Provides

 

Multisurge(Pty) Ltd, Promed

  • Standard surgical face masks to be given to officials and visitors entering the building for protection against COVID-19.
  • Body thermometers infrared for the screening of officials and visitors when entering the Department.

Promed Technologies (Pty) Ltd

Disinfectant for the cleaning of surfaces in the

building.

Kanga Business Management

Alcohol gel hand sanitisers and surgical masks for the sanitising of hands and protection from the COVID-19 infection of officials and visitors

Names of the businesses/Service Providers

 
 

entering the building.

Orange Juice Investment Pty LB T/A X-Treme

Cleaning Solutions

Emergency sanitisation and logging of Foretrust

building.

4. The regulations on how departments must respond to COVID-19 have bean widely publicized by the various government department.

Regards

MS BD CREECY
MINISTER OF FORESTORY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
DATES: 5/6/2020

29 May 2020 - NW618

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(1) what (a) is the total number of informal wet markets in the Republic and (b) steps will her department in association with other relevant departments take to avoid that such markets become incubators for dangerous pathogens and viruses as most recently seen regarding the circumstances for the suspected outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic at a fish market in Wuhan, China; (2) whether she intends closing wet markets in the Republic; if not, what preventative measures will she put in place; if so, what are the full details of the effect that this will have on general food security generated by these markets?

Reply:

 


618. THE MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT REPLIES:

1(a). According to the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries, there are no known formal or informal wet markets in the republic. However, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, section 162, Municipalities are responsible for the publication of relevant bylaws in their respective provinces, which would regulate activities associated with such markets. It should further be noted that the Meat Safety Act (Act No. 40 of 2000), enforced by the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) regulates the meat product. Therefore, please refer further questions in this regard to municipalities and/or the DALRRD

1(b) Please see 1(a) above

2. Please 1(a) above

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTORY FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 29/05/202

 

29 May 2020 - NW834

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

(a) What criteria are necessary to declare an area a High Priority Air Quality Area, (b) has she considered declaring the South Durban Basin a High Priority Air Quality Area considering that the area has been identified as an air pollution hot spot with high incidences of respiratory illness, (c) what oversight does her Department exercise over the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality in terms of monitoring compliance with the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004, (d) how often does her Department exercise oversight over the specified municipality in terms of compliance with the specified Act, considering that her Department has been made aware of high levels of air pollution in the South Durban Basin and across the province, and (e)(1) what oversight and (ii) how often does her Department exercise oversight over municipalities in terms of their compliance with the specified Act?

Reply:

 

 

(b) 834. THE MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT REPLIES:

a) For the Minister to declare an area as a national air quality priority area, amongst other things:
• It must have exceedances of national ambient air quality standards;
• The Minister reasonably believes that such will be the case in the future; and
• it must extend beyond provincial boundaries

b) As indicated above, for an area to be declared to be declared as a priority area, it must extend beyond provincial boundaries. In the case of the South Durban Basin, the area falls entirely within the boundaries of the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality. As a consequence, it would be for the Membe of Executive Council (MEC) in the province to make such a declaration if the area needs the requirements as set out in Section 18 of the National Environmental Management : Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No/ 39 of 2004)/

c) The national department provides and support to all municipalities in the execution of their air quality management duties and responsibilities through an intergovernmental forum called MINMEC, consisting of the Minister of Environment and the MECs responsible for Environment, as well as Mayors of metropolitan municipalities, relevant sector department and SALGA. Minmec meetings are held on a quarterly basis to ensure that policy coordination takes place.

Furthermore, the MINIMEC has established a technical forum called MINITECH, consisting of the Director General and provincial Heads of Department, relevant sector departments, metropolitan municipal managers and SALGA to provide formal technical support to the MINMEC, MINTCH, as the technical structures, informs and advises the Minister and MECs. MINTECH is informed by Working Groups consisting of national, provincial and local government officials ,Working Group 2 is designated for air quality management.

Through these structures sector targets are set, in line with relevant legislation, performance monitored and corrective measures taken by all three spheres of government according to the principles of cooperative government as set out in Chapter 3, section 41(1) of the Constitution. This section of the Constitution stipulates the principles of cooperative government and intergovernmental relations applicable to all spheres of government, and requires them (spheres of government) tp operate within the framework of mutual trust and good faith

d) The establishment for a meet on a quarterly basis

e) (i) and (ii) The Department is in the process of establishing a stakeholder forum in the area, with the view to bring together spheres of government, industry, NGOs/CBOs, academia and any othver interested and affected parties. The forum will provide a platform for all stakeholders to engage openly and transparently with a view to address air pollution concerns in the area.

In addition, the Department will be conducting a health study in the area in order to get a better understanding of the impact of air pollution on the residents of the area

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTORY FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 29/05/202

29 May 2020 - NW804

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

1) With regard to the Level 4 regulations on the relaxation of the lockdown to curb the spread of Covid-19 which came into effect on 1 May 2020, (a) on what date did she issue directives to clarify what the phrase 'all fishing allowed' means and (b)(i) what are the directives and (ii) on what grounds are they based; and (2) with regard to the internationally known sardine run which will take place soon, what considerations have been given to cater for the sardine run phenomenon in view of current lockdown regulations?

Reply:

804. THE MINISTER OF FORESTRY, FISHERIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT REPLIES:


1. (a) The Directions Regarding measures to Address, Prevent and Combat the Spread of COVID-19, in particular relating to the Freshwater and Marine Fishing Sectors, were gazetted on 14 May 2020.

(b) (i) These Directions apply to:
■ Mariculture, commercial and small-scale fishing rights, permits and exemptions;
■ Commercial and small-scale fishing vessel licences;
■ Fishing Processing Establishments rights, permits and exemptions
■ Permits or exemptions to import or export fish; and
■ Recreational fishers

They provide for the prohibition of sports and recreational fishing activities, as well as for the extention of validity of permit, exemption or licence issued in terms of the Marine Living Resources Act, 1998 (Act No. 18 of 1998) prior to the national lockdown.

(ii) The Directives were based on the principle of restricting personnel movement other than for essential travel for work in terms of the alleviation provided for in Part A OF Table 1 of the Regulations as they pertain to fishing activities.

2. The KwaZulu Natal Sardine Beach Seine fishery is a fully fledged fishing sector with right holders fishing on commercial and small scale permits. During the upcoming Sardine Run, Rights Holders that operate in this sector, will operate in a similar manner as right holder in other commercial fishing sectors.

At the current lockdown alert level , access to beaches continue to remain restricted, and the Department will continue to work with all relevant Coastal Municipalities and Law Enforcement Officers to ensure that authorised fishers have access to beaches and there is compliance with the lockdown Regulations.

Regards

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF FORESTORY FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT
DATE: 29/05/202
 

27 February 2020 - NW37

Profile picture: Whitfield, Mr AG

Whitfield, Mr AG to ask the Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries

What was the total number of live (a) black rhino and (b) white rhino in the Republic on (i) 31 December 2015, (ii) 31 December 2016, (iii) 31 December 2017, (iv) 31 December 2018 and (v) 31 December 2019?37. THE MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT, FORESTRY AND FISHERIES REPLIES:Rhino numbers are informed by a variety of sources. Specific complementary reports are the following:• Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland for both white and black rhino;

Reply:


Rhino numbers are informed by a variety of sources. Specific complementary reports are the following:

• Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland for both white and black rhino;

• the Non Detriment findings for both white and black rhino;

• a report from the IUCN Species Survival Commission (IUCN SSC) African and Asian Rhino Specialist Groups; and

• TRAFFIC to the CITES Secretariat pursuant to Resolution Conf. 9.14 (Rev. CoP17)

 

MS B D CREECY, MP
MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT, FORESTRY AND FISHERIES
Date: 27/02/2020

08 November 2019 - NW1290

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Environmental Affairs, Forestry and Fisheries

With reference B the Government Notice No 1317 and her establishment of an advisory committee known as the high level panel in kms of section 3A of the National Environmental Management Act, Act 107 of 1998, whose mandate is to review policies, regulations and practices on matters related to the management, breeding, hunting, trade and handling of elephant, lion, leopard and rhinoceros, what (a) is the name of each body that each member of the high-level panel is (i) affiliated to and (ii) a member of and (b) (i) qualifications and (ii) knowledge and/or experience served as the basic on which each member was selected

Reply:

 

The details of each member of the High-Level Panel are provided below:

  1. Ms Aadila Agjee

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to Centre for Environmental Rights

(a)(ii) Name of each body member of • Wildlife Project for Centre for Environmental Right NPC

(b)(i) Qualifications • Degree - Bachelor of Law (LLB)

    • Postgraduate LLM -Animal Rights Law

b)(II) Knowledge and experience Environmental legal matee, litigation, legal regulations

 

for welfaRe of wild animal9 and compliance, legislative review. Animal nghb and welfare legislation

Professor Brian Child

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(II) Name of each body member of

‹b›‹i 4uaiirlcationx

b){II) Knowledge and experience

Mr Kule Chitepo

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(II) Name of each body member of

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

NATIOML A6SEfBLY

Global Environmental Fund

  • Biodiversity Panel Member
  • Scientific Advisory Panel of the Global Environmental Fund
  • University of Florida
  • Peace Parts Foundation’s Community

Development Programme

  • Biodiversity Panel Member on the Scientific and technical Advisory Panel of the Global Environmental Facility(2014-2018)
  • B.Sc. Honors - Agricultural Economics
  • M.Sc. - Agricultural & Forest Science
  • D.Phil. - Ecology

Nature Conservation, Communal Area management, Indigenous resources and Camp fie

Africa Resources Trust (ART) - Resources Africa

  • Chemonics International's Resilient Waters

IUCN Species Survival Commission (sustainable

use and livelihoods)

Resource Africa

  • Masters in Science - Environment and Development

Bachelor of Science - Renewable Resources

Trans-boundary biodiversity conservation expert, community development, policy development on rural communities, exposure to trade, Resource mobilization

 

Ms Ashleigh Doc

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(ii) Name of each body member of (b)(I) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

Mr Stewart Dorrington

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(li) Name of each body member of

•Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Nkosi Mpumalanga Gwadiso

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(II) Name of each body members

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Kgosi Edward Mabalane

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(II) Name of each body member of

UT xsseuatY

Endangered Wildlife Trust Admitted attorney

  • Master of Laws - Environmental
  • Postgraduate Certificate - Environmental 6 Sustainable Development
  • Degree - LLM - Environmental Law

Nature conservation, community empowerment, admitted attorney dealing with environmental issues, restorative justice

Professional Hunter Association of South Africa (PHASA)

  • Custodians of Professional Hunting & Conservation South Africa (CPHC-SA)
  • Hunting regulation and captive lion breeding

» FASA

Degree - Bachelor of Commerce

Wildlife conservation, Hunting and Game Farming

Amakhonjwayo Traditional Council

Amakhonjwayo Traditional Council

  • Traditional House of Leaders
  • Chairman of Agriculture
  • CONTRALESA

CONTRALESA investment holdings

Certificate - Businees Administration

Community Leadership, Community Development and

Human Rights Activist

Baphiring Nation-Mabaalstad

Moses Kotane Hospital - Board Member

QUESTION NO. 1200 W2501E

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

6. Mr Reuben Malema

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(ii) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Dr Kelly Mamewick

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(li) Name of each body member of

(b)(i) Qualifications

MTIONAL AG6EMBLY

    • Village FM - Board Member
    • REMDEC (Community and Consultative Process Dispute Resolution Committee
    • HRM Mabalane Haven of Hope Foundation
    • Freedom Park-Board Member,
    • Provincial Contralessa Chairperson
    • Chairperson of HR & Remuneration Freedom Park Council
    • Groot Marico Biosphere Reserve Board
  • Certificate - Indigenous Law & Restorative Justice with Traditional Leaders
  • Certificate- Executive Leadership & Municipal Development Programme

Community Leadership, Mail & Guardian Top 200 young leader award, trained in Restrictive Justice

Empower Wildlife Ranching and South African Agricultural Industry Association (AGRI-SA)

Black Evolution Product (Game Meat Trade)

  • DAFF Ministerial advisory committee on Game

meat regulations

Food Security & BBG

  • Transformation Committee in Wildlife Ranching South Africa (WRSA)

National Diploma - Business Management

Sustainable use of wildlife, Policy development in agriculture, Game meat regulations, Business management

IUCN African Lion Working Group

Southern African Wildlife Management Associate

IUCN Cat Specialist Group

  • IUCN Candid Specialist Group
  • Wildlife Forum
  • Doctorate - Ph.D. - Wildlife Management

I

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Ms Lulama Lorraine Matyolo

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to

{a){II) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Mr Tebogo Mogashoa

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(II) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Mr Mavuso Msimang

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(II) Name of each body member of

tJATl0hAL A66Ef/IBLY

    • Masters - Wildlife Management

BSc Honors-Zoology

    • BSC Degree-Zoology & Botany

Carnivore Conservation & Biology of Cheetahs, Project Management, Data Management, Wildlife Trade

Attorneys Admission Board

    • National People & Part B Task Team
  • Deputy Secretary - Provincial People & Packs Forum (Western Cape)
  • Degree - Bachelor of Arts
  • Degree - LLB
  • Honors Degree - Business Administration
  • Certificate - Legislative drafting

Legal and Compliance related matters

Wildlife Ranching Association of SA

  • Wildlife Ranching Association of SA
  • Kwandwe Rhino Conservation Trust

Degree - Bachelor of Science (Engineering)

Game Ranching, Investment in the SA economy through Wildlife sector, Wildlife farming

World Wide Fund for Nature SANParks

United Nations

Peace Parks Foundation

  • SANParks
  • African Parks Foundation, established in 2000
  • iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority
  • Peace Parks Foundation
  • WWF South Africa
  • Board's Social, Ethics & Transformation Committee

QJE6TDN NO. 12N W2501E

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

Dr Tshifhiwa Constance Nangammbi

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(ii) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(iI) Knowledge and experience

  1. Ms Elizabeth Johanna Lizanne Nel

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(ii) Name of each body member of

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(ii) Knowledge and experience

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    • Tourism Conservation Fund
    • Masters - Business Administration
    • Degree - Bachelor in Entomology & Biochemistry

Nature conservation, Institutional development, Tourism development, Chairman of Corruption watch, community development

The South African Council For Natural Scientific Professional(SACNASP)

The Parasitology Society of Southern Africa

    • UNITAS Malacologica
  • Zoological Society of Southern Africa
  • Doctorate - PhD. Zoology
  • Post-graduate Diploma- Higher Education

MasBrs of Science - Systematic 6 Biodiversity

  • BSc. Honors - Biological Sciences
  • Degree - Bachelor of Arts - Biology & Psychology

Curriculum Development in genetics, Piloting the establishment of a wildlife biological resource centre. Established the molecular genetics lab at UNIVEN. Empowerment of PDls and student

South African Hunters 6 Game Conservation

Association

Tshwane University of Technology IUCN Sustainable

Use & Livelihood Specialist Group

Southern African Wildlife Management Association

  • Southern African Wildlife Management

Association

  • Biodiversity Management(Scientific Services)

Limpopo Department of Economic Development

LEDET

MBA(Masters in Business Administration)

  • B.Sc. Hons. Wildlife Management

BSc Degree

Wildlife Conservation, Conservation lecture, IUCN specialist group, hunting, Wildlife management, Policy

QUESTION NO. 1200 NM501E

development, advocacy

  1. Ms Mmboneni Esther Netshivhongweni

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(II) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Professor Azwihangwisi Edward Nesamvuni (a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(II) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(li) Knowledge and experience

Wildlife Eco-Tourism Bio-Prospecting Association of South Africa (WEBSA)

Wildlife Ranches of South Africa (WRSA)

  • WEBSA
  • Board of Directors of the Professional Hunters'

Assoc.SA's(PHASA)

  • Conservation & Empowerment Fund
  • People and Parks
  • Master of Commerce
  • B. Comm Honors
  • B. Comm
  • Advanced Diploma- Professional Management

Sustainable Use of wildlife, Community conservation management

Professor Extra-Ordinary: Centre for Sustainable Agriculture at University of the Free State

South African Council for Natural Scientific

Professions

  • South African Society for Animal Science

Association of Feed Manufacturer of South Africa

  • South African Society of Agricultural Expansion

Doctorate - Ph.D. Animal Bleeding and Reproduction

  • Masters -Agriculture
  • Master - Business Administration

Bachelor of Science -Agriculture (Honors)

  • Bachelor of Science -Agriculture

Nature Conservation and Research in Animal Bleeding & Repuzluction

Advocate for Women in Conservation & Sustainable use and Strategic development & Implementation

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OUESTION NO. 1200 NW2501E

  1. Ms Sibusiswe Maureen Ngcobo

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(ii) Name of each body member of

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(ii) Knowledge and experience

  1. Host Pheni Cyprian Ngove

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to (a){ii) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(ii) Knowledge and experience

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

Kana U \/hulunge Mvelele

    • Member of the National Action Programme
    • Implementing initiatives related to Bio-trade
    • United Nations Convention to combat desertification in South Africa
    • Inter-governmental Science Policy platform on Biodiversity and Eco-system
    • Master - Social Science - Policy & Development
  • Bachelor - Home Economics

Diploma - Home Economics

  • Certificate in PFMA

Advocate for women participation in Conservation issues, Conservation and Sustainable use, Women in Conservator, Strategic development specialist and Implementation

Nghonyama Wildlife Africa

  • Institute of Dike of South Africa

Wildlife Ranching South Africa

  • People and Parks Organisation
  • Mabunda Community Game Reserve
  • LEDET Letaba Ranch Co Management

Limpopo Provincial House of Traditional Leaders

  • National Diploma - Public Administration & Management
  • Post-Graduate Diploma - Human Right
  • P0st Graduate Diploma- Labor Law
  • Post-Graduate Certificate - Local Government Law

Knowledge and Experience in matters relating to indigenous knowledge system in South Africa, Bleeding, community development

QUESTION NO. 12B0 NW2501E

  1. Mr Michael 't Sas Rolfes

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(ii) Name of each body member of

{b){l) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Professor Robert Hugh Slotow

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(II) Name of each body member of

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and axpe8ence

  1. Mr Deon Swart

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(II) Name of each body member of

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

International Union for Conservation of Nature

    • IUCN Species Survival Commission African

Rhino Specialist Group

    • IUCN Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist

Group

    • MSc. - Biodiversity, Conservation and Management

MSc. - Environmental Resource Economic9

B. Com (Hons) - Business Economics

    • Diploma- Integrated Environmental

Management

Environmental resource economist, legal and illegal market for wildlife products. He is knowledgeable in sustainable use, an expert in the analysis of wildlife trade policy for high value species and works closely with both national and international bodies in biodiversity sector.

Elephant Specialist Advisory Group (ESAG)

Institute for Commercial Forestry Research

    • Sugar Milling Research Institute
    • KwaZulu-Natal Institute in Research TB & HIV/AIDS
    • Africa Health Research Institute (AHRI)

Ph.D. - Biology

  • M.Sc. - Zoology
  • Bachelor of Science (Hons) - Zoology
  • Bachelor of Science-Zoology

Research on genetics and conservation of large mammals. Specializes in Corporate Governance and species-related policy development, economics, animal physiology, welfare and protected areas management.

South African Predator Association (SAPA)

  • National Wildlife Forum
  • Provincial Wildlife Forum'
  • Hunting and Wildlife Association SA

African Lion Task team

QUESTION NO.1200 NW2501E

(b)(I) Qualifications

b)(ii) Knowledge and experience

  1. Inkosi Mabhudu Israel Tembe

(a)(i) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(II) Name of each body member of

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Ms Karen Tendler

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(II) Name of each body member of

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

Diploma - Nature Conservation and Management

Wildlife Conservation, Policy Development, Conservation management, lion breeding and captive breeding, wildlife trade(local and international), monitoring and enforcement

  • The Tembe Traditional Council
  • Provincial House of Traditional Leaders
  • KwaZulu - Natal Department of Co-Operative Governance and Traditional Affairs
  • UMkhanyakude Local House of Traditional Leader
  • Former Board member of iSimangalico
  • Former member of Wildlife Steering Committee of EKZNW
  • Diploma - Computer Course
  • Certificate - Management of International Criminal Prosecutions
  • Certificate - Leadership and Good Governance

Specializes in community development. Criminal Prosecutions. Training in SA Constitution, Community Development and Environmental Administration

National Council of Societies for the Presentation of Cruelty to Animals

  • SANParks Ethics and Animal Use and Care Committee
  • SABS code of Practice for Translocation and Capture of African Herbivores, Code on Zoo standard and animal experimentation
  • Advanced IWRC USA
  • NSPCA Wildlife Trade and Trafficking Unit

Rhino Response Project Coordinator

  • EWT 2012 -2015
  • Rhino Response Strategy

IFAW on wildlife rescue, response and ehabilita6on

  • Pretoria Biomedical Research Ethics Committee member

E\/\/T Conservation Management Committee

  • Committee for Elephant Welfare during the Tuli

0flE5TlQt NO. 12B0 NYf2 01E

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Mr Andries Lucas van Coffer

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to

(a)(ii) Name of each body member of

(b)(i) Qualifications

b)(II) Knowledge and experience

  1. Ms Pamela Bulelwa Yako

(a)(I) Name of each body affiliated to (a)(II) Name of each body member of

MTIOKAL ASSEMBLY

elephant cruelty case

National Diploma - Nature Conservation 6 Wildlife Management

Trained in Wildlife Rehabilitation, Wildlife Conservation, Pharmacology in wildlife rehabilitation. Rhino rearing and rehabilitation, Ethics of wildlife rehabilitation, Rearing and rehabilitating wildlife, Nursing and specialized nursing. Introduction to Basic Wildlife Rehabilitation, Wildlife nursing, fearing orphaned wildlife, Advanced Wildlife Rehabilitation 1&2, Rehabilitating raptors, Crisis management, Oil spill response, Wound management in wildlife, Pharmacology for Wildlife rehabilitate, Ethics, Wildlife we4e

Professional Hunter's Association of South Africa (PHASA) and Confederation of Hunter Association of South Africa (CHASA)

  • Tourism Business Council South Africa (TBCSA)

Ezemvelo KZN Honorary Officers Association

  • Board of Directors of the PHASA Conservation &

Empowerment Fund

Board of Directors of the Tourism Business Council

South Africa (TBCSA)

  • Registered national tour guide with SA Tourism (SAT)

PHASA Conservation & Empowerment Fund

  • Board of Zululand Rhino Reserve
  • Ezemvelo KZN Honorary Officer Association
  • Goss Estate Hunting Academy
  • National Diploma - Electronics
  • Diploma - Business Management
  • National Certificate - Toun9lTl Guiding

Specialist in agriculture and wildlife conservation, game farm management, community participation and hunting.

Zenande Leadership Consulting

  • Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism
  • Seriti Institute Board
  • South African Tourism Board

Former DG: (DEAT and DWAF)

  • DDG: Biodiversity & Conservation

QUESTION NO.1290 NW2501E

b)(ii) Knowledge and experience

Regards

  • Former Board ECPTA
  • Master in Business Leadership
  • Bachelor of Commerce - Industrial Sociology, Management and Economics

Municipal Support and Turnaround Specialist, Environmental policy development. Women empowerment. Municipal governance, stakeholder facilitation and financial strategy development and sustainability planning specialist.

MS BD CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT, FORESTRY AND FlSHERIES

.

NATIONAL ASSE£/BLY QJE8TION NO. 1200

08 November 2019 - NW1314

Profile picture: Winkler, Ms HS

Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Environmental Affairs, Forestry and Fisheries

(I) Will the member of the South African Weather Service boast still be held personally liable for the finances spent on the six months salary in the premature termination of employment of a certain person (name and details furnished); (2) What are the relevant details of the allegations faced by the specified person?

Reply:

 

 

1. The Audited Financial Statement for the South African Weather Service (SAWS) for the period under consideration are available and the Auditor General has made no finding that the expenditure arising from the settlement of the dispute between the Board and the lower CEO amount to fruitless and wasteful expenditure. For his reason the SAWS Board, will not be held personally liable for this expenditure, as there is no legal basis to do so.

 

 

2. The Board removed the Chief Executive officer from office for, inter alia, failing to perform certain functions connected with the office of the Chief Executive Officer or b exercise those powers adequately, diligently and efficiently and because the was an irretrievable breakdown in the relationship between the Boast and the former Chief Executive Officer due b the following reasons:

  • A breakdown in communication occurred between the Chair of the Board and the former Chief Executive Officer;
  • The former Chief Executive Officer failed B, inter alia, attend meeting requested by the Chair;
  • Absenteeism on the part of the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for extended period during critical periods for the organisation;

  • Inability or unwillingness on the part of the CEO b finali9e matters ‹elated to her missing employment contract and performance agreement for 2016/17 and to confirm the date of conclusion of the employment contract as 31 March 2017;

Regatdc

MG BD CREECY, MP

MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT, FORESTRY AND FISHERIES

DATE:.. .].!.!.. .I#/.1

MTIQ\IAL A99EMBLY QUESTION NO. 1g14 IM2528E

08 November 2019 - NW1360

Profile picture: Abrahams, Ms ALA

Abrahams, Ms ALA to ask the Minister of Environmental Affairs, Forestry and Fisheries

Whether her department did business with certain (a) persons, (b) companies and (c) trusts (names and details furnished in each case) (i) in each of the past five financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2019; if so, (aa) on what date(s) did her department do business with the specified persons, companies and trusts and (bb) what was the (aaa) nature and (bbb) monetary value of each business arrangement?

Reply:

a) b) c) i) ii) The Department did not do any business with the relevant persons, companies and trusts for the past five financial years and current financial year.

 

aa) Not applicable.

bb) aaa) bbb) Not applicable.