MARCH 2008 PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN
43
MARCH 2008 PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN WILDERNESS NATIONAL PARK PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN
Transcript of MARCH 2008 PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN
MARCH 2008 PA R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N
WILDERNESS
N AT I O N A L PA R K
PA R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N
3
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
South African National Parks would like to thank everybody who
participated and had input in the formulation of this document
4 5
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
This management plan is hereby internally accepted and authorised as the legal requirementfor managing Wilderness National Park as stated in the Protected Areas Act.
Date: 31 MARCH 2008
______________________________Jill Gordon
Park Manager – Wilderness National Park
______________________________NC Songelwa
Regional Manager – Garden Route Parks
______________________________Paul Daphne
Managing Executive
______________________________Sydney Soundy
Chief Operating Officer
______________________________Dr David Mabunda
Chief Executive
Recommended to SANParks Board
Name: _____________________________ Date: __________Ms Cheryl CaroulusChairperson – SANParks Board
Recommended to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Name: _____________________________ Date: ___________Mr Marthinus van SchalkwykMinister – Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
AUTHORISATION
7
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AUTHORISATIONi. Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6ii. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7iii. Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8iiv. Process Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
1. INTRODUCTION TO BACKGROUND INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121.1 Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121.2 Extent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121.3 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121.4 Urban/rural park relation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121.5 Socio economic context: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131.6 The park in its bioregional context: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131.7 Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .141.6 Topography, geology & soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .141.7 Freshwater & estuarine processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
1.7.1 Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .151.7.2 Physical and chemical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
1.8 Marine & coastal processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .171.9 Flora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
1.9.1 Phytoplankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .181.9.2 Algae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .181.9.3 Submerged aquatic plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .181.9.4 Emergent aquatic plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .191.9.5 Terrestrial vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
1.10 Fauna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .191.10. Zooplankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .191.10.2 Estuarine aquatic invertebrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .201.10.3 Marine & estuarine fishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .201.10.4 Freshwater fishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .211.10.5 Birds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
2. The Protected Areas Management Planning Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .222.1 Setting the Desired State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .222.2 Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
2.2.1 Operating Principles & Vital Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .232.2.2 Vital Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .232.2.3 Socio-Political Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .232.2.4 Economic Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .232.2.5 Environmental Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
2.3 Setting the Details of the Park Desired State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .242.4 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
2.4.2 Socio-economic objectives hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
3. Guidelines and Programmes to achieve the Desired State3.1 Biodiversity and Heritage Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
3.1.1 Park expansion programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .303.1.2 Sustainable use of natural resource programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .323.1.3 Rehabilitation programme (aliens, erosion etc) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .323.1.4 Damage causing animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .343.1.5 Species of Special Concern (Rare & endangered species) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .343.1.6 Aquatic programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .353.1.6.1 Freshwater systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .353.1.6.2 Estuarine systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .353.1.7 Integrated fire programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .373.1.8 Cultural heritage resource programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
3.2. Sustainable tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .393.2.1 Wilderness National Park Zoning Plan (including Knysna) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .393.2.2 Tourism Programm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .423.2.3 Marketing Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .433.2.4 Commercial Development Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43
3.3. Constituency Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .433.3.1 Stakeholder relationship Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .433.3.2 Educational Development Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .433.3.3 Local socio economic development Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .453.3.4 Communications Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46
3.4. Effective park management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .473.4.1 Environmental management programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .473.4.2 Security and Safety Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .473.4.3 Infrastructure Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .483.4.4 Staff Capacity Building Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .503.4.5 Institutional Development and Administration Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .503.4.6 Financial Sustainability Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .503.4.7 HIV/AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .513.4.8 Risk management Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .523.4.9 Adaptive and integrative strategies to sustain the desired state for WNP . . . . . . . . . .53
4. REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54
APPENDIX 1: ZONING PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58
APPENDIX 2: MAP BOOK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70
BSC Balanced Scorecard
C.A.P.E Cape Action Plan for People and the Environment
CBOs Community Based Organisations
CDF Conservation Development Framework
CMAs Catchment Management Authorities
CRM Cultural Resource Management policy
EAP Employee Assistance Program
EMS Environmental Management System
EXCO Executive Committee
GGP Gross Geographic Product
GRI Garden Route Initiative
HDE Historically Disadvantaged Enterprise
IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and natural resources
MPA Marine Protected Area
NGOs Non- Government Organisations
PAA Protected Areas Act
PFMA Public Finance Management Act
SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency
SANParks South African National Parks
SBR State of Biodiversity Report
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
SEDA Small Economic Development Association
SMME Small, medium and macro enterprises
WNP Wilderness National Park
TPC Threshold of Potential Concern
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
8 9
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In compliance with the National Environment: Protected Areas Act No. 57 of 2003,SANParks is required to develop management plans for each of its parks. In devel-oping the management plan for Wilderness National Park (WNP), SANParks hasattempted to integrate, implement and review the biodiversity conservation,tourism and constituency building components that make up its core business,whilst ensuring continual learning and compliance.
The WNP, proclaimed in 1983 is situated between the towns of George andKnysna in the Western Cape and forms part of the world-renowned Garden Route.This park is most probably one of the most integrated urban parks in South Africaand probably in the world. Main sources of income for communities surroundingthe park are offered by the park, domestic service, restaurants, hotels and B& B’s,petrol stations and farms in the area. The park is composite of lakes, rivers, vleis,estuaries and beaches all with a backdrop of lush forests and lofty mountains andoffers a mild climate throughout the year. It is a birder’s paradise, with a total of257 bird species, including the most diverse and abundant water bird communi-ties. The park falls within the Cape Floristic Region (CFR) with its rich biodiversity underserious threat for a variety of reasons. The region has been identified as one of theworlds “hottest” biodiversity hotspots. The Cape Action Plan for the Environment(C.A.P.E) is a strategic plan to identify the key threats and root causes of biodiver-sity losses that need to be addressed in order to conserve the floral kingdom. TheGarden Route Initiative (GRI) is one of the component landscape initiatives of theC.A.P.E. programme, working towards the implementation of the C.A.P.E strategyin the Garden Route region.
The process towards establishing a single consolidated park in the Garden Routehas been initiated by SANParks and forms a part of the GRI project
This park will include the currently proclaimed Tsitsikamma and WildernessNational Park, as well as the former Knysna National Lakes Area. The vision is tomanage all three of these protected areas along with national forests currently del-egated and managed by SANParks, and its contracting partners, as an integratedwhole in the regional mosaic. This will meaningfully conserve a representative sam-
ple of the Garden Route’s biodiversity heritage under asingle banner. Given this broader vision for the protect-ed areas in the Garden Route, WNP’s management planneed be consistent and support the notion of the newpark. The vision statement for WNP recognises theimportance of having to conserve this areas’ unique bio-diversity in conjunction with its important cultural her-itage and as a part of a larger socio- economic system. To meet this vision a desired state for the proposedGarden Route NP to guide park management in its dailyoperations and longer term planning was developed.This required the formulation of the park’s vital attrib-utes (what makes it unique) factors determining/strengthening or threatening/eroding these attributes,and objectives to address them In this way the manage-ment plan was customized for WNP, but within theGarden Route National Park context.
The WNP plans specifically aim to conserve a represen-tative sample of the regions ecosystems in a linked land-scape, with particular emphasis on the Wilderness Lake
systems, and the maintenance or restoration of environ-mental processes. It also plans to in conjunction with rel-evant stakeholders, to reduce threats and pressures andlimit environmental impacts. The park plans to developits tourism infrastructure and facilities in order toenhance the experience as well as to integrate the cur-rent park as a tourist node in the greater Garden Routeprotected areas.” Further to the parks current zonationplan, will be the development of an all inclusive conser-vation development framework (CDF) that sets the lim-itations for development based upon regional, biologi-cal and social informants This would be fully in tune withlocal IDPs to facilitate development and conservationissues.
10 11
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Process overview
South African National Parks (SANParks) has adopted an overarching park man-agement strategy that focuses on developing, together with stakeholders, andthen managing towards a ‘desired state’ for a National Park. The setting of apark desired state is done through the adaptive planning process (Rogers 2003).The term ‘desired state’ is now entrenched in the literature, but it is importantto note that this rather refers to a ‘desired set of varying conditions’ rather thana static state. This is reinforced in the SANParks biodiversity values (SANParks2006) which accept that change in a system is ongoing and desirable.Importantly, a desired state for a park is also not based on a static vision, butrather seeks refinement though ongoing learning and continuous reflection andappropriate adaptation through explicit adoption of the Strategic AdaptiveManagement approach.
The ‘desired state’ of apark is the parks’ longer-term vision (30-50 years)translated into sensibleand appropriate objectivesthough broad statementsof desired outcomes.These objectives arederived from a park’s keyattributes, opportunitiesand threats and areinformed by the context(international, national andlocal) which jointly deter-mine and inform manage-ment strategies, pro-grammes and projects.Objectives for nationalparks were further devel-oped by aligning withSANParks corporatestrategic objectives, butdefining them in a localcontext in conjunction withkey stakeholders. These
objectives are clustered or grouped into an objectiveshierarchy that provides the framework for the ParkManagement Plan. Within this document only the higherlevel objectives are presented. However, more detailedobjectives, down to the level of operational goals, havebeen (or where necessary are currently being) furtherdeveloped in conjunction with key stakeholders and spe-cialists.
This approach to the management of a National Park is inline with the requirements of the National EnvironmentManagement: Protected Areas Act No. 57 of 2003 (NEM:PAA). Overall the Park Management Plan forms part of aNational Planning framework for protected areas as out-lined in the figure on the left.
Park Management Plans were not formulated in isolationof National legislation and policies. Management planscomply with related national legislation such as theNational Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act,national SANParks policy and international conventionsthat have been signed and ratified by the South AfricanGovernment.
Coordinated Policy Framework GoverningPark Management Plans
The SANParks Coordinated Policy Framework providesthe overall framework to which all Park ManagementPlans align. This policy sets out the ecological, economic,technological, social and political environments ofnational parks at the highest level. In accordance with theNEM: Protected Areas Act, the Coordinated PolicyFramework is open to regular review by the public toensure that it continues to reflect the organisation’s man-date, current societal values and new scientific knowl-edge with respect to protected area management. Thisdocument is available on the SANParks website.
Key functions of Park Management Plans
The key functions of this management plan are to: • ensure that the Park is managed according to the rea-
son it was declared;• be a tool to guide management of a protected area
at all levels, from the basic operational level to theMinister of Environ-mental Affairs and Tourism;
• be a tool which enables the evaluation of progressagainst set objectives;
• be a document which can be used to set up key per-formance indicators for Park staff;
• set the intent of the Park, and provide explicit evi-dence for the financial support required for the Park.
This Management Plan for Wilderness National Parkcomprises four broad sections:
1. The background to and outline of the desired state ofthe Park and how this was determined.
2. A summary of the management strategies, pro-grammes and projects that are required to movetowards achieving the desired state (obviously thesestrategies, programmes and projects can extend overmany years but here we present the managementfocus until 2010.
3. An outline of the Strategic Adaptive Managementmethodology and strategies that will ensure that thePark undertakes an adaptive approach to manage-ment. It focuses park management on those criticalstrategic issues, their prioritisation, operationalisationand integration, and reflection on achievements toensure that the longer-term desired state is reached.
4. Presentation of a high level budget.
Figure 1: Protected Areas planning framework
National & International Legislation
SANParks Strategic FrameworkVision, Policies, Values, Objectives, Norms,
Standards, Indicators
Protected Area PolicyFramework
Park Desired State
Park Management Plan
Annual Operations Plan
5-Year Cycle
Annual Cycle
Monitor
Strategic Review
National DecisionMaking Context
Park DecisionMaking Context
AdaptiveManagement Review
Implementationand Operations
OVERVIEW OF THE SANPARKSMANAGEMENT PLANNING PROCESS
with various levels of community structures as part of theparks daily operations.
The park falls between the George and Knysna munici-palities and interaction between the parties is ongoing.The George municipality has a completed IDP and cur-rently a draft SDF. Although the Environment is identi-fied as a Key Performance Area (in association withSports and Recreation), a section dedicated to theEnvironment has been recommended. The parks’tourism and local economic development projects arerelevant to these local government plans. The Knysnamunicipality has a complete IDP and SDF.
Collaboration also continues around the incorporationof SANParks funded projects (CoastCare, WfW andEPWP) into the IDP projects section of the plans.
1.5 Socio economic context:
The park serves an area between Sedgefield andGeorge. Communities within close proximity of the park,fall within two municipal areas: Knysna (Sizamile,Sedgefield) and George (Kleinkrans, Kransvlei, Langvlei,Rondevlei, Wilderness, Wilderness Heights, Hoekwil,Touwsranten). The estimated population for Sedgefieldis 7840 (as per Knysna Municipal figures). The preva-lence of HIV/ Aids estimated at 298 as per reportedantenatal cases at the Knysna Municipal HealthDepartment.
The Sedgefield economy is based on Tourism services.Most people work in Knysna (25km) especially the moreprofessional jobs. Some are employed by SANParksPoverty Relief programmes such as CoastCare and Workfor Water. Communities within the George municipalarea show an unemployment rate of 21% as per EdenIntegrated Development Plan (IDP) 2006. The estimatedpopulation figure is 16983.
Main sources of income for communities surroundingthe park are offered by: the park (permanent positions inSANParks, Working for Water and CoastCare, learner-ships and holiday jobs), domestic service, restaurants,hotels and B& B’s, petrol stations and farms in the area.Others travel to and from George.
1.6 The park in its bioregional context:
The park falls within the country’s Cape Floristic Region(CFR). The CFR in South Africa is the smallest and rich-est of the six floral kingdoms in the world, and it is theonly one to be found entirely within one country. Its richbiodiversity is under serious threat for a variety of rea-sons including conversion of natural habitat to perma-nent agriculture, inappropriate fire management, rapidand insensitive development, overexploitation of waterresources, marine resources, and infestation by alien
species. The region has been identified as one of theworlds “hottest” hotspots of biodiversity.In response to this a process of extensive consultationinvolving various interested parties, including local gov-ernment and non governmental organisations resultedin the establishment of a strategic plan referred to asCape Action Plan for the Environment (C.A.P.E). It iden-tified the key threats and root causes of biodiversity loss-es that need to be addressed in order to conserve thefloral kingdom. This resulted in a spatial plan identifyingareas which need to be conserved and a series of broadprogramme activities which need to be undertaken overa 20 year period. Based on the situation assessment andanalysis of threats, three overarching themes that com-plement and reinforce one another were developed:C.A.P.E. will:
• establish an effective reserve network, enhance off-reserve conservation, and support bioregional plan-ning
• strengthen and enhance institutions, policies, laws,co-operative governance, and community participa-tion
• develop methods to ensure sustainable yields, pro-mote compliance with laws, integrate biodiversityconcerns into catchment management, and promotesustainable eco-tourism
The Garden Route Initiative (GRI) is one of the compo-nent landscape initiatives of the C.A.P.E. programme,working towards the implementation of the CAPE strat-egy in the Garden Route region. The GRI is a partnershipprogramme that aims to conserve and restore theunique biodiversity and sense of place in the GardenRoute, while supporting the sustainable management ofthe area and the delivery of benefits to local communi-ties. The GRI is supported by a grant as part of theC.A.P.E. Programme from the GEF (Global EnvironmentFacility) through the World Bank to SANParks.
The GRI’s strategic areas of implementation include theconsolidation of priority biodiversity into protectedareas, assisting land owners to appropriately managebiodiversity on their properties, and incorporating biodi-versity priorities into land use planning and decisionmaking, as well as ensuring the sustainable managementeffectiveness of the Garden Route’s conservation areas.
SANParks is leading the implementation of the protect-ed area land consolidation programme for the GRI,working towards the establishment of the single consol-idated Garden Route National Park, as well as workingwith CapeNature with the Stewardship Programme torealize the protection and appropriate management ofthe biodiversity priorities on private land. The parks con-servation mandate, objectives and initiatives are all com-plimentary and support the bioregional plans and inter-ventions.
13
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.1 Location
The Wilderness National Park (WNP) (33°50’-34°30’S; 22°33’-22°50’E) is locatedbetween the towns of George (16km) and Knysna (40km), and adjoins the IndianOcean on the Southern Cape Coast.
1.2 Extent
The WNP is ± 2 595 ha in extent, and incorporates the Touw Estuary, Eilandvlei,Langvlei, Rondevlei and all interleading channels (collectively referred to as theTouw System), Swartvlei Lake, Karatara Lake and Swartvlei estuary (collectivelyreferred to as the Swartvlei System); a portion (72.1 ha) of the lower reaches of theDuiwe River catchment; and the marine shoreline (Admiralty Zone) fromWilderness (town) to the western boundary of the Goukamma Nature Reserve.
1.3 History
The WNP was proclaimed in 1983 to protect the unique lakes system of the area,with subsequent additions made in 1986 (Swartvlei System), 1987 (state lands inthe Wilderness National Lake Area), 1991 (Rondevlei and lands between Rondevleiand Swartvlei Lake), and 1997 (lower Duiwe River). The objective of the park wasto conserve the Touw and Swartvlei Systems (collectively referred to as theWilderness lakes) and associated historic and cultural assets and natural landscapefeatures. Portions of the Touw System (Rondevlei, Langvlei, Eilandvlei, Serpentine)were designated in terms of the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar Convention) asa Wetland of International Importance in 1991.
1.4 Urban/rural park relation
This park is most probably one of the most integrated urban parks in South Africaand probably in the world. Its borders are intertwined with residential estates(Wilderness, Klein Krans and Sedgefield) and farmlands to the extent that itbecomes difficult to know when one is in the park and when not. Located betweenthe town of George (16km) and Knysna (25km) in the heart of the Garden Routethe area has seen a significant increase in residential development over the last fiveyears.
The Park is a largely an open access system with only the controlled access at theEbb and Flow Rest camp. Contact and liaison with communities adjacent to thepark takes place in a formal and informal manner. Regular contact is maintained
12
INTRODUCTION
posed of virtually pure quartzose sand, whereas highlyorganic muds cover the lake floor (Birch et al. 1978). The Wilderness lakes formed as a result of the cutting offof rivers by the development of dune cordons during theperiod 67 to >200 ka BP (Bateman et al. 2004), thus pre-venting them from flowing directly into the sea. The lakesare transient features that through natural erosion anddeposition processes are slowly silting up.
1.7 Freshwater & estuarine processes
1.7.1 Hydrology
The catchment area of the Touw System comprises threerivers, namely Touw River (catchment area = 96.2 km
2),
Duiwe River (42.1 km2) and Langvlei Spruit (8.2 km
2)
(Hughes & Filmalter 1993; Fijen & Kapp 1995b), withrivers draining into the Swartvlei System being the DiepRiver (98.3 km
2), Klein Wolwe River (17.2 km
2), Höekraal
River (111.0 km2), and Karatara River (101.6 km
2)
(Whitfield et al. 1983; Hughes & Filmalter 1993).
Virgin mean annual runoff (MAR) in the Touw System is24.6 x 10
6m
3y
-1(Fijen 1995a), and in the Swartvlei System
is estimated to be between 66 x 106
m-3
y-1(CSIR 1978)
and 70.6 x 106
m3
y-1
(Fijen 1995a). Total flow reduction inthe Touw System in 1995 was estimated to be 7.1 x 10
6
m3
y-1
(29% of virgin MAR) (Fijen & Kapp 1995a; Fijen1995a) for forestry (15% MAR), agricultural (12% MAR)and domestic (2% MAR) use. It was predicted (in 1995)that future flow reduction will reduce to 62% MAR due topredominantly increasing agricultural and domesticdemand (Fijen & Kapp 1995a; Fijen 1995a). Total flowreduction in the Swartvlei System in 1995 was estimatedto be 22.6 x 10
6m
3y
-1(32% of virgin MAR) (Fijen & Kapp
1995a; Fijen 1995b) for forestry (27% MAR), agricultural(5% MAR) and domestic (<1% MAR) use. It was predict-ed (in 1995) that future flow reduction will reduce to 63%MAR due predominantly to increasing agricultural anddomestic demand (Fijen & Kapp 1995a; Fijen 1995b).Total evaporation from the Swartvlei System has bee esti-mated as 12.1 x 10
6m
-3(cf. 1127 mm y
-1) or approximate-
ly 20% of MAR (Whitfield et al. 1983) indicating thatunder natural conditions Swartvlei Lake is unlikely tobecome hypersaline.
Flood hydrograph modelling in the Touw System empha-sised the short residency time of flood waters and hencepotential for rapid increases in water level, particularly inthe Touw Estuary (Görgens 1979). Expected water levels(meters amsl) in the Touw Estuary that would result dur-ing flood events of different return frequency are 5 yr. =3.22; 10 yr. = 3.61; 20 yr. = 3.88; 50 yr. = 4.01; 100 yr. =4.93 (Görgens 1979). Hydrological modelling demon-strated that maintaining the height of the sand sill at theestuary mouth at between 2.1 m and 2.4 m amsl shouldprevent flooding of low-lying properties by floods with areturn frequency of 1 in 50 years or lower, and thatdredging of the connecting channels would not signifi-
cantly reduce the peak water levels. (CSIR 1981, 1982).
In the Swartvlei System when river floods coincide withperiods when the estuary mouth is closed, or even withvery high spring tides when the mouth is open, floodingof adjacent land can be expected, especially in theSedgefield Extension 1 area (Howard-Williams & Allanson1979). To reduce the probability of flooding whilst meet-ing hydrological and ecological needs for periodic elevat-ed water levels it has been recommended that SwartvleiEstuary mouth be artificially breached at 2.0 m amsl (CSIR1978; Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979; Whitfield et al.1983).
Mathematical modelling of water movement in theSwartvlei System indicated that the removal of the rail-bridge dividing Swartvlei Lake and Swartvlei Estuarywould have no discernible effect on the estuary mouth(CSIR 1978; Huizinga 1987), with the influence of thebridge on flow reduction confined to the immediatevicinity of the bridge as the main restriction to outflow inthe system is the narrow estuary mouth (Whitfield et al.1983).
1.7.2 Physical and chemical
Water temperature: Temperature variations in the lakesand estuaries follow a seasonal pattern, with tempera-tures generally ranging between 10-14°C in winter and25-29°C in summer (Whitfield et al. 1983; Russell 1996).Closure of the Swartvlei Estuary mouth has little effect onwater temperature (Whitfield et al. 1983), though duringsummer when the estuary mouth is open, the waters nearthe mouth are generally 1°C cooler than further up theestuary.
Salinity: Swartvlei Lake is normally meromictic, as a resultof its usual stratification into water layers of different den-sities, caused by vertical stratification in salt concentra-tion (Robarts & Allanson 1977; Howard-Williams &Allanson 1978). The bottom layer of high salinity watercan be up to 5 m thick (Whitfield et al. 1983). WhenSwartvlei Estuary mouth is closed, wind mixing of the sur-face waters of the lakes gradually breaks down the salin-ity layering (Robarts & Allanson 1977; Allanson &Howard-Williams 1984). No definite pattern of stratifica-tion has been recorded in the lakes of the Touw System.The salinity of the lakes of the Touw System increase thefurther removed they are from the sea, with Eilandvleiaveraging between 6 and 10 g kg
-1, Langvlei 10 and 13 g
kg-1, and Rondevlei between 12 and 16 g kg
-1(Whitfield
et al. 1983; Russell 1999a).
Turbidity: Turbidity recorded in the lakes and estuaries ofthe WNP are moderate, with the average of all waterbod-ies being below 10 NTU (Whitfield et al 1983; Russell1999a). Water clarity is greatest in Swartvlei Lake, with allsystems undergoing periodic dramatic reductions in clar-ity which is generally associated with flood conditions(Whitfield et al. 1983; Russell 1999a).
15
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Management initiatives could include:
Engage with regional land management authorities at local & regional level.
Alignment with bioregional planning, including areas for the maintenance of bio-diversity pattern and processes with appropriate land use guidelines.
Provide input into planning and decision making process for external developmentthat may compromise park biodiversity objectives.Negotiate to ensure that external developments are not visually obtrusive or outof character with the park.
1.7 Climate
The WNP occurs in the relatively small perennial rainfall zone of South Africa(Tyson 1971). Annual rainfall is between 600 and 700 mm (Schafer 1992) with littleseasonal variation (Whitfield et al. 1983), but slight peaks do occur from Januaryto March, and from August to November (Robinson & De Graaff 1994; Fijen &
Kapp 1995c). Mean rainfall in the upper river catchments is 900-1000 mm y-1
(Adamson 1975; Fijen & Kapp 1995c).South-west winds predominate throughout the year (Howard-Williams & Allanson1978), though warm north and north-east winds are fairly common during winter
months. Strong winds are uncommon with 97% below 30 km hr-1 (Whitfield et al.1983). Cloudy conditions are common. Mean daily minimum and maximum airtemperatures are 15-25°C (summer) and 7-19°C (winter). Temperature extremesrecorded at Swartvlei Lake (1975 to 1982) are minimum 2°C, and maximum 33°C(Whitfield et al. 1983).
1.6 Topography, geology & soils
The coastal lakes and their surrounding dunes comprise predominantly quaternarysands in which dune rock or aeolianite has been formed from the cementing ofsandy ridges by calcium carbonate (Martin 1962). Soils range from inceptisols onthe youngest dunes, to finely textured, poorly drained podzols and duplex soils inolder dunes (Schafer 1991). The high silt and fine clay fraction in the topsoil ofolder dunes, coupled with underlying impervious clay or rock layers and thin iron-pans contribute to restricted drainage (Schafer 1991). Much of the floodplain ofthe lake systems are covered with a dark alluvium which is rich in organic matter(Allanson & Whitfield 1983). Sediments on the margins of Swartvlei lakes are com-
14
Dissolved oxygen: Spatial variations in dissolved oxygen in the Swartvlei Systemdepend largely on the distribution of aquatic plants, with higher oxygen valuesbeing associated with the presence of submerged aquatic plants (Howard-Williams& Allanson 1979). The closing of the estuary mouth has no effect on the mean dis-solved oxygen values in Swartvlei Estuary (Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979).Deoxygenation has been recorded in localised areas in the Swartvlei Estuarytowards the end of the open phase (Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979). Theseareas are at the sides of the channel where mats of floating algae start to rot, andin deeper portions of the estuary. The only recorded incidence of low oxygen con-centrations resulting in the death of organisms occurred in Rondevlei during March1993 when the senescence of a dinoflagellate/algal bloom resulted the mean oxy-gen concentration in Rondevlei declining to below 1 ppm, which resulted in thedeath of several large Cape stumpnose (Rhabdosargus holubi) and white steen-bras (Lithognathus lithognathus) (Russell 1994).
Phosphorous: Soluble reactive phosphate (SRP) (PO4-P) concentration in SwartvleiLake is very low (± 1 ug l
-1) and is often present in undetectable quantities
(Whitfield et al. 1983). Dissolved humic matter from the rivers plays a significantrole in binding phosphate, and hence contributing to the nutrient poor status ofthe waterbody (Howard-Williams 1977). Total dissolved phosphorous (TDP) valuesrange from 10 to 20 ug l
-1, and total phosphorous (TP) up to 30 ug l
-1(Whitfield et
al. 1983). SRP, TDP and TP in the stratified bottom waters of the lake all exceed100 ug l
-1(Howard-Williams 1977) but are unavailable for plant growth (Howard-
Williams 1977). The oligotrophic status of Swartvlei Lake has biological conse-quences, which include low phytoplankton primary production (Robarts 1976), lowzooplankton biomass (Coetzee 1981) and low ichthyoplankton densities (Whitfield1989b).
TDP concentrations in Swartvlei Estuary remains fairly constant at about 24 ug l-1
(Whitfield et al. 1983), though increases up to 260 ug l-1
have been recorded indeoxygenated saline areas.
SRP concentrations in the Touw Estuary and Eilandvlei generally remain low, notexceeding 2.2 ug l
-1. In Langvlei and Rondevlei however, TP levels as high as 66 and
117 ug l-1
respectively have been recorded (Allanson & Whitfield 1983). Despitethese comparatively high levels of TP, only occasionally have SRP levels up to 20ug l
-1been recorded in Langvlei and Rondevlei, which is the point at which, if all
other factors are propitious, marked algal growth could occur (Allanson &Whitfield 1983). The main source of P for the estuaries is the sea, and during thetidal phase there being a net import and accumulation of P primarily in the formof particulate matter (Liptrot 1978; Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979). A net out-flow of P occurs from Swartvlei Estuary during the strong outflow phases immedi-
16 17
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
ately after the estuary mouth is opened, with most of theP leaving the estuary is in particulate form.
Nitrogen: The concentration of N-ions in SwartvleiEstuary are generally low, with concentrations in 1976being found to range from not detectable to 21 ug l
-1
[NO2+NO3]-N (Coetzee 1978). Howard-Williams andAllanson (1979) recorded values for nitrate (NO3-N)ranging from 3 to 30 ug l
-1, and Robarts (1973) recorded
values for ammonia (NH4-N) ranging from notdetectable to 4 ug l
-1.
NO3-N concentrations in the Touw Estuary (1979 to1981) were found to vary between 7 and 60 ug l
-1
(Allanson & Whitfield 1983) which is well below thatwhich could be considered to constitute serious organicpollution. Similar low levels of NO3-N were recorded inthe other waterbodies of the Touw System during non-flood periods, with the exception of Langvlei, where val-ues as high as 569 ug l
-1have been recorded.
Surveillance of water chemistry in the Touw System dur-ing flood periods has demonstrated that the inflowingstreams are an important source of both N- and P-ionsinto the system (Allanson & Whitfield 1983). Elevatedconcentrations of both NO3-N and PO4-P have beenrecorded in the Touw Estuary, Eilandvlei and Langvleiduring flood periods, whereas the concentration of N-and P-ions in Rondevlei, with no feeder streams,remained relatively unaltered (Allanson & Whitfield1983).
Trace elements: Assessment of the occurrence of traceelements (copper, lead, zinc, iron, manganese, cobalt,nickel, chromium, cadmium, mercury, magnesium, alu-minium, sodium, calcium, strontium, potassium) in watersamples from the Wilderness lakes in 1977 indicatedthat, with the exception of iron and manganese inSwartvlei Lake, concentrations were generally low(Watling 1977). High iron concentrations appear to be anatural phenomenon in rivers flowing into the lakes, evi-denced by the large quantities of ferric oxide which canbe seen to cover the rocks along the river beds (Watling1977).
A sediment sample collected adjacent to the yacht clubin Eilandvlei during April 1977 (Watling 1977) was foundto have an elevated level of manganese. A core sampletaken in this locality also showed an overall elevation invalues for copper, lead, zinc, cobalt, nickel, cadmium andchromium, with it being hypothesised that these levelsrepresent some degree of anthropogenic contamination(Watling 1977). Similarly, high levels of nickel from sedi-ments in Swartvlei Estuary may represent contaminationfrom adjacent residential areas. Elevated levels of lead inthe upper portions of sediment cores from both lake sys-
tems indicate possible pollution from motor fuels orpaint (Watling 1977).
Persistent chemicals: Investigations of the concentrationof chlorinated hydrocarbon, PCB and Dieldrin residues inthe body tissues of aquatic birds in the Touw Systemhave yielded conflicting results. In 1983 low concentra-tions of t-DDT and PCB were detected in the body tis-sues of reed cormorant, darter, white-breasted cor-morant, black-necked grebe, great crested grebe andgrass owl (De Kock & Boshoff 1987). Similarly, a fisheagle egg, collected at Sedgefield during 1985 had alow concentration of t-DDT (0.21 ug g
-1wet weight), and
no PCBs or Dieldrin residues (De Kock & Lord 1986). Incontrast, in 1984 and 1985 high levels of Dieldrin (1.89ug g-1) and t-DDT (6.26 & 5.08 ug g
-1) were recorded in
African marsh harrier eggs from the Touw System, withlow ratios of DDE/t-DDT in several eggs indicatingrecent inputs of DDT into the environment. (De Kock &Simmons 1988).
1.8 Marine & coastal processes
Wind and wave conditions are the main factors in coastalhydraulics affecting the Touw and Swartvlei estuaries.South-westerly winds are dominant throughout the year,though there is a strong south-easterly component dur-ing spring and summer, and in winter the north-westerlywinds are more frequent (Whitfield et al. 1983). South-easterly waves predominate in summer and autumn, andsouth-westerly waves in spring and winter (Whitfield etal. 1983), the sector from which the greatest medianwave height of 2.75m originate.
Eastward longshore sediment transport is estimated tooccur 53% of the time in the region of Swartvlei Estuarymouth, whereas westward longshore drift occurs 23% ofthe time (Whitfield et al. 1983). Littoral sand movementtends to close gaps in the shoreline such as an estuarymouth. This happens when the longshore sand driftbecomes stronger than the forces that keep the inletopen. The majority of mouth closures in Swartvlei Estuaryoccur in winter, which coincides with the predominanceof south-westerly wave conditions that are responsiblefor the main longshore sand transport.
Open estuary mouth conditions were estimated to be atleast 40% (Touw System) and 65% (Swartvlei System)under virgin flow conditions. In 1995 open estuary mouthconditions had been reduced to 25% (Touw System) and55% (Swartvlei System) (Fijen & Kapp 1995a). As a resultof possible future reductions in freshwater inflow (seehydrology) the open mouth conditions can reduce fur-ther to approximately 19% (Touw System) and 51%(Swartvlei System) (Fijen & Kapp 1995a).
18 19
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
1.9 Flora
1.9.1 Phytoplankton
Three major categories of phytoplankton have been recorded in Swartvlei Lake viz.diatoms, flagellates and dinoflagellates (Robarts 1976) with the diatomCoscinodiscus lineatus the most abundant species. Flagellates and dinoflagellatesgenerally form a relatively minor part of the phytoplankton biota (Robarts 1973),though short-lived blooms do occasionally occur.
1.9.2 Algae
Principal genera of epiphytic algae occurring in the Wilderness lakes includeEnteromorpha, Lyngbya, Cladophera, Percursaria, Cocconeis, Ectocarpus,Polysiphonia, Chondria and Hypnea (Howard-Williams 1980; Howard-Williams &Liptrot 1980).
1.9.3 Submerged aquatic plants
Submerged aquatic plants are abundant throughout the lake systems. The produc-tion of organic matter in the Swartvlei System was calculated in 1978-1979 as 1.84x 10
6kg y
-1(dry weight) (74% of total production) (Howard-Williams & Allanson
1979), and 334 100 kg y-1 (17% of total production) in the Touw System (Howard-Williams 1980). The bulk of this organic matter is produced in the shallow periph-ery of the waterbodies. Both long- and short-term changes occur in the abun-dance, biomass and distribution of submerged aquatic plants, with substantialdeclines in the abundance and distribution of species periodically recorded inmost waterbodies (Davies 1982; Weisser & Howard-Williams 1982; Whitfield 1982;Weisser et al. 1992). Theorised reasons for periodic declines in aquatic plantsinclude fungal diseases (Howard-Williams 1980), changing nutrient status of thewaterbody (Hall 1985a, 1985b; Weisser 1979), shading by Enteromorpha (Hall1985a) and dinoflagellate blooms (Coetzee & Palmer 1982), reduced water trans-parency resulting from the influx of turbid water (Whitfield 1982; Allanson &Howard-Williams 1984), and reduced calcium: magnesium ratios in the water col-umn, as a result of persistent flooding (Allanson & Howard-Williams 1984).
Declines in the aquatic plants significantly effect food production, with a 10%decline in submerged aquatic plants resulting in a 20% decline in the total foodproduction in Swartvlei Lake (Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979). As the ratio offood production to consumption in Swartvlei Lake is approximately 1:1 (Howard-
Williams & Allanson 1979), while in the estuary utilisationof organic material by the biological community isgreater than the production rate, any loss in primary pro-duction would result in a corresponding reduction in thenumber of consumer organisms.
Extensive studies of the role of submerged aquaticplants in nutrient cycling have been undertaken in theSwartvlei System. In Swartvlei Lake, no evidence ofphosphorous limitation was found in Potamogeton tis-sues (Howard-Williams 1977), whereas the large algae,Chara and Cladophera spp. were found to be nutrientlimited. Potamogeton does not act as an efficient “nutri-ent pump” (Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979), thus therelease of nutrients from the rooted aquatic plants isthrough decomposition (Howard-Williams & Davies1979). The rate of uptake of nutrients from the water col-umn by epiphytic algae is approximately ten orders ofmagnitude greater than that of the Potamogeton(Howard-Williams 1977, 1981), thus enrichment of thewater with P and N compounds would be expected toresult in the growth of epiphytic algae. The sediments ofSwartvlei Lake act as a major sink to plant nutrients,absorbing up to 60 % of all phosphorous inputs into thesystem (Howard-Williams 1977, 1981).
In Swartvlei Estuary the eelgrass Zostera capensis acts asa nutrient pump adsorbing nutrients from the sedimentsand secreting them into the surrounding water (Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979). Two pathways of the take-upof nutrients are thought to exist, the first being a sedi-ment-water exchange system, and the second beingthat the large mats of Enteromorpha algae take up Pduring the day faster than the rate at which it is releasedby the Zostera, and then in turn release P compoundsduring the night. There is no evidence of a long-termaccumulation of phosphate in Swartvlei Estuary(Howard-Williams & Allanson 1979) which indicates thataccumulated nutrients must be periodically removed.
1.9.4 Emergent aquatic plants
Mapping of the distribution of emergent aquatic plantsin the 1970s (Weisser & Howard-Williams 1982) and1990s (Russell 2003) indicated localised increases incommon reeds Phragmites australis, bulrush Typhacapensis, Scrub or trees, and Grass or Fields, anddecreases in dune rush Juncus kraussii, Schoenoplectusscirpoideus and Low scrub or fynbos in the TouwSystem. Probable causes of change include the naturaltendency of plants to colonise new areas, as well asanthropogenic manipulation of physical, chemical andbiological processes, including the cessation of distur-bance by large herbivores, water-level stabilisation,changes in soil salinity and the accumulation of plant lit-ter within wetland areas (Russell 2003).
Phragmites australis is the most abundant of the emer-gent aquatic plants, calculated in 1979 to produce up to303 000 kg y
-1organic matter (dry weight) (12% of total
production) in the Swartvlei System (Howard-Williams &Allanson 1979), and 1.08 x 10
6kg y
-1(55% of total pro-
duction) in the Touw System (Howard-Williams 1980).Organic matter production by other emergent aquaticplant species is substantially lower, with Schoenoplectusscirpoideus producing 351 600 kg y
-1(18.0% of total pro-
duction), and Typha capensis 182 800 kg y-1
(9.4% oftotal production) in the Touw System (Howard-Williams1980).
1.9.5 Terrestrial vegetation
The vegetation of the park largely comprises two vege-tation types/broad habitat units, i.e. GoukammaFynbos/Thicket Mosaic and Knysna Afromontane Forest(Cowling & Heijnis 2001). The latter is named “SouthernAfrotemperate Forest” by Mucina & Rutherford (2006).The former comprises a mixture of fynbos and subtropi-cal thicket on dunes and was accordingly termed a“Mosaic of Dune Fynbos and Kaffrarian Thicket” by Mollet al. (1984), ”South Coast Dune Fynbos” by Cowling(1984), and “Southern Cape Dune Fynbos” by Mucina &Rutherford (2006). Structurally, South Coast DuneFynbos is distinguished from other fynbos types by thestrong component of large-leaved shrubs (of subtropicalthicket affinity, e.g. Rhus species, Olea exasperata,Maytenus procumbens, Sideroxylon inerme,Pittosporum viridiflorum, Pterocelastrus tricuspidatus)and the lack of proteoid shrubs. Restioids and small-leaved shrubs dominate in the herb and shrub stratarespectively, although grass cover can be quite high(Cowling 1984). Several rare and/or endemic species areknown from the small (± 212 ha) community betweenRondevlei and Swartvlei Lake, including Satyrium prin-ceps, Gladiolus vaginatus, Silene sp. nov. and Disa sp.nov. cf. hians which is only known from this population(Vlok 1989).
1.10 Fauna
1.10.1 Zooplankton
Zooplankton communities consist primarily of estuarinespecies, with 45 forms having been recorded (Grindley &Wooldridge 1973). Two zooplankton communities havebeen describes, namely a mixolimnion community occur-ring mainly under aerobic conditions, and a moni-molimnion community occurring primarily under anaero-bic conditions and in the presence of H2S (Coetzee 1981,1983). The highest daytime number of individuals in theTouw System has been recorded from Eilandvlei (14 641indiv. m-3) followed by Rondevlei (13 108 indiv. m
-3)
20 21
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
(Coetzee 1983). The highest mean daytime standing crop has been recorded inLangvlei (17 mg m
-3), followed by Rondevlei (15 mg m
-3) and Eilandvlei (6 mg m
-3)
(Coetzee 1983). The lowest daytime planktonic standing crop was recorded overdeep areas in Swartvlei Lake, where bottom waters were deoxygenated (Grindley1981; Grindley & Wooldridge 1973).
1.10.2 Estuarine aquatic invertebrates
Aquatic macroinvertebrate communities in the lakes consist predominantly ofestuarine species. (Davies 1981; Whitfield 1989e). Most of the zoobenthos in lakesoccur on submerged aquatic plants (Davies 1981), with the mean biomass onPotamogeton pectinatus in the Touw System calculated during 1979 and 1980 tobe 77.6 g dry mass m
-2, compared to the 12.7 g dry mass
m-2recorded in sediments (Davies 1981).
1.10.3 Marine & estuarine fishes
Fish communities are typically dominated by juvenile marine species (Hall 1985a,1985b; Kok & Whitfield 1986; Hall et al. 1987; Russell 1996). The optimum recruit-ment period for most dominant species is from October to February (Kok 1981b;Whitfield 1989a, 1989d), with an extended spawning period thought to be anadaptive strategy whereby the period of potential juvenile recruitment is pro-longed, in effect creating a buffer against failure of recruitment as a result ofadverse marine or estuarine conditions (Whitfield & Kok, 1992). Nearshore marineareas are important habitat for estuarine associated fishes, with larvae and post lar-vae of 16 families identified from the surf zone off Swartvlei Estuary (Whitfield1989c, 1989d). Recruitment of juvenile fish form the surf zone into a closed estu-ary can occur during high seas when the sand bar at the estuary mouth is over-topped (Whitfield 1992). Though an open estuary phase is essential for breedingand recruitment of marine fishes, a closed phase is also important for providing anideal nursery habitat for juveniles (Kok & Whitfield 1986).
Breaching of Swartvlei Estuary has been observed to result in the mortality ofKnysna seahorses (Hippocampus capensis). Most die-off’s have involved less than100 individuals though on 18 February 1991 mortality was estimated to exceed3000 individuals, resulting from high water temperatures (32°C) which occurred inthe shallow marginal areas of the Swartvlei Estuary following an extended periodof hot weather (Russell 1994).
Extensive studies have been undertaken on the diet of fishes, which consequentlycan be grouped into five feeding categories (detrivores, herbivores, omnivores,
carnivores, piscivores) of which the detrivores are domi-nant (Whitfield 1988a). The biomass of the littoral fishcommunity in Swartvlei Lake during 1980 was estimatedto be 12.4 g m
-2wet weight (Whitfield 1993), with detriv-
orous species contributing 3.2 g m-2, zoobenthic con-
sumers 2.8 g m-2, piscivorous species 2.3 g m
-2, herbivo-
rous/epifaunal consumers 2.7 g m-2
and zooplanktivo-rous consumers 1.4 g m
-2. Estuarine fish biomasses in the Swartvlei sys-
tem do not exceed those of productive freshwater ormarine environments (Whitfield 1993).
1.10.4 Freshwater fishes
Nine freshwater fish species have been recorded in theDuiwe and Touw rivers within the WNP (Russell 1999b),of which three species are alien.
1.10.5 Birds
A total of 257 bird species, including 84 water birds,have been recorded in the WNP and surrounding areas(Boshoff 1991). Rondevlei and Langvlei frequently sup-port the most diverse and abundant water bird commu-nities (Boshoff & Piper 1992), with surveys on Langvleiindicating that at times water bird abundance canexceed 7000 individuals comprising 65 species (Boshoff& Palmer 1981). This abundance of water birds, and inparticular Anatidae (ducks and geese) which on Langvleialone at times exceeds 2000 individuals of nine species,represents the largest concentration of species and indi-viduals along the southern and eastern Cape coasts(Underhill et al. 1980). Most water birds which occur onthe lakes and estuaries have been observed to undergoa short-term temporal, usually seasonal, variation inabundance (Boshoff et al. 1991a, 1991b, 1991c).
22 23
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
2. THE PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PLANNING FRAMEWORK
The protected areas management planning framework that has been designed forthe SANParks guides park management in setting up a management plan imple-mentation thereof and the review of the plan. The essential feature of the systemis the iterative way in which it will enable continual improvement in the manage-ment of the Park though annual and five-year review cycles. The first step in devel-oping/revising a management plan is to develop the desired state of the park.
2.1 Setting the Desired State
After an extensive negotiation period, the transfer of the management responsi-bility of the 97 000ha of previously DWAF managed indigenous forest, (althoughmentioned here these areas do not form part of this management plan as they arenot yet inclusive of the proclaimed national park) mountain catchment and planta-tion areas to be rehabilitated to SANParks, took place in April 2005. This has initi-ated the process for the establishment of a single consolidated Park in the GardenRoute, inclusive of the current proclaimed national parks, i.e. Tsitsikamma NP andWilderness NP, as well as the Knysna estuary. The vision for the long term future isto manage all the above mentioned areas as an integrated whole by meaningfullyconserving a representative sample of the Garden Route’s biodiversity. Given thisbroader vision for the protected areas in the Garden Route, it is felt that the visionstatement for the management of the WNP should be consistent and support thenotion of the Garden Route National Park. The following vision statement anddesired state for the consolidated Garden Route Park was derived at through anadaptive planning process at two protected area management planning work-shops involving SANParks, CapeNature and key external stakeholders in theGarden Route.
2.2 Vision
An integrated protected area that effectively conserves a functionally linkedmosaic of diverse terrestrial, freshwater, estuarine and marine ecosystems,landscapes, and cultural heritage, representative of the Garden Route, thatcontributes to the well being of present and future generations.”
In order that the current, and future, extent of the park is protected and managedeffectively, a desired state for the proposed Garden Route NP to guide park man-agement in its daily operations and longer term planning was developed. Thisdesired state will be reviewed every five years in accordance with SANParksBiodiversity Custodianship Framework (Rogers 2003). It forms a bridge betweenSANParks policy framework and its vision for the park, and the medium term (fiveyear) priorities to attain the vision in cooperation with its stakeholders. To set this
desired state focus was placed on the park’s vital attrib-utes making this park unique, or at least very special inits class.
2.2.1 Operating Principles & Vital Attributes of the park:
SANParks has adopted eleven corporate values, whichserve as guiding principles around which all employeebehaviour and actions are governed and shaped. Thesecorporate values include:• show leadership in all we do.• be guided by environmental ethics in all we do• promote transformation within, and outside of the
organisation.• strive for scientific and service excellence at all
times.• act with professionalism at all times.• adopt, and encourage initiative and innovation by
all.• treat all our stakeholders with equity and justice.• exercise discipline at all times.• show respect to all.• act with honesty and integrity.• strive for transparency and open communication at
all times.
These may be modified to meet local requirementsthrough interaction with its stakeholders.
2.2.2 Vital Attributes
2.2.3 Socio-Political Attributes
Relationships with local authorities strengthen relation-ships – IDP’s, municipalities, town engineers
• Management forums (catchment, PFM, otherforums, various levels of participation and gover-nance.
• Institutional coordination (unification/inter organiza-tional and other government departments) .
• Passionate stakeholders that are organized in struc-tured NGO’s strengthen relationships and buildambassadors.
• Established community structures (Active function-ing street comities).
• Resources base with potential to deliver benefits topeople.
• Diverse cultures and cultural heritage sites that hastourism opportunities.
• Polarized social support. • Cultural and natural resources that are sensitive to
human disturbance.• Recreational and spiritual resources (experiences).
2.2.4 Economic Attributes
• Established tourism route and brand.• Established partnerships (neighbouring conservation
initiatives). • Ecosystem services (water catchments, scenic land-
scapes and associated impacts on property values) • Extractible resources (timber, etc).• Established tourism infrastructure.• Job creation.• Diverse Tourism product (cultural, nature based,
adventure, coastal) - attracting funding (Povertyrelief funding, etc).
• Low crime level area.• Educational opportunities .
2.2.5 Environmental Attributes
• Important aquatic ecosystems (Wetlands (Ramsar);all estuary types.
• Potential to conserve whole ecosystems from catch-ments to sea.
• (Single largest indigenous block in South Africa.• Outeniqua and Tsitsikamma sandstone fynbos .• Important ecologic goods and services.• Mountains forest and coast in close proximity +
mosaic.• Rehabilitation drive and potential (resilience)
because of high rainfall.• Scenic beauty.• Functional MPA ( spell out)system representing
inshore marine environments.• Important threatened lowland vegetation.
THE PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT
PLANNING FRAMEWORK
24 25
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
2.3 Setting the Details of the Park Desired State
Objectives Hierarchy for WNP:
A hierarchy of objectives for the park has been formulated with reference to theabove background information, the park’s vital attributes, perceived threats andconstraints, guiding principles and the vision. The objectives are listed in the tablebelow, along with initiatives and their associated park programmes to meet theobjectives,
In addition, the table list SANParks corporate balanced score card objectives as ameans of indicating the link between the parks and SANParks corporate objec-tives. In 2004 SANParks implemented the Balanced Scorecard management toolto provide a comprehensive business measurement and management frameworkthat allowed the organization to translate its value proposition into achievableobjectives, measures and targets. These are lumped into four operational per-spectives affecting SANParks business, namely: Financial; Customer; Internalprocesses; and Learning & Growth. The balanced score card has the followingadvantages in that it:
• Places SANParks business within a common frameworkCommunicates strategy effectively to all levels•
• Makes strategic goals operationally implement able Align departments and activities
• Links remuneration to performance Effects organisational change
Objectives:Park specific conservation objectives are framed in a hierarchical order that isshown with links to the balanced scorecard quadrants via the far right hand columnin the tables below:
Table 1: Management Objectives
2.4.1 Biodiversity & Heritage objectives
High levelobjectives Objectives Sub-objectives Initiative
26 27
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
High level objectives Objectives Sub-objectives Initiative
High level objectives Objectives Sub-objectives Initiative
28 29
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Table 2: Management Objectives
2.4.2 Socio-economic objectives hierarchy
High level objectives Objectives Sub-objectives Initiative
High level objectives Objectives Sub-objectives Initiative
ing land-use mosaic, and catchments to further theidentified important aquatic processes.
The park currently conserves some of the country’simportant coastal wetlands (Howard-Williams &Allanson.1979), as well as pockets of endangeredGarden Route shale/granite and Knysna Fynbos vegeta-tion types that remain hardly protected (Cowling &Heijnis 2001), but remain under threat owing to poorregional linkages.
To meet the desired state, via the least conflicting route,the park would need to expand to a total of 110 845 ha.This in turn would further link to the expandedTsitsikamma National Park section making a total conser-vation area of about 250 000 ha. The greater WNP wouldinclude 73 309 ha of State owned DWAF land, made upof 29 831 ha of DWAF forests, 11 780 ex SAFCOl, 25 211ha Forestry exit land, and 6 487 ha of additional DWAF
forestry corridor lands would be needed (see table 3).Inclusion of 20 840 ha of Cape Nature land under a co-management agreement would include the necessaryState land. Private land is limited to a required 7466 ha,and 4000 ha of secondary importance. Inclusion of thisland could be largely via contractual/stewardship typearrangement, guided by the SANParks’ Land InclusionFramework, thus precluding the need for expensiveacquisitions and capital outlay.
Management initiatives could include:
Identification of under represented habitats/ecosystems.Consolidation of park boundaries. Consolidation of wetland ecosystems.Incorporation of untransformed lowland fynbos. Establishment of corridors linking WNP with mountaincatchments.
31
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
3. GUIDELINES AND PROGRAMMES TO ACHIEVE THE DESIRED STATE
This section deals with all the discrete, but often interlinked, programmes whichmake up the approaches to issues, and lead to the actions on the ground.Together they are the Park’s best attempt to achieve the desired state .Each sub-section in this management plan is a summary of the particular programme, invari-ably supported by details in what are called operational or lower-level plans,referred to in appendices but not included here.
The various programmes are classified into the five activity groupings as reflectedin the SANParks biodiversity custodianship framework, namely Biodiversity andHeritage Conservation, Sustainable Tourism, Building Co-operation, Effective ParkManagement, and Corporate Support. Corporate SANParks policies provide theguiding principles for most of the subsections, and will not be repeated here,except as references and occasionally key extracts.
3.1 Biodiversity and Heritage Conservation
3.1.1 Park expansion programme
The park sits in a nationally identified priority conservation area as identified by theSouth African national conservation assessment (Driver et al. 2005). As such, theexpansion of WNP remains important for SANParks in its attempt to consolidatethe essential ecological patterns and processes associated with the marine-wet-lands-forest-mountain fynbos associations’ characteristic of the Garden Routearea.
The expansion programme is in full congruence with SANParks accepted biodiver-sity values and follows the SANParks land acquisition framework. In this regard thepark falls within the Garden Route Initiative (GRI), part of the wider regional CAPE(Cape Action Plan for the Environment) programme that is aimed at building acomprehensive protected area system in the Cape Floristic Region fully integrat-ed into the regional land use mosaic (Lochner et al. 2003). The envisaged expan-sion would include a multiple number of different land agreements across themarine, terrestrial and wetland environments, and as such expected to be affect-ed by the environmental legislation governing these different environments. Thedesired state of the park, in the context of park expansion, includes: • The consolidation of remaining wetlands, and associated forest/fynbos inter-
face• Protection of important Touw and Swartvlei river catchment systems, and their
marine interfaces via their respective river mouths. • Rehabilitation of degraded lands included into the park;• Encourage conservation friendly land management activities in the surround-
30
GUIDELINES AND PROGRAMMES TO
ACHIEVE THE DESIRED STATE
Table 3: Land Ownership.
co-ordination and administration of the SANParks proj-ects. This office will handle the administration of thebudget, including payments for supplies and services. Itwill also serve to ensure standardisation and co-ordina-tion across the projects as well as adherence to the dif-ferent contractual agreements. In addition, the internalaudit section of SANParks will carry out standard finan-cial and performance audits on the project activities.This is both to ensure adequate accountability andadherence to financial regulations. The ISCU will alsoserve as the communication channel between the proj-ects in the field and the relevant funding organisations.Effective monitoring and control is being exercisedthrough the Working for Water Programme.Management Unit Control Plans are drawn-up andimplemented.
Vegetation mapping in the Wilderness lakes indicatedthat between 1975 and 1997 prominent increasesoccurred in the distribution of Phragmites australis(+53.9ha), Grass & fields (+23.1ha) and Scrub & trees
(+12.2ha). Over the same period substantial declinesoccurred in the distribution of Juncus kraussii (-76.2ha),Schoenoplectus scirpoideus (-10.1ha) and Low scrub &fynbos (-7.8ha). The most prominent changes haveoccurred at Langvlei and the Serpentine channel.Probable causes of change in the distribution of wetlandplants include the natural tendency of plants to colonisenew areas, as well as anthropogenic manipulation ofphysical, chemical and biological processes, includingwithdrawal of disturbance by large herbivores, waterlevel stabilisation, changes in soil salinity, and accumula-tion of plant litter within wetland areas.
A possible means of controlling the establishment P. aus-tralis reeds in wetland areas, currently being trailed bySANParks in Eilandvlei, entails the subsurface cutting ofplants in inundated areas. If these methods are found tobe effective in controlling the growth and establishmentof reeds, future management actions may entail period-ic flooding of wetland areas in the upper lakes of theTouw system through operation of the sluice gate in the
33
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
3.1.2 Sustainable use of natural resource programme
At present, the only consumptive resource utilization practiced in WNP is recre-ational fishing in Swartvlei Estuary, Swartvlei Lake, Touw Estuary and Eilandvlei;and bait collecting in the Touw and Swartvlei estuaries. These activities are under-taken in accordance with the Marine Living Resources Act (1998) regulations. It isforeseen that the removal of marine derived sediments may be undertaken in theTouw Estuary. Sand mining activities will be of limited scale, and confined to thearea of active sediment deposition by marine processes. Resource use activities inWNP will in future be aligned with SANParks corporate policy on extractive use,which is still to be developed.
Management initiatives could include:• Quantify current extractive resource activities.• Define opportunities and constraints in line with corporate guidelines.• Regulate resource use, according to adaptive management process
3.1.3 Rehabilitation programme (aliens, erosion etc)
The dominant terrestrial vegetation types within the Wilderness National Park[WNP] are fynbos and thicket as well as a complex of fynbos/thicket mosaics withpockets of Afromontane Forests. Along the coastal forelands ‘mobile’ and vege-tated dunes are susceptible to invasion by AIP.
Fire prone fynbos vegetation, the ecotones and disturbed areas of both the thick-et and forest vegetation types are susceptible to infestation by Alien InvasivePlants [AIP]. Along the coastal forelands ‘mobile’ and vegetated dunes are sus-ceptible to invasion by AIP.
Invasion of natural vegetation by aggressive AIP disturbs the processes and equi-libriums within the natural systems by out competing natural vegetation as well asincreasing the frequency and intensity of fires through increased fuel loads (seetable 4-6).
The current measures to monitor, control, and eradicate such invasive species areinitiated through the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF), throughthe Working for Water project (WfW), and the Department of EnvironmentalAffairs and Tourism (DEAT) through Projects Empowering People (PEP), who arethe main partners contributing towards the budgetary requirements towards eco-logical projects within this Unit. Both these projects are part of the ExtendedPublics Works Programme of The ISCU is required to facilitate the management,
32
Genus Species English Name Method Seedling Young Adult Mature CARA
Category
Acacia cyclops Rooikrans Handpulling and uprooting Yes 2
Acacia mearnsii Black Wattle Fell Debranch and Stack Yes 2
Acacia melanoxylon Blackwood Cutting or slashing Yes 2
Acacia saligna Port Jackson Willow Cutting or slashing Yes 2
Agave sisalana Sisal Inject with herbicide 2
Arundo donax Giant Spanish Reed Cutting or slashing 1
Cestrum laevigatum Yellow/Orange Cestrum Cutting or slashing 1
Cortaderia jubata Pampas Grass Foliar application 1
Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum Cutting or slashing Yes 2
Eucalyptus grandis Saligna Gum Felling Yes 2
Eucalyptus sideroxylon Black Ironbark Foliar application Yes 2
Hakea gibbosa Rock Hakea Cutting or slashing Yes 2
Hakea sericea Silkey Hakea Handpulling and uprooting Yes 2
Ipomoea alba Morning Glories Cutting or slashing 1
Lantana camara Lantana Cutting or slashing 1
Leptospermum laevigatum Australian Myrtle Felling Yes 1
Melia azederach Syringa Cutting or slashing Yes 3
Opuntia ficus-indica Sweet Prickly Pear Foliar application 1
Paraserianthes lophantha Stink Bean Cutting or slashing Yes 1
Passiflora caerulea Granadilla spp Cutting or slashing 1
Pinus pinaster Cluster Pine Cutting or slashing Yes 2
Pinus radiata Radiata Pine Felling Yes 2
Pinus taeda Lablolly Pine Ringbark/stripbark Yes 2
Psidium guajava Guava Cutting or slashing 2
Ricinus communis Castor-oil Plant Handpulling and uprooting Yes 1
Sesbania punicea Red Sesbania Cutting or slashing Yes 1
Solanum mauritianum Bugweed Cutting or slashing Yes 1
Rubus cuneifolius Bramble Foliar application 1
Cestrum elegans Inkberry Foliar application Yes 1
Residential Mix spp Residential Mix Cutting or slashing
Table 4: Species occurring within the park, methods of control and categories.
localised plant species in the fynbos component of theGoukamma Dune Fynbos/Thicket Mosaic betweenRondevlei and Swartvlei Lake; three red-data listed fish-es including one of only three populations of the Knysnaseahorse; and several species of water birds where thesize of local populations supported on the Wildernesslakes regularly exceeds one percent of the world popu-lation.
Threats to plant SSC include invasion by aliens and aninappropriate fire regime in fynbos areas. The Knysnaseahorse is threatened by habitat destruction resultingfrom recreational boating and altered hydraulics of theSwartvlei Estuary. Water birds are vulnerable to distur-bance by boating activities and destruction of their foodbase (mostly aquatic plants) through altered waterchemistry and hydraulic processes in the lakes. Efforts toconserve SSC should include both internal activities suchas alien plant clearing, initiation of an appropriate fireregime in fynbos areas, park zonation with respect torecreational activities (particularly boating), as well asexternal activities such as negotiations with governmentdepartments and catchment management agencies forthe maintenance of flow and quality of water in rivers,and the prevention of potentially negative impacts fromexternal sources such continued destruction of indige-nous vegetation, and the introduction of alien species.
3.1.6 Aquatic programme
3.1.6.1 Freshwater systems
Many of the challenges SANParks faces with respect tomanaging river ecosystems in national parks are com-mon to all parks. Prominent issues include:
Fragmented catchment ownership: For most rivers inparks, only portions of river ecosystems or catchmentsoccur within the park boundaries. In WNP only the verylower reaches of the Duiwe River occurs within the parkand a portion of the lower Touw River is managed bySANParks on behalf of the regional government. Manyanthropogenic changes to rivers originate in catchmentareas outside of parks, and are consequently processesor activities over which SANParks has little or no influ-ence.
Reduced ecosystem variability: Scientific studies havedemonstrated that the maintenance of inherently vari-able physical processes, and in particular variability inthe flow of water, is essential for healthy functioning ofriver ecosystems. Past river management by governmentagencies, however, was frequently directed at minimiz-ing fluctuations in flow to ensure stability of supply foroff-channel, non-ecological uses. This has resulted in alegacy of, for example, water storage behind dams and
regulating flow for irrigation or domestic supply, whichpresents considerable operational challenges whenattempting to achieve a new ideal of managing forhealthy river ecosystem rather than just predictablewater supply.
Legislated management: Section 3 of the NationalWater Act (Act 36 of 1998) clearly identifies the NationalGovernment as the public trustee of the nation’s waterresources, which acting through the Minister of WaterAffairs and Forestry has the power to regulate the use,flow and control of all water in South Africa. SANParksthus does not directly, and in most cases also indirectly,manage hydraulic processes and resource use in rivers.The Act also states that the Department of Water Affairsand Forestry must devolve most of the catchment man-agement issues to Catchment Management Agencies(CMA’s) that include representatives of local interestgroups and relevant government agencies. AlthoughCMA’s will provide opportunity for cooperative catch-ment management, the Gouritz CMA to whom manage-ment of river catchments of the Wilderness lakes will bedevolved, has not yet been established. The most productive future role for SANParks in themanagement of rivers in parks would be the active par-ticipation in structures and processes for cooperativecatchment management involving all stakeholders. Viasuch mechanisms the case could be made for resourceutilization that is not only equitable and efficient, butalso results in the protection of a healthy aquatic envi-ronment for present and future generations.
3.1.6.2 Estuarine systems
Two estuaries occur in WNP, these being the TouwEstuary which is connected to the estuarine lakes ofEilandvlei, Langvlei and Rondevlei; and Swartvlei Estuarywhich is connected to the estuarine lake of SwartvleiLake. Historical records indicate that both are temporar-ily open/closed estuaries. As such these systems areblocked off from the sea for varying lengths of time by asand bar which forms at the mouth. This occurs duringlow river flows combined with long-shore sand move-ments in the near-shore marine environment.
Management activities undertaken in estuaries and estu-arine lakes consists predominantly of regularly artificialbreaching the Touw and Swartvlei estuaries to reducethe threat of flooding of residential and other propertiesthat have been developed on the estuarine floodplains;and cutting of submerged and emergent aquatic plantsin selected localities to facilitate water movementbetween water bodies and migration of fishes, facilitateaccess to water bodies at selected localities, andenhance selected recreational opportunities.
35
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Serpentine cannel to increase water levels, in conjunction with mechanical cuttingin inundated areas.
Management initiatives could include:
• Establish the distribution and density of invasive species. • Prioritise areas for alien removal focusing biodiversity restoration• Implement removal programmes for priority species and areas.• Investigate options for the control of alien fishes.
3.1.4 Damage-causing animals
• Damaging causing animals in the park are chacma baboons Papio ursinus andvervet monkeys Cercopithecus aethiops. Baboons and vervet monkeys oftenfrequent rest camps and picnic sites in the park. They are primarily attracted byfood and refuse bins. On occasions these animals do loose their fear ofhumans, resulting in “food grabbing” and raiding of chalets and tents. Parkstaff have embarked on a programme to raise awareness levels amongst parkvisitors about the problems experienced in these conflict areas. The park is alsomodifying all refuse bins so that they are animal proof. These two initiatives arefocused at minimizing the people/animal conflict.
• Any sick or injured animal is carefully assessed. Should the need arise for theindividual animal to be euthanized it is done in accordance with the StandardOperating Procedures for the Management of Wildlife in South AfricanNational Parks.
3.1.5 Species of Special Concern (Rare & endangered species) programme
The WNP supports populations of several species of special concern, including
34
Table 5: Area density statistics for the park.
Table 6: Extent of infestations.
(Swartvlei Estuary) or 2.1m amsl (Touw Estuary) with-in a 12 hour period.
• The health of public who may come into contact withthe estuarine water may be at risk, and/or wherethere is the obvious introduction of matter that maypose a significant health risk as determined bySANParks personnel, and where the opportunity toprevent exposure of the public to physical contactwith the water does not exist, and breaching of theestuary mouth can be demonstrated to have a highprobability of significantly reducing the health risk.
• The undertaking of essential construction or mainte-nance of services infrastructure.
• Facilitation of the dispersal, dilution or removal ofchemical pollutants that have been accidentallyintroduced into the system, and which pose a signif-icant threat to either public health, the survival ofestuarine biota, or the ecological functioning of theestuarine system.
There has been no time in a 24 month period where theestuary has remained continually open for one completetidal cycle (28 days) or longer, and where such anextended closed period is indicated by scientific investi-gation to have, or likely to have, a long-term detrimen-tal effect on estuarine biota, or result in salinity levelsexceeding the range which would normally occur in theestuary.
There is scientific evidence that the failure to open theestuary would result in significant direct or indirectthreat to species of special concern, and where thebreaching of the estuary would significantly reduce suchthreat.
Closure of Estuary mouths (Touw Estuary andSwartvlei Estuary).
An estuary mouth may be artificially closed to preventthe inflow of pollutants from the marine environment.
Regular cutting of submerged and emergent aquaticplants is undertaken by SANParks in channels betweenlakes in the Touw system. Restricted cutting of aquaticplants may also be undertaken in front of bird-hides, andselected boat slipways in Swartvlei and Eilandvlei.Cutting of emergent plants may also be employed bySANParks for the purpose of altering plant distributionand establishment patterns where the objective of suchmanagement is to reinstate appropriate biodiversity pat-terns and processes. Cutting of emergent aquatic plantswill not be undertaken or permitted in areas wherebanks are eroding or at risk to erosion, or to improve the
view of water bodies from private waterfront properties.Cutting of aquatic plants in front of private slipways orjetties will not be permitted.Human occupation of estuary catchments, along withmanipulation of biological, physical and chemicalprocesses through activities such as resource utilizationand management, may effect changes within the estuar-ine ecosystem.
The November 2007 floods and their associated impactshave necessitated a need to review current regulationsand procedures relating to the opening of tidal mouthswhich is currently underway.
Multi-disciplinary monitoring will be undertaken toquantify changes thereby facilitating adaptive manage-ment. Monitoring will be undertaken, subject to theavailability of resources and information needs. The levelor extent of change that would elicit concern in respectto non-compliance with park objectives will bedescribed, and where possible quantified as thresholdsof potential concern.
3.1.7 Integrated fire programme
The Goukamma Fynbos/Thicket Mosaic found withinWNP is dependent on fire to maintain the co-existenceof dune fynbos and dune thicket in a mosaic pattern, tostimulate recruitment of many fynbos species, and thusto retain maximum species richness. The frequency,intensity, season and size of fires are critical determi-nants of plant species composition, vegetation structureand successional patterns. Hot fires at 12-40 year inter-vals in late summer/early autumn are deemed suitablefor dune fynbos vegetation. Knysna Afromontane Forestand solid dune thicket are largely fire-free under naturalconditions and should be protected from wild fires ofunnatural cause. Fynbos fires on the forest edge andwithin the dune fynbos/thicket mosaic are howeveressential to maintain the fynbos/forest- andfynbos/thicket ecotones (i.e. transitions) and should notbe artificially suppressed indefinitely. Wetland reed bedsmay be left to burn during wild fires, but active burningis not necessary. The WNP is limited in terrestrial extent(ca. 500 ha) and located in a highly fragmented environ-ment. Public roads and the Outeniqua Steam Train dis-sect the park in numerous places and are potentialsources of wild fires. Mitigation measures need to be inplace to prevent inappropriate burning of vegetationtypes not driven by fire and too frequent burning of fire-dependent vegetation types.
Records to be kept of fires occurring in and around WNP,preferably in GIS format. Little additional monitoring isdone or proposed on account of capacity constraintsand the small extent of fire-dependent habitat. Fire
37
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Artificial breaching of an estuary by SANParks may be undertaken where:
• The natural breaching of an estuary is disrupted by human alteration ofhydraulic processes and such change in the breaching is deemed by scientificinvestigation to have had, or be likely to have a long-term detrimental effecton estuarine biota or environmental processes.
• Natural breaching will result in the flooding of residential properties adjacentto the estuary that had been either demarcated or developed prior toSANParks implementation of estuary management on proclamation of theWNP.
• The breaching of estuaries will be undertaken solely by, or under the directsupervision of authorised SANParks personnel.
• Wherever possible it should be attempted to coincide estuary breaching witha receding tide to maximise the rate of sediment erosion in the estuary mouthby out-flowing water.
Wherever possible heavy earth moving equipment, such as a bulldozer, mechani-cal shovel, or similar such equipment should be used in the breaching of an estu-ary to maximise the length and depth of the breaching channel; increase the prob-ability of being able to effect a breach at the desired time; and decrease the timerequired to effect a breach during periods of increased flooding risk.
Swartvlei Estuary is breached when waters levels achieve 2.0m amsl., and the TouwEstuary when water levels are within the range of 2.1 to 2.4m amsl. Breachingheights are based on hydrological modelling undertaken by the CSIR and biophys-ical studies undertaken by Rhodes University. The method and timing of breachingare intended to maximise sediment scour by out-flowing waters.
A preparatory channel may be constructed at any time prior to estuary breachingif deemed necessary by SANParks personnel to facilitate future breaching. Theextent and design of a preparatory channel must be such that premature breach-ing of an estuary (<2m amsl – Swartvlei Estuary; < 2.1m amsl – Touw Estuary) can-not occur as a result of either sediment erosion from the preparatory channel byhigh seas, or deliberate acts to breach the estuary by unauthorised persons.
Deviation from the defined breaching heights could be considered under the fol-lowing circumstances:
• Prevailing meteorological conditions or forecasts as provided by the SouthAfrican Weather Bureau and/or Disaster management indicate that there is ahigh probability that water levels in the estuary will exceed 2.0m amsl
36
nities, academic researchers and other relevantsources and stakeholders
Management initiatives could include
• Develop a database of all tangible and intangiblecultural assets which include and inventory, maps andrelevant documentation.
• Develop site Management Plans for each CulturalHeritage site with monitoring systems in place formanagement priorities and prescriptions.
• Facilitate appropriate Interpretation of cultural her-itage associated with the park
3.2 Sustainable tourism
3.2.1 Wilderness National Park Zoning Plan (including Knysna)
The primary objective of a park zoning plan is to estab-lish a coherent spatial framework in and around a park toguide and co-ordinate conservation, tourism and visitorexperience initiatives. A zoning plan plays an importantrole in minimizing conflicts between different users of apark by separating potentially conflicting activities suchas quiet forest walks and busy day-visitor picnic areaswhilst ensuring that activities which do not conflict withthe park’s values and objectives (especially the conserva-tion of the protected area’s natural systems and its bio-diversity) can continue in appropriate areas.
The zoning of Wilderness National Park was based on ananalysis and mapping of the sensitivity and value of apark’s biophysical, heritage and scenic resources; anassessment of the regional context; and an assessmentof the park’s current and planned infrastructure andtourist routes/products; all interpreted in the context ofpark objectives. The zoning for Wilderness National Parkneeds to be seen in the context of the park being inte-grated in the short term into the Garden Route NationalPark.
Overview of the use zones of Wilderness NationalPark:The summary of the use zoning plan for WildernessNational Park is shown in Map 4. Full details of the usezones (including high resolution maps), the activities andfacilities allowed in each zone, the conservation objec-tives of each zone, the zoning process, the Park InterfaceZones (detailing park interaction with adjacent areas)and the underlying landscape analyses are included inAppendix One: Wilderness National Park Zoning Plan.
Remote Zone: This is an area retaining an intrinsicallywild appearance and character, or capable of beingrestored to such and which is undeveloped and roadless.There are no permanent improvements or any form ofhuman habitation. It provides outstanding opportunitiesfor solitude, with awe inspiring natural characteristics
with sight and sound of human habitation and activitiesbarely discernable and at far distance. The conservationobjectives for this zone require that deviation from a nat-ural/pristine state should be minimized, and existingimpacts should be reduced. The aesthetic/recreationalobjectives for the zone specify that activities whichimpact on the intrinsically wild appearance and charac-ter of the area, or which impact on the wilderness char-acteristics of the area (solitude, remoteness, wildness,serenity, peace etc) will not be tolerated. In WildernessNP, Remote areas were designated in the mountainousareas above and east of the Bergplaas sections of thepark, as these areas are both logistically difficult fordevelopment and sensitive to development pressures (inparticular disruption of catchment areas).Environmentally sensitive forest areas, including but notlimited to those areas previously managed by DWAF asForest Special Nature Reserves, were designated asRemote in order to protect them from infrastructuredevelopment and intensive tourism activities. Sectionsof the important coastal forest in the western sections ofHarkerville were also included in the Remote Zone.
Primitive Zone: This is a largely undeveloped zone withaccess controlled in terms of numbers, frequency andsize of groups. The conservation objectives for this zonerequire that deviation from a natural/pristine stateshould be small and limited to restricted impact foot-prints, and that existing impacts should be reduced. Theaesthetic/recreational objectives for the zone specifythat activities which impact on the intrinsically wildappearance and character of the area, or which impacton the wilderness characteristics of the area (solitude,remoteness, wildness, serenity, peace etc) should berestricted and impacts limited to the site of the facility.Ideally visitors should only be aware of the facility orinfrastructure that they are using, and this infrastruc-ture/facility should be designed to fit in with the environ-ment within which it is located in order to avoid aesthet-ic impacts. The designation of Primitive areas inWilderness National Park in the areas that were histori-cally under SANParks management was severely limitedby existing infrastructure impacts associated with theperi-urban nature of this section of the park. Althoughthe zone can contain limited access roads and thepotential for basic small-scale self-catering accommoda-tion facilities such as a bushcamp, this would be inappro-priate within the limited extent of the high conservationvalue area protected by the Primitive Zone in these sec-tions of Wilderness NP. In the older sections ofWilderness NP, Primitive areas were designated to pro-tect the high conservation value and Ramsar listedRondevlei, Bo-Langvlei and surrounding areas fromtourist and infrastructure impacts. The areas previouslymanaged by DWAF and the forest exit areas provide farmore scope for the designation of Primitive areas inorder to both protect sensitive environments and to pro-vide the scope for appropriate controlled tourist use andresource utilization of these areas. Most forest and fyn-
39
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
management procedures should at all times comply with the regulations of theNational Veld and Forest Fire Act (101 of 1998).
Management initiatives could include
Implementation of a fire management plan in accordance with objectives of con-serving biodiversity and threatened biota. Where possible monitor the impact of fire management regime.
3.1.8 Cultural heritage resource programme
The Wilderness area incorporates various cultural heritage sites ranging fromKhoisan cultural heritage sites such as Ebb and Flow Shelter, Oakhurst Shelter,Settlers’ graves, St. Aidan’s church, Outeniqua choo-tjoe railway lines and theSeven Passes Road.
Running concurrently is an Oral History Collection and a Cultural Mapping Project,both of which are implemented with the purpose of identifying and cataloguing allCultural Heritage assets (tangible and intangible) associated with the Park. Theseprojects are currently being developed in conjunction with local community mem-bers, the organisations representing community interests, as well as relevant aca-demic institutions and researchers.
Discussion groups and presentations were hosted to create awareness and encour-age involvement in the proposed projects. It is envisaged that a local CulturalHeritage Forum will be established to form working groups that will co-ordinateactivities. Local youth will be trained as field researchers and will work in conjunc-tion with the community working groups.
The project will be managed in line with legislation relating to property rights andintellectual property rights
Programme Objectives:
• To facilitate the research of information and documentation of availableresources through a series of projects
• To recover the oral history and information relating to cultural heritage, specif-ically related to the areas incorporated within the park in collaboration withlocal communities, academic researchers and other relevant sources and stake-holders
• To enhance the relationship between the park and communities by interpret-ing information relating to cultural heritage in collaboration with local commu-
38
ignated in most of the high use beach areas of the park(except around the Touw River mouth), in the areabetween the Touw River mouth and the Ebb and FlowRest camp, Eilandvlei, Swartvlei above the railwaybridge, Sedgefield Lagoon, and Knysna Estuary south ofthe road bridge. Current public access roads around Bo-Langvlei and Rondevlei (including access to the hides),as well as park infrastructure at Rondevlei were accom-modated within this zone. In lake and estuary areas, Lowintensity leisure implies that motorized vessels are gen-erally allowed, but they may be excluded from certainsections either to minimize environmental impacts or toreduce conflict with other recreational water users. Lowintensity leisure does not imply motorized access tobeaches. In the areas previously managed by DWAF, lowintensity leisure areas were designated along the accessroutes to Diepwalle (including Kom se Pad), Gouna, theaccess to Goudveld, a section of the Harkerville forestnear the N2 identified for potential development, as wellas the access routes to Krantzkloof. Most of the LowIntensity Leisure areas represent existing developmentnodes and access routes to the major forest stations.
High Intensity Leisure Zone: The main characteristic isthat of a high density tourist development node withamenities such as shops, restaurants and interpretivecenters. This is the zone where more concentratedhuman activities are allowed and is accessible by motor-ized transport on high volume transport routes. This isthe zone where more concentrated human activities areallowed and is accessible by motorized transport on highvolume transport routes. The conservation objectives forthis zone specify that the greatest level of deviation fromdeviation from a natural/pristine state is allowed in thiszone, and, it is accepted that damage to the biophysicalenvironment associated with tourist activities and facili-ties will be inevitable. However, care must be taken toensure that the zone still retains a level of ecologicalintegrity consistent with a protected area.
The aesthetic/recreational objectives for the zone speci-fy although the high visitor numbers, activities and facil-ities will impact on the wild appearance and reduction ofthe wilderness characteristics of the area (solitude,remoteness, wildness etc) is inevitable, these should bemanaged and limited to ensure that the area generallystill provides a relatively natural outdoor experience. InWilderness NP, High Intensity Leisure areas designatedaround the current Ebb and Flow Camp, at the TouwRiver Mouth and to accommodate major public accessroads through the park. In the areas previously managedby DWAF, the two existing nodes at Diepwalle andGoudveld that have been identified for developmentwere designated as High Intensity Leisure.
Overview of the Special Management Overlays ofWilderness National Park:Special management overlays which designate specific
areas of the park that require special management inter-ventions were identified. These are shown in Map 4. Twooverlay types were designated:
Special Conservation Areas – Wetlands: High conser-vation value wetlands such as Rondevlei, Bo-Langvlei,Eilandvlei, the Serpentine channel and floodplain, andSwartvlei Estuary below the railway line were identifiedfor special protection in order to reduce any potentialhabitat loss and minimize tourist and developmentimpacts.
Special Conservation Areas – Fishing exclusion area:Rondevlei, Bo-Langvlei and the channels between themwere designated as fishing exclusion areas to preventimpacts associated with fishing and bait collection.
Special Conservation Areas – Bait collection exclusionarea: The eastern sections of Knysna Estuary were des-ignated as a bait collection exclusion area to preventimpacts associated with bait collection.
Overview of the Park Interface Zone of WildernessNational Park:The Park Interface Zones shows the areas within whichlanduse changes could affect a national Park. The zones,in combination with guidelines, serve as a basis for a.)identifying the focus areas in which park managementand scientists should respond to EIA’s, b.) helping toidentify the sort of impacts that would be important at aparticular site, and most importantly c.) serving as thebasis for integrating long term protection of a nationalpark into the spatial development plans of municipalities(SDF/IDP) and other local authorities. In terms of EIAresponse, the zones serve largely to raise red-flags anddo not remove the need for carefully considering theexact impact of a proposed development. In particular,they do not address activities with broad regional aes-thetic or biodiversity impacts.
Wilderness National Park has three Park Interface Zonecategories. The first two are mutually exclusive, but thefinal visual/aesthetic category can overlay the others(Map 6).
Priority Natural Areas: These are key areas for bothpattern and process that are required for the long termpersistence of biodiversity in and around the park. Thezone also includes areas identified for future park expan-sion. Inappropriate development and negative land-usechanges should be opposed in this area. Developmentsand activities should be restricted to sites that arealready transformed. Only developments that contributeto ensuring conservation friendly land-use should beviewed favorably.
Catchment Protection Areas: These are areas importantfor maintaining key hydrological processes within the
41
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
bos areas identified as environmentally sensitive, that were not included in theRemote zones or subject to existing infrastructure impacts, were include in thePrimitive Zone. This included the bulk of the indigenous Harkerville forest as wellas forest and fynbos areas north of Knysna.
Quiet Zone: This zone is characterized by unaccompanied non-motorized accesswithout specific access control and permits. Tourist infrastructure is limited totrails, viewpoints and hides. Larger numbers of visitors are allowed than in thePrimitive zone and contact between visitors is frequent. The conservation objec-tives for this zone specify some deviation from a natural/pristine state is allowed,but care should be taken to restrict the development footprint. Theaesthetic/recreational objectives for the zone specify that activities which impacton the relatively natural appearance and character of the area should be restrict-ed, though the presence of larger numbers of visitors and the facilities theyrequire, may impact on the feeling of “wildness” found in this zone. In WildernessNP, Quiet zones were designated to allow visitors access on foot to hiking trailsaround the Low intensity leisure areas. Sections of beach away from major accesspoints (such as west of Gericke Point) were also zoned Quiet. Sensitive lake andestuary areas such as the Serpentine, the far western and eastern sections ofSwartvlei, Swartvlei Estuary below the railway and above Sedgefield lagoon, andKnysna Estuary above the road bridge, were zoned Quiet to limit access to non-motorized vessels only. In the forest areas previously managed by DWAF, Quietzones were designated around the access points and development nodes atGoudveld, Gouna, Diepwalle and Harkerville to encourage non-motorised touristaccess to these areas. As far as possible, the sensitive sections of the park whichwere not included into the Primitive zone were zoned Quiet to protect them frominfrastructure development and excessive tourist impacts.
Low Intensity Leisure Zone: The Low Intensity Leisure Zone is characterized byrelatively high levels of tourist activity, motorized self-drive access to certain areas,and the potential for small basic camps without facilities such as shops and restau-rants. Facilities along roads are limited to basic self-catering picnic sites with toi-let facilities. The conservation objectives for this zone specify that although devia-tion from a natural/pristine state should be minimized and limited to restrictedimpact footprints as far as possible, it is accepted that some damage to the bio-physical environment associated with tourist activities and facilities will beinevitable. The aesthetic/recreational objectives for the zone specify that althoughactivities and facilities will impact on the wild appearance and reduction of thewilderness characteristics of the area (solitude, remoteness, wildness etc) isinevitable, these should be managed and limited to ensure that the area still pro-vides a relatively natural outdoor experience. Low intensity leisure areas were des-
40
The park is well located in terms of national roads, air-ports and major shopping centres. The accommodationin general is well located, although it is in a need of anupgrade. The park will also become part of the greaterGarden Route Protected Area and the existing accom-modation will form part of a tourism node. Added tothis the park has an opportunity to develop a new touristfacility that can have a significant impact on income gen-eration. The area is surrounded by various tourism estab-lishments such as Bed and Breakfast establishments,Hotels, timeshare facilities and luxury resorts. Activitiesinclude Paragliding, horse riding, picnics, fishing, golf-ing, mountain biking, art routes, farm routes, adventuresports, offshore boating, hiking etc.
Accommodation includes a number of camping and car-avan sites, log and brick chalets, log forest huts and ron-dawels, providing 139 beds and 124 camping units.Occupancy rate in 2005 was 42 %. A conference facilitythat can seat 30 people exists, but is not used by thegeneral public. Activities include bird watching, canoe-ing and trails. Income generated through tourism in2005 came to R 3 998 940, making up 81% of the parks’total revenue. The park employs 24 people in thetourism function.
Developing of the existing tourism plan will thereforefocus on the implementation of initiatives to reach thisdesired state. This tourism plan must be integrated withall other aspects of the management plan especially toensure that there is no conflict of interest with the bio-physical objectives, which according to the SANParksvalues, must take precedence. Product developmentand diversification is high on the list of the parks objec-tives
3.2.3 Marketing Programme
Most tourists to this area came from Western Cape (66,8%) followed by 8, 29% from Gauteng and 6, 27% forEastern Cape. Approximately 85% of all tourists are fromSouth Africa. 92% are white people that stay at the parkovernight and only 7.6% of blacks stay overnight. Mostof the foreign tourists are from Germany (9, 2%), fol-lowed by United Kingdom (1, 3%) and the Netherlands(1, 2%).
Current strategies to market the park and thereforeattract more visitors, includes the focussing on primaryand secondary markets and to ensure that the stay with-in the park is a memorable one. The park’s resources andservices are being actively marketed in collaborationwith tourism promotion bodies, Effective marketingmaterials that include new brochures and a visitor maphave been developed and are to be reviewed on a bi-annual cycle.
Based on the above profile and current strategies a mar-keting programme is currently under development.
3.2.4 Commercial Development Programme:
The park currently has only one concessionaire in theform of Eden Adventure which offers canoe hire in theRest Camp. There are no norms and standards applica-ble to the activity. Commercial operators and conces-sions potentially offer an important source of income forthe WNP, but their operations could have a negativeeffect on the environment and would therefore requirecareful monitoring and evaluation. Equally although out-sourcing a number of park activities may provide thepark with complimentary skills and efficiencies, this hasits own set of management challenges. It is envisagedthat all concessionaires will continue to contribute to theWNP income through the establishment of fixed fees ora percentage of turnover. Opportunities for public pri-vate partnerships will continued to be explored.Opportunities will especially be sought with small, medi-um and macro enterprises (SMMEs) from the immediatecommunities. There are currently no written agreementsfor use of the parks’ biological resources by communi-ties. The park continues to investigate potential newcommercial ventures within the park.
3.3 Constituency Building
3.3.1 Stakeholder relationship Programme
The park aims to enhance biodiversity conservationthrough the promotion of a conservation ethic anddeveloping healthy community custodianship for thepark. Co-operative, collaborative and mutually beneficialrelationships are essential to reach park goals and ulti-mately to ensure the sustainability of the Park. To thisend both formal and informal partnerships are initiated,maintained and nurtured with National and ProvincialGovernment such as the Department of EnvironmentalAffairs and Tourism (DEAT), The Department of WaterAffairs and Forestry (DWAF), Public works, Agriculture,regional and local government planning to have parkplans integrated into the Integrated Development Plans(IDPs) and Spatial Development Frameworks (SDFs).Conservation entities such as Marine and CoastalManagement (MCM), Fire Associations, etc; Tourismentities such as South African Tourism Association(SATOUR), etc and the local communities through thepark forum, ward committees and the local sub-commit-tees.
A Park Forum is currently being established to encour-age the building of constituencies in support of naturaland cultural heritage conservation goals of SANParks. Itis expected that the Park Forum will facilitate construc-tive interaction between the park and surrounding com-munities and other stakeholders. Park Forums are ameans of providing a legitimate platform to communi-cate park/SANParks issues and to ensure participation ofstakeholders on matters of mutual relevance affectingthe Park.
43
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
park. Inappropriate development (dam construction, loss of riparian vegetationetc.) should be opposed. Control of alien vegetation & soil erosion as well asappropriate land care should be promoted.
Viewshed Protection Areas: These are areas where development is likely toimpact on the aesthetic quality of the visitor’s experience in a park. Within theseareas any development proposals should be carefully screened to ensure that theydo not impact excessively on the aesthetics of the park. The areas identified areonly broadly indicative of sensitive areas, as at a fine scale many areas within thiszone would be perfectly suited for development. In addition, major projects withlarge scale regional impacts may have to be considered even if they are outsidethe Viewshed Protection Zone.
Current status and future improvements:The zoning for Wilderness National Park needs to be seen in the context of itbeing integrated in the short term into the Garden Route National Park. This rap-idly changing context will potentially require re-assessment of the current parkzoning. The current park use zonation is based on the same biodiversity and land-scape analyses undertaken for a Conservation Development Framework (CDF);however certain elements underlying the CDF such as a tourism market analysisare not be fully incorporated into the park use zonation. A full CDF will be devel-oped for Garden Route National Park within the current update cycle. . 3.2.2 Tourism Programme
The desired state for tourism in the park is: “To develop the park’s infrastructureand facilities in order to enhance the tourist experience as well as to integratethe current park as a tourist node in the greater Garden Route protectedareas.”
Objectives to achieve this desired state are as follows:
• To consolidate land ownership under SANParks management or protection• To develop the tourist infrastructure in order to enhance the visitor experience• To develop more tourist activities in order for the park to be more competitive• To increase and to train staff to render a quality service
The park’s borders are intertwined with residential and farmlands to the extentthat it becomes difficult to know when one is in the park and when not. The parkis mainly a coastal park, with outstanding scenery, that can offer the visitor a vari-ety of water based activities.
42
• Develop effective communication mechanisms andresponsibilities for representatives.
• Establish task teams and working groups (with inclu-sion of the Park Forum) around key issues.
• Establish and maintain good working relationshipwith relevant government departments and localgovernment.
• Define roles and responsibilities with stakeholdergroups, partnerships and government through writ-ten agreements.
3.3.2 Educational Development Programme
The greatest part of the work conducted by the Peopleand Conservation Department is directly or indirectlyrelated to Environmental Interpretation & Education andfocuses on the various park user groups and local com-munities. Local schools and communities were high-lighted as potential focus groups that are not yet part ofthe main park user groups by the initial analysis processthat guided the design of the various educational pro-grammes. Hence, the programmes that form part of thisplan aims to address this “imbalance”.
The various programmes have each been designed withspecific focus groups in mind. However they are oftenintegrated with one another. This combination ofprocesses forms an integrated network of solutions thatwork together to support each other and so ensure theirsustainability (cross pollination) as well as the enhance-ment of park-community relations.
The park offers a range of day programmes as well asovernight programmes to interpret the park’s rich natu-ral and cultural heritage. Every programme has its ownset of interpretive activities complemented with variousinterpretive displays, signage and information resources.Activities have different themes to ensure a variety ofexperiences that cater for wide participant interest.Self-guided and / or guided experiences are offered.Self-guided options are supported with the necessaryinformation resources. When guided, the level of detailand presentation are adapted to suit the audience. Thevarious activities are sometimes grouped and offered aspackages or conducted as part of different programmes.This makes it possible to be integrated with communityoutreach programmes, training programmes, pro-grammes for conference groups, holiday programmes,tourist programmes, etc.
To reach park goals and develop a healthy communitycustodianship for the park, most projects are implement-ed in partnership with various Non GovernmentOrganisations (NGOs); Community Based Organisations(CBOs) and community liaison structures as well as theprivate sector. A detailed Programme Document isdeveloped for each programme to serve as guide for theimplementation of programmes and activities. Thesedocuments are developed in liaison with the relevant
stakeholders to ensure relevance and effectiveness. Allprogrammes are included in the applicable BusinessPlans with its relating Budgets and Annual Plan ofOperations (APOs).
A high degree of reflexivity is built into programmedesign. All activities are continuously monitored andadjusted to ensure their continuing relevance to the var-ious user groups as well as to the park context that issubject to change. Monitoring tools such as feedbackquestionnaires, a suggestion box, guides’ report forms,etc. will facilitate a continuous process of critical reflec-tion, contextual review, and formative evaluation of pro-gramme processes and activities.
Management initiatives could include
Development and implementation of an InterpretationPlan that feeds into both the Education and zonationplans. Implement environmental education and youthdevelopment programmes suited to the needs of eachfocus group.
3.3.3 Local socio economic development Programme
The park contributes to local socio economic develop-ment in the following ways:
Skills development and capacity buildingSkills development and capacity building is regarded asa cornerstone to enable economic activity. The parkfacilitates Skills and/or Learner ship programmes annual-ly. Both processes involve park staff and unemployedmembers from local communities. There is an ongoingreview of park training needs.
Business opportunities and support of local entrepre-neursThe park procures contracted services ranging frommaintenance to tourism related services. Where possi-ble, local Small, Medium and Macro Enterprises(SMMEs) and especially HDEs are favoured when sourc-ing contractors, provided that all procurement condi-tions as stated in the SANParks Procurement Policy canbe adhered to.
The park continues to support and develop local initia-tives or small businesses that provide services that arerequired during special events or functions. These initia-tives have in the past included craft groups, choirs or tra-ditional dance groups, small catering businesses, etc.Where more continued collaboration is required, mutu-ally beneficial initiatives or partnerships are established.The park continues to investigate the feasibility ofpotential new concessions within the park and commis-sion thereof.
Social Development SupportLocal social development initiatives are supported
Co-operative governance systems are being developed and strengthened for thePark. These aim to promote inclusively and to ensure compliance with legislationthrough improved relationships and collaboration with government and variousgoverning bodies. The park liaises with various conservation entities to ensurethat it keeps up to date with global and national trends and that it collaborates onmanagement strategies that are relevant to be implemented for the local context.Where feasible, the park enters into agreements with various business partners toenable SANParks to focus on its core mandate as a conservation agency, whilstcontinuing to yield financial benefit from the provision of quality products andservices to its customers (see table 7).
The park enhances biodiversity conservation through developing a healthy com-munity custodianship that in it self would be able to be regarded as part of theparks’ conservation equity. Where required, special task teams are set up toaddress issues of mutual interest or to resolve potential conflict of interest.SANParks regards its employees as a most valuable asset and foundation fororganisational competency. Therefore the park invests in staff development,strives towards employment equity and endeavour to uphold employee rights.
Visitors to the park are regarded as the number one financial resource that enablesus to fulfil the organisations’ conservation mandate. SANParks fosters good medi-al relations. Not only is the media regarded as an ally to market our tourism prod-ucts, but also as key communication tool to keep stakeholders informed and topromote a positive image of SANParks, including this park.
Management initiatives could include:
• Identify and involve all relevant stakeholders for participation in the parkforum.
44 45
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
TITLE DEED FARM PORTION NO EXTENT OWNER SECTION GG PROCLA DATE PERIOD
T22822/1999 Lot 108 Portion 0 72.1909 Wildernis 2B(1)(b) 17727 17-Jan-97 Indefinitely - maybe
Hoekwil Distriksraad terminated by 3 years
notice only after 27
years from
commencement
date - 17 January 1997.
Tabel 7: Co-management agreement.
and Learnership programmes• Identification and facilitating the creation of business
opportunities in association with the park. • Support community based Social Development
Initiatives.
3.4 Effective park management
3.4.1 Environmental management programme
SANParks has committed itself to a set of corporate val-ues, one of which state that SANParks will embrace, andbe guided by environmental ethics in all we do. Giventhe national and international importance of our nation-al parks, it is vital that parks are managed to world-classstandards.
An environmental management system has been adopt-ed and implemented in the park. This system will assistthe park and park management in the achievement oftheir environmental management responsibility.
The main objectives of utilizing and maintaining anEnvironmental Management System (EMS) is to allow forthe WNP Management to address their environmentalchallenges in a consistent manner.
The EMS is applied with the standards of managingwaste, pollution, uncontrolled resource consumption,risks, meeting stakeholder expectations etc. The imple-mentation of EMS offers benefits to the management ofthe WNP, such as:
• The compliance of legal requirements,• Provides improved organizational:• Image• Competitiveness• Relationship with all neighbours• Regulatory relationships• Improved efficiency in the WNP’s environmental
responsibility• Increase in the raising of environmental awareness
and• Placing environmental issues on the WNP’s agenda.
There is a growing awareness in the general communityof problems associated with the state of naturalresources in South Africa. This is generating a communi-ty expectation that natural resources must be managedand or used sustainably if South Africa is to maintainhealthy ecosystems for the wellbeing of future genera-tions. Consumers are also beginning to demand that theenvironment be taken into account in decision making.
The EMS will focus on the following requirements:
Environmental aspects: The park identifies the environ-mental aspects which the facility controls and over which
it may be expected to have an influence, and determineswhich of those aspects are considered significant
Legal and other requirements: The park identifiesaccess and communicates legal and other requirementsthat are applicable to the park
Environmental Objectives and Targets: The park devel-ops objectives and targets for each significant environ-mental aspect. Objectives and targets are developedconsidering significant environmental aspects, techno-logical options and financial, operational and businessplans, and the views of interested parties
Environmental Management Programmes: The parkestablishes environmental management programmes(EMPs) as a means for achieving objectives and targets.These programmes define the principal actions to betaken, those responsible for undertaking those actionsand the scheduled times for their implementation
Training, Awareness and Competence: The park identi-fies, plans, monitors and records training needs for per-sonnel whose work may create a significant impact uponthe environment
Operational Control: The park is responsible for identi-fying operations and activities associated with significantenvironmental aspects that require operational controlsin procedures, work practices or environmental manage-ment programmes
Emergency Preparedness and Response: The parkidentifies potential for and responds to accidents andemergency situations, and for preventing and mitigatingthe environmental impacts that may be associated withthem.
3.4.2 Security and Safety Programme
Firstly, securing visitor safety to the WNP is about secur-ing SANParks’ international reputation as the custodianof choice for protected area management.
Secondly and directly related, visitor safety is both aboutsecuring the SANParks tourism income stream from theWNP and securing the WNP’s wider economic role in theregional and national tourism economy.
Therefore the strategic intent of the safety and securityplan is to firstly ensure that effective visitor safety meas-ures are in place, and secondly to ensure that tourist per-ceptions are managed in order to protect the brand andreputation of SANParks and South African Tourism atlarge.
Investment in the core business of visitor safety allowsSANParks to protect its reputation and to sustain its long
47
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
through collaboration on environmental calendar campaigns and other pro-grammes where mutually beneficial arrangements supports SANParks goals andcontribute to local social upliftment.
Government Expanded Public Works ProgrammesThe Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) remains a significant focus areaof the organisation to effectively contribute to local socio economic development.The park currently manages three programmes, namely Working for Water,CoastCare Working for the Coast and a Special Public Works Programme. Theseprogrammes all focus on poverty alleviation and are therefore labour intensiveprojects that create temporary jobs in the short term (three year cycles). Greatimportance is also afforded to the skills development component of these pro-grammes, with specific targets set for both hard and soft skills development.Sustainability is further supported by investigating and implementing exit strate-gies through the development of entrepreneurial opportunities for local commu-nities.
Local Government involvementCo-operative governance systems are being developed and strengthened for thePark to promote inclusivity and to ensure compliance with legislation. Improvedrelationships with Regional and Local Government will also ensure a more effectivecontribution to local economic development. Collaboration currently focuses onplanning i.e. the integration of park plans into the Integrated Development Plans(including Local Economic Development plans and Spatial DevelopmentFrameworks.)
3.3.4 Communications Programme
The Communication objectives of WNP are to build, maintain and to constantlyimprove relations between the park’s relevant stakeholders. To ensure that there iseffective representation in both the print and electronic media, to create andmaintain a positive image of SANParks, to manage media coverage of contentiousissues and to inform the media of relevant emerging conservation and tourismissues.
The objectives will be achieved by the formulation of a comprehensiveCommunication Strategy for the park that will ensure that stakeholders and clientsalike are interacted with on a continuous basis through various medium such asPark Forums, Newsletters, PR Campaigns and the SANParks website.
Management initiatives could include:
• Contribute to local skills development by supporting the Skills Programmes
46
Overnight Facilities
The Ebb & Flow rest camp situated on the banks of theTouw River and the Serpentine and provides for bothcampers and non camping visitors. The camping sitesare divided into two, sites with power and withoutpower. All river view sites have power. These sites areserviced by six ablution blocks. The camping site is stargraded by the SA grading council and has three stars.
The accommodation section currently has the followingunit types:
• 5 Family Cottages (with one double bed and two sin-gle beds each)
• 4 Log Cottages (with one double bed and two singlebeds each)
• 4 Log Cottages (with four single beds each)• 10 Forest Cabins (two single beds each)• 10 Forest Cabins (four single beds each)• 10 Rondawels (two single beds with en suite)• 05 Rondawels (two single beds without en suite)• One Family Cottage and one Forest cabins are suit-
able for disable people.The accommodation units apart from the Rondawels arein acceptable condition. Some internal refurbishment ofthe units The Rondawels need to be demolished andreplaced with accommodation units that reflect theimage of a National Park.
Day Visitor Facilities
Day picnic facilities are located at Touwriver Mouth,Eiland vlei and Tarantal. These areas all have rudimenta-ry braai facilities and inadequate Ablution facilities thatare linked to conservancy tanks.These facilities are all inneed of an upgrade to reflect the standards of aNational Park.
Trails and Bird hides
The park has five day hiking trails scattered throughoutthe Park and three bird hides.
Administrative Infrastructure: The Parks Administrativeoffice, Technical Stores and Tourism Stores are all locat-ed in the main Rest camp at Ebb and Flow.
Staff Accommodation
Staff accommodation is located in three Clusters vizRondevlei (5 houses); Kranzvlei (13 houses) andWilderness (4 houses). There are also two houses in thetownship of Kleinkrans that are owned by the Park. Thehouses at Wilderness, KleinKrans and Kranzvlei are all inan acceptable condition and only minor maintenance isrequired to keep them in good order. The Housing atRondevlei are old and in a poor state of repair. Anupgrading of the staff accommodation structures isrequired.
Roads and Services
Almost the entire park is serviced by municipal infra-structure (water, electricity and refuse and sewage).Exceptions are Rondevlei (no water, sewage is via soak-aways), Wilderness Staff houses and Day visitor ablutionfacilities (conservancy tanks).
The park is criss-crossed with provincial roads. The onlyinternal roads are at Ebb and Flow which has beenrecently paved and the gravelled access road toRondevlei (1km).
Fencing
The Park has several kilometres of boundary fencing thatis maintained on a regular basis.
Access points
The Park has several access points. as reflected in table8.
49
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
term tourism income required to deliver on its conservation mandate both in theWNP and across SANParks nationally.
While a single attack is one too many in terms of the risk to the SANParks brandand reputation, mitigatory risk management measures can and must be taken.
The Security and Safety Operational Plan comprehensively addresses both thestrategic and operational aspects of visitor safety and security within the frame-work set out by the SANParks Safety and Security Plan.
A detailed SWOT analysis has been completed inclusive of planning for capacityand detailed budgets for the following two year cycle.
• Ensure the provision of adequate enforcement training for, effective deploy-ment of, and proper resources to, all park field staff personnel
• Direct field staff enforcement activities toward the management of the sustain-able use of marine resources, control of boating activities, control of net-fish-ing, regulation of building activities within the “control area”, safety and secu-rity of visitors, mitigating visitor impacts, control of poaching/hunting and thecontrol of feral dogs and cats. Maintain regular park patrols
• Establish and maintain collaborative inter-agency relationships with SAPS,MCM, municipal traffic services and Cape Nature
• Maintain working relationships with, and provide relevant supporting informa-tion to, local magistrates
• Identify fencing requirements for the park, construct and maintain as required.• Apply to the MLRF to support the enforcement of the MLRA in the coastal
zone of the park
WNP recognizes the need to facilitate various partnerships with the public and pri-vate sectors in order to realise this Safety and Security Plan. To this end, interac-tions with entities such as the Wilderness and Sedgefield Police, the National SeaRescue Institute (NSRI), ambulance and fire brigade, air traffic control and themunicipalities of Eden, Wilderness, George and Sedgefield.
3.4.3 Infrastructure Programme
Tourism infrastructure programme
The parks tourism infrastructure consists of a rest camp, three day visitor areas sev-eral hiking trails and three bird-hides.
48
Ebb & Flow Main Entrance (N2) S33 59.694 E22 36.406 24 hours
Ebb & Flow North S33 59.270 E22 36.492 24 hours
Ebb & Flow South (Railway line) S33 59.317 E22 36.504 24 hours
Island lake Day visitors S33 59.369 E22 38.061 07H30 – 18H00
Lagoon N2 Entrance Day visitors S33 59.676 E22 34.729 07H00 – 18H00
Lagoon Pedestrian Day visitors S33 59.579 E22 34.845 07H00 – 18H00
Lagoon Pedestrian Day Boardwalk S33 59 556 E22 34.955 07H00 – 18H00
Tabel 8: Access points
51
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
3.4.4 Staff Capacity Building Programme
The park has an establishment figure of forty two (with 6 vacant posts cur-rently) . No major changes in the staff component are envisaged in thenear future. The competency level of the staff component is very impor-tant, if the performance level of the park has to be maintained; hencetherefore a staff capacity building programme is necessary.
The corporate balanced score card measure for SANParks measures thepercentage of employees who have achieved set goals in terms of defined
individual development plans. Every employee will have his/her individual plan toinclude training needs. The park management will therefore see that all the trainingand capacity building programmes are implemented. Park management will also seethat training needs are identified, budget for the training, and also ensure that train-ing happens. The use of the SETAs for funding the training will be explored both athead office and park level.
A Work Place skills Development Plan is also produced for the park every year asrequired by legislation. This is coordinated at head office level, with input from thepark and the Employment Equity Forum. Most of the staff is involved and encour-aged to make inputs into the plan.
Following the transfer of management responsibility of the staff of the IndigenousForest Management section of DWAF in the Garden Route to SANParks in April2005, SANParks is undertaking a re-organisation of the operations for the GardenRoute region.
3.4.5 Institutional Development and Administration Programme
The WNP is fully aligned to the corporate policy, guidelines and protocol on institu-tional development programmes and actions. This is communicated to the park fromtime to time by corporate HQ in Pretoria. Administration and is also based on accept-ed norms and standards as set out in various sets of legislation pertaining to admin-istrative procedures.
3.4.6 Financial Sustainability Programme
Table 9 provides an estimation of the costs involved in striving towards the desiredstate for WNP within the proposed Garden Route NP context over the next 5-yearperiod through all of the objectives and associated programmes detailed in this man-agement plan. For logistical purposes this budget reflects the budgets for the areasof Wilderness NP, Knysna Lake Area, Knysna Scientific management, the mountaincatchment area, Knysna administration office, the regional office and functions,Diepwalle and Farleigh forests. The allocated costs account for InfrastructureDevelopment Plans, Working for Water, Coast Care, Extended Public WorksProgrammes and the WNP and DWAF operational budgets. It is significant to notethat there is shortfall for unfunded projects of approximately R24,5 million over thenext four years. This shortfall mostly accounts for additional developments, infrastruc-ture and forestry and marine operating costs, which had been applied for but alloca-tion is unknown. Although most of the development and infrastructure will be inplace by the fourth year, the shortfall does not decrease significantly, as this is whenthe World Bank funding will have run its course and SANParks would have to accountsustaining the project. An important omission that requires urgent attention is an esti-mated costing for liability and risk. Corporate support (i.e. not included in the WNP’s
50
Cat 1 Cat 2 Description 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2007-2011
(R’000) (R’000) (R’000) (R’000) (R’000)
WNP: Current Operational Budget
A. Income Conservation Fee -727,253 -637,640 -661,480 -687,360 -2,713,733
A. Income Concession Fees -32,700 -32,448 -33,746 -35,096 -133,990
A. Income Tourism Income -4,089,247 -3,102,218 -3,225,436 -2,741,893 -13,158,794
A. Income Other Income -26,000 -27,000 -28,000 -29,000 -110,000
B. Expenditure Human Resource 4,597,967 4,942,814 5,313,525 5,712,040 20,566,346
B. Expenditure Depreciation 255,014 201,372 211,211 221,482 889,079
B. Expenditure Maintenance Maintenance: Buildings 136,870 241,844 254,021 266,602 899,337
B. Expenditure Maintenance Maintenance: Veld 43,680 46,000 48,400 51,000 189,080
B. Expenditure Maintenance Maintenance: Other 177,280 227,200 238,500 250,500 893,480
B. Expenditure Operating Costs Rent Paid: All 131,171 186,302 195,424 205,077 717,974
B. Expenditure Operating Costs Municipal Fees: All 392,649 412,010 432,280 453,550 1,690,439
B. Expenditure Operating Costs Telecommunications 98,540 114,665 119,895 125,931 459,031
B. Expenditure Operating Costs Transport Costs: All 60,793 60,968 58,090 58,004 237,855
B. Expenditure Operating Costs Specialist & Agent Fees 0 16,500 16,000 16,800 49,300
B. Expenditure Operating Costs All Other 1,182,434 1,308,392 1,372,023 1,443,269 5,306,118
B. Expenditure Finance Costs 21,159 43,800 44,500 45,200 154,659
Total Operations 2,222,357 4,002,561 4,355,207 5,356,056 15,936,181
WNP Infrastructure Development Program (Provisional DEAT Funding)
C. IDP Biodiversity Management All Biodiversity Projects
C. IDP Tourism Management All Tourism Projects 3,138,107
Total: IDP 3,138,107
Extended Public Works Program Application
D. EPWP Tourism Management All Tourism Projects 1,969,815
Total: EPWP 1,969,815
Coast Care
E. CC Biodiversity Management All Biodiversity Projects 3,452,042 6,000000
Total: CC 3,452,042 6,000,000
Working for Water-Wetlands
G. WfW Biodiversity Management All Projects 724,776
Total: WFW 724,776
Marine MPA
H. Marine Biodiversity Management All Projects 106,047 534,569 284,006 274,267 1,198,889
Total: Marine 106,047 534,569 284,006 274,267 1,198,889
Unfunded Projects
I. UFP Biodiversity Management All Biodiversity Projects R 4,500 000 R4,500 000
I. UFP Heritage Management All Heritage Projects R1,500 000 R500 0000
I. UFP Tourism Management All Tourism Projects R4,500 000 R4,500 000l
I. UFP Other All Projects R5,000000
Total: UFP R10,500 000 R14,000 000 R24,500,000
Summary
Total Income (A) -4,875,200 -3,3,799,306 -3,948,349 -3,493,349 -16,116,517
Total Committed Budgets (B, C) 10,235,664 7,801,867 8,303,869 8,849,405 32,052,698
Total Budgets Applied For (D, E, F, G, H) 6,252,680 5,807,256 284,006 274,267 1,198,889
Total Uncommitted Budgets (I)
* if all revenue were to be reinvested back into the WNP
Table 9: Costing
53
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
budget) will be required in the form of a technician and operating budget toundertake the monitoring necessary to evaluate TPCs and feedback as part of theadaptive management process. No cost estimates have yet been included for theadaptive management components of non-biophysical aspects of the plan. Adetailed breakdown of these figures can be found in the associated lower levelplan, available from the park manager upon request.
3.4.7 HIV/AIDS
HIV & AIDS requires special attention because it is also spreading withinSANParks. Whilst it is an integral component of the EAP (Employee AssistanceProgramme), it is accorded priority within the SANParks programming. In the mostseverely affected settings, there is mounting evidence that HIV/AIDS is erodinghuman security and capacity, undermining economic development and threaten-ing social cohesion. Inevitably, this situation has serious impacts on business. HIV& AIDS in the Wilderness communities will also concern the tourism progress andgeneral economic growth of the area. South Africa’s hospitality and tourism industry, of which the organization is a keyrole player, allows for job creation throughout the country, including rural areas,where HIV prevalence is often high. It impacts on all businesses, both directly andindirectly, resulting in increased costs and reduced productivity. Against thisbackdrop and because SANParks values its human capital, it has now introduceda comprehensive HIV & AIDS Programme which includes Developing an HIV &AIDS Policy; Education and Awareness; Anonymous and Unlinked PrevalenceSurveys; Know-Your-Status Campaigns; Lifestyle Management; Care, Treatment &Support as well as Scientific Impact Analyses. The purpose of a WNP HIV & AIDSprogramme will be to enable SANParks and its adjacent communities to maintaina healthy and productive workforce. The park will inform and educate the childrenand communities of lifestyle management, prevention, care and treatment andsupport of those who are infected. SANParks could play a pivotal role in sendinga positive message in this regard.
3.4.8 Risk management Programme
Risk awareness and management within the WNP is adhered to on an ongoingbasis. This entails the implementation of corporate policies, procedures and pro-tocol.
The purpose of corporate risk management is to ensure that strategic, businessand operational objectives are met and that continued, sustained growth and bio-diversity management takes p-lace. This is achieved by proactively identifying andunderstanding the factors and events that may impact the achievement of the set
52
objectives, then managing, monitoring and reporting onthese risks.
The process for the identification of risk is an objectivedriven process which assesses the impact that riskswould have on the viability of the objectives. Seniorexecutives and line management within divisions, downto each business unit are accountable for risk. Each indi-vidual Park Scorecard (Balanced Scorecard) reflects thegoals, objectives, targets and performance indicators forall its operations. They need to meet all applicable lawsand regulations as a minimum and, where appropriate,apply best practice (Table 1).
Section 51 (1) (a) (i) of the PFMA requires of theAccounting Authority of a Public Entity to establish andmaintain effective, efficient and transparent systems offinancial and risk management and internal control.Reporting on Risk Management occurs monthly atEXCO. Currently the existing corporate risk registers(per division) are being aligned with the divisional score-card objective-setting. The process to integrate parklevel scorecards with that of the Director: Parks is cur-rently in progress but park managers must in the interimadvice the Manager Admin Parks of any significant riskarising for that park that falls outside the scope of ongo-ing management issues. The Head Risk Management orManager: Corporate Insurance can be contacted in thisregard.
3.4.9 Adaptive and integrative strategies to sustain the desired state for WNP
The desired state cannot be effectively maintained with-out explicit attention given to prioritization, integration,operationalisation, and above all, reflection and adapta-tion according to the principles in the biodiversity custo-dianship framework. This will be further developed inconsultation with public participation, especially in thelight of the proposed Garden Route National Park.
Most objectives as indicated in objective hierarchy table
contained above need to be seriously addressed in thenext 5 year management cycle. A balance must bestruck between the energy needed to deal with immedi-ate threats, and the necessity of laying the all-importantgroundwork for longer-term strategic success. Thedesired state will take long and be tough to reach, anddifficult trade-offs will need to be made along the way. Itis hoped that the guidance offered in this section assiststhat decision-making in a structured way, though obvi-ously ongoing evaluation is imperative.
Biophysical and socio economic goals seem compatiblegiven the current formulation of the desired state. Theeffort to work towards the proclamation of the GardenRoute National Park needs to be kept high in convincingthe stakeholders of the key objectives to do so. On theother hand, it may be difficult to achieve all the goalswithin the next five years.
Given the desired state, the next step is for Park man-agement to use this management plan to draw up adetailed plan of action to for annual operations andwherever necessary delegate down to the level of tasksand duties. The Park Manager must be satisfied that allthis serves the desired state as contained in this plan. Afurther cross-check is contained in the BalancedScorecard system implemented by SANParks, whichserves not to replace any objectives contained in thisplan, but to support their effective implementation.
If these obligatory feedbacks are effectively honoured, itis believed that the WNP will be practicing an accept-able if not sophisticated level of adaptive management,and in accordance with our overarching values aroundcomplex systems, will have the best chance of achievingthe desired state in a sustainable way.
54 55
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
REFERENCES
REFERENCES:
Adamson, P.T. 1975. Extension of monthly runoff records in the catchments of the Wit Els,
Diep and Karatara rivers - Wilderness - Cape Province. Report to the Chief of the
Division of Hydrology, Department of Water Affairs, Pretoria. 9pp.
Allanson, B.R. & Howard-Williams, C. 1984. A contribution to the physio-chemical limnology
of Swartvlei. Archive fur Hydrobiologie 99(2): 133-159.
Allanson, B.R. & Whitfield, A.K. 1983. The Limnology of the Touw River Floodplain. South
African National Scientific Programs Report No. 79. CSIR, Pretoria. 35pp.
Bateman, M.D. Holmes, P.J., Carr, A.S. Horton, B.P. & Jaiswal, M.K. 2004. Aeolianite and bar-
rier dune construction spanning the last two glacial-interglacial cycles from the south-
ern Cape coast, South Africa. Quaternary Science Reviews 23: 1681-1698.
Birch, G.F., Du Plessis, A. & Willis, J.P. 1978. Offshore and onland geological and geophysi-
cal investigations in the Wilderness lakes region. Transactions of the Geological Societyof South Africa 81: 339-352
Boshoff, A.F. 1991. A checklist of the birds of the southern Cape Province. Bontebok 7: 40-
47.
Boshoff, A.F. & Palmer, N.G. 1981. A preliminary report on the water birds of the Wilderness-
Sedgefield lakes system. In: Jacot-Guillarmod, A. & Allanson, B.R. (Eds.). The Touw
River Floodplain. Part III. The chemical and biological impact of man. Institute for
Freshwater Studies Confidential Report to the Council for Scientific & Industrial
Research, Co-operative Scientific Programs.
Boshoff, A.F., Palmer, N.G. & Piper, S.E. 1991a. Spatial and temporal abundance patterns of
waterbirds in the southern Cape Province. Part 1: Diving and surface predators. Ostrich62: 156-177.
Boshoff, A.F., Palmer, N.G. & Piper, S.E. 1991b. Spatial and temporal abundance patterns of
waterbirds in the southern Cape Province. Part 2: Waterfowl. Ostrich 62: 178-196.
Boshoff, A.F., Palmer, N.G. & Piper, S.E. 1991c. Spatial and temporal abundance patterns of
waterbirds in the southern Cape Province. Part 3: Wading birds. Ostrich 62: 197-214.
Boshoff, A.F. & Piper, S.E. 1992. Temporal and spatial variation in community indices of
waterbirds at a coastal wetland, southern Cape Province. South African Journal ofWildlife Research 22(1): 17-25.
Coetzee, D.J. 1978. A contribution to the ecology of the zooplankton of the Wilderness
lakes. PhD. Thesis. University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch. 167pp.
Coetzee, D.J. 1981. Zooplankton distribution in relation to environmental conditions in the
Swartvlei system, southern Cape. Journal of the Limnological Society of Southern Africa7(1): 5-12.
Coetzee, D.J. 1983. Zooplankton and environmental conditions in a southern Cape coastal
lake system. Journal of the Limnological Society of Southern Africa 9(1): 1-11.
Coetzee, D.J. & Palmer, N.G. 1982. Algemene fisiese en chemiese toestande in Eilandvlei,
Langvlei en Rondevlei gedurende 1978. Bontebok 2: 9-12.
Cowling, R.M. 1984. A syntaxonomic and synecological study in
the Humansdorp region of the fynbos biome. Bothalia 15:
175-227.
Cowling, R.M. & Heijnis, C.E. 2001. The identification of broad
habitat units as biodiversity entities for systematic conser-
vation planning in the Cape Floristic Region. South AfricanJournal of Botany 67: 15-38.
CSIR 1978. Hidrouliese studie van die Swartvlei Estuarium. CSIR
Report C/SEA 7805/1. Coastal Engineering and Hydraulics
Division, National Research Institute for Oceanology,
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research,
Stellenbosch.
CSIR 1981. Wilderness Report No. 1. Evaluation of prototype
data and the application of a numerical model to the
Wilderness lakes and Touws River floodplain. CSIR Report
C/SEA 8113. Coastal Engineering and Hydraulics Division,
National Research Institute for Oceanology, Council for
Scientific and Industrial Research, Stellenbosch.
CSIR 1982. Wilderness Report No. 2. Evaluation of prototype
flood conditions and application of the numerical model
to conditions when the estuary mouth was opened. CSIR
Report C/SEA 8255. Coastal Engineering and Hydraulics
Division, National Research Institute for Oceanology,
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research,
Stellenbosch.
Davies, B.R. 1981. The zoobenthos of the Wilderness coastal
lakes. Unpublished Report 60pp.
Davies, B.R. 1982. Studies on the zoobenthos of some southern
Cape coastal lakes. Spatial and temporal changes in the
benthos of Swartvlei, South Africa, in relation to changes
in the submerged littoral macrophyte community. Journalof the Limnological Society of Southern Africa 8: 33-45.
De Kok, A.C & Lord, D.A. 1986. Chlorinated hydrocarbon
residues in African fish eagle (Haliaeetus vocifer) eggs.
Institute for Coastal Research Report No. 10.
De Kok, A.C & Boshoff, A.F. 1987. PCBs and Chlorinated hydro-
carbon insecticide residues in birds and fish from the
Wilderness lakes system, South Africa. Marine PollutionBulletin 18(7): 413-416.
De Kok, A.C & Simmons, R. 1988. Chlorinated hydrocarbon
residues in African marsh harrier eggs and concurrent
reproductive trends. Ostrich 59(4): 180-181.
Fijen, A.P.M. 1995a. Wilderness lakes catchment, Touw and
Duiwe Rivers, water management strategy. Volume 2:
Water resources. Department of Water Affairs and
Forestry, Pretoria. 57pp
Fijen, A.P.M. 1995b. Swartvlei Lake catchment, Diep, Klein-
Wolwe, Hoëkraal and Karatara Rivers, water management
strategy. Volume 2: Water resources. Department of
Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria. 47pp
Fijen, A.P.M. & Kapp, J.F. 1995a. Wilderness, Swartvlei and
Groenvlei Lakes catchment, water management strategy.
Proposed water management strategy, objectives and
goals. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria.
40pp
Fijen, A.P.M. & Kapp, J.F. 1995b. Wilderness lakes catchment,
Touw and Duiwe Rivers, water management strategy.
Volume 1: Present situation. Department of Water Affairs
and Forestry, Pretoria. 115pp
Fijen, A.P.M. & Kapp, J.F. 1995c. Swartvlei Lake catchment,
Diep, Klein-Wolwe, Hoëkraal and Karatara Rivers, water
management strategy. Volume 1: Present situation..
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria. 114pp
Görgens, A.H.M. 1979. Estimated flood hydrographs for certain
Wilderness streams. Special Report 1/79. In: Hughes, D.A.
& Görgens, A.H.M. 1983. Hydrological Investigations andresearch in the southern Cape coastal lakes region 1979-
1983: Summary and guide to reports. Department of
Geography, Hydrological Research Unit, Rhodes
University, Grahamstown.
Grindley, J.R. 1981. Estuarine plankton. In: Day, J.H. (Ed.)
Estuarine Ecology with particular reference to southernAfrica. Balkema, Cape Town. 117-146.
Grindley, J.R. & Wooldridge, T. 1973. The plankton of the
Wilderness Lagoons. Unpublished report. 21pp.
Hall, C.M. 1985a. Some aspects of the ecological structure of a
segmented barrier lagoon system with particular refer-
ence to the distribution of fishes. Unpublished M.Sc.
Thesis, Rhodes University, Grahamstown.
Hall, C.M. 1985b. The limnology of the Touw River floodplain
Part II. Aspects of the ecological structure subject to
floods, drought and human interference. Rhodes
University Institute for Freshwater Studies. Investigational
Report No. 85/1. 137pp.
Hall, C.M., Whitfield, A.K. & Allanson, B.R. 1987. Recruitment,
diversity and the influence of constrictions on the distribu-
tion of fishes in the Wilderness lakes system, South Africa.
South African Journal of Zoology 22(2): 163-169.
Howard-Williams, C. 1977. The distribution of nutrients in
Swartvlei, southern Cape coastal lake. Water SA 3: 213-
217.
Howard-Williams, C. 1980. Aquatic macrophyte communities of
the Wilderness lakes: community structure and associated
environmental conditions. Journal of the LimnologicalSociety of Southern Africa 6(2): 85-92.
Howard-Williams, C. 1981. Studies on the ability of a
Potamogeton pectinatus community to remove dissolved
nitrogen and phosphorous compounds from lake water.
Journal of Applied Ecology 18: 619-637
Howard-Williams, C. & Allanson, B.R. 1978. Swartvlei Project
Report II. The limnology of Swartvlei with special refer-
ence to production and nutrient dynamics in the littoral
56 57
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Russell, I.A. 1996. Fish abundance in the Wilderness and
Swartvlei Lake systems: changes relative to environmental
factors. South African Journal of Zoology 31(1): 1-9.
Russell, I.A. 1999a. Changes in the water quality of the
Wilderness and Swartvlei Lake systems, South Africa.
Koedoe 42(1): 57-72.
Russell, I.A. 1999b. Freshwater fish of the Wilderness National
Park. Koedoe 42(1): 73-78.
Russell, I.A. 2003. Long-term changes in the distribution of
emergent aquatic plants in a brackish South African estu-
arine-lake system. African Journal of Aquatic Science.
28(2): 103-122.
Schafer, G.N. 1991. Forest Land Types of the Southern Cape,
Part 1. Division of Forest and Science Technology Report
No. FOR 22. CSIR, Pretoria.
Schafer, G.N. 1992. Classification of forest land in the southern
Cape region. MSc thesis, University of Natal,
Pietermaritzburg.
Tyson, P.D. (Ed.). 1971. Outeniqualand: The George-Knysna
area. The South African Landscape Monographs No. 2.
South African Geographical Society: 23pp.
Underhill, L.G., Cooper, J. & Waltner, M. 1980. The status of
waders (Charadrii) and other birds in the coastal region of
the southern and eastern Cape, Summer 1978/79.
Western Cape Wader Study Group. Cape Town. 248pp.
Vlok, J. 1989. Wilderness National Park - The fynbos vegeta-
tion. Unpublished Report: 4pp.
Watling, R.J. 1977. Trace metal distribution in the Wilderness-
lakes. CSIR Special Report FIS 147, National Physical
Research Laboratory, Pretoria. 72pp.
Weisser, P.J. 1979. Report on the vegetation of the Wilderness
lakes and the macrophyte encroachment problem.
Botanical Research Institute. Department of Agricultural
Technical Services, Pretoria.
Weisser, P.J. & Howard-Williams 1982. The vegetation of the
Wilderness lakes system and the macrophyte encroach-
ment problem. Bontebok 2: 19-40.
Weisser. P.J., Whitfield, A.K. & Hall, C.M. 1992. The recovery
and dynamics of submerged aquatic macrophyte vegeta-
tion in the Wilderness lakes, southern Africa. Bothalia
22(2): 283-288
Whitfield, A.K. 1982. Trophic relationships and resource utilisa-
tion within the fish communities of the Mhlanga and
Swartvlei estuarine systems. Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Natal, Pietermaritzburg. 157pp.
Whitfield, A.K. 1988a. The fish community of the Swartvlei estu-
ary and the influence of food availability on resource utili-
sation. Estuaries 11(3): 160-170.
Whitfield, A.K. 1989a. Ichthyoplankton interchange in the
mouth region of a southern African estuary. MarineEcology Progress Series 54: 25-33.
Whitfield, A.K. 1989b. Fish larval composition, abundance and
seasonality in a southern African estuarine lake. SouthAfrican Journal of Zoology 24(3): 217-224.
Whitfield, A.K. 1989c. Ichthyoplankton in a southern African
surf zone: nursery area for the postlarvae of estuarine
associated fish species? Estuarine, Coastal and ShelfScience 29: 533-547.
Whitfield, A.K. 1989d. Recruitment of ichthyoplankton into the
Swartvlei Estuarine System. J.L.B. Smith Institute of
Ichthyology Investigational Report No. 30: 5 pp.
Whitfield, A.K. 1989e. The benthic invertebrate community of a
southern Cape estuary: structure and possible food
sources. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa47(2): 159-179
Whitfield, A.K. 1992. Juvenile fish recruitment over an estuarine
bar. Ichthos 36:23
Whitfield, A.K. 1993. Fish biomass estimates from the littoral
zone of an estuarine coastal lake. Estuaries 16(2): 280-289
Whitfield, A.K., Allanson, B.R. & Heinecken, T.J.E. 1983.
Estuaries of the Cape, Report No. 22: Swartvlei (CMS 11).
CSIR, Stellenbosch. 62pp.
Whitfield, A.K. & Kok, H.M. 1992. Recruitment of juvenile
marine fishes into permanently open and seasonally open
estuarine systems on the southern coast of South Africa.
Ichthyological Bulletin of the J.L.B. Smith Institute ofIchthyology No. 57, Grahamstown.
zone. Institute for Freshwater Studies Special Report No. 78/3. Grahamstown. 280pp.
Howard-Williams, C. & Allanson, B.R. 1979. The ecology of Swartvlei: Research for planning
and future management. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. 26pp.
Howard-Williams, C. & DAVIES, B.R. 1979. The rates of dry matter and nutrient loss from
decomposing Potamogeton pectinatus in a brackish south-temperate coastal lake.
Freshwater Biology 9: 13-21.
Howard-Williams, C. & Liptrot, M.R.M. 1980. Submerged macrophyte communities in a
brackish South African estuarine-lake system. Aquatic Botany 9: 101-116.
Hughes, D.A. & Filmalter, E. 1993. Water quality management strategy for Wilderness,
Swartvlei and Groenvlei Lake areas. Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University.
Report to GFJ Inc. 57pp
Huizinga, P. 1987. Hydrodynamic model studies of the Swartvlei Estuary. CSIR Report T/SEA
8709. Stellenbosch. 22pp.
Kok, H.M. 1981b. Studies of the juvenile fishes of Cape south Coast estuaries. In: Jacot-
Guillarmod, A. & Allanson, B.R. (Eds.) The Touw River Floodplain. Part III, The chemical
and biological environment and the impact of man. Institute of Freshwater Studies,
Grahamstown.
Kok, H.M. & Whitfield, A.K. 1986. The influence of open and closed mouth phases on the
marine fish fauna of the Swartvlei estuary. South African Journal of Zoology 21(4): 309-
315.
Liptrot, M.R.M. 1978. Community metabolism and phosphorus dynamics in a seasonally
closed South African estuary. M.Sc. Thesis, Rhodes University. 130pp.
Martin, A.R.H. 1962. Evidence relating to the Quarternary history of the Wilderness lakes.
Transactions of the Geological Society of southern Africa 65(1): 19-42.
Moll. E.J., Campbell, B.M., Cowling, L.M., Bossi, L., Jarman, M.L & Boucher, C. 1984. A
description of major vegetation categories in and adjacent to the fynbos biome. SANSP
Report No. 83. CSIR, Pretoria.
Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. 2006. The vegetation map of South Africa, Lesotho andSwaziland. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
Robarts, R.D. 1973. A contribution to the limnology of Swartvlei: The effect of physico-chem-
ical factors upon primary and secondary production in the pelagic zone. Ph.D. Thesis.
Rhodes University, Grahamstown. 181pp.
Robarts, R.D. 1976. Primary productivity of the upper reaches of a South African estuary
(Swartvlei). Journal of Experimental Marine Ecology 24: 93-102.
Robarts, R.D. & Allanson, B.R. 1977. Meromixis in the lake-like upper reaches of a South
African estuary. Archive fur Hydrobiologie 80(4): 531-540
Robinson, G.A. & De Graff, G. 1994. Marine protected areas of the Republic of South Africa.Pretoria: Council for the Environment (The World Conservation Union, IUCN.).
Russell, I.A. 1994. Mass mortality of marine and estuarine fish in the Swartvlei and Wilderness
Lake systems, southern Cape. South African Journal of Aquatic Science 20(1/2): 93-96.
58 59
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
to engage in a range of nature-based recreational activ-ities, or to socialize in the rest camp. Different peoplehave different accommodation requirements rangingfrom extreme roughing it up to luxury catered accom-modation. There is often conflict between the require-ments different users and different activities.Appropriate use zoning serves to minimizing conflictsbetween different users of a park by separating poten-tially conflicting activities such as game viewing and day-visitor picnic areas whilst ensuring that activities whichdo not conflict with the park’s values and objectives(especially the conservation of the protected area’s nat-ural systems and its biodiversity) can continue in appro-priate areas. Use zones serve to ensure that high inten-sity facilities and activities are placed in areas that arerobust enough to tolerate intensive use, as well as toprotect more sensitive areas of the park from over-uti-lization.
PARK USE ZONATION SYSTEM:
The zoning system
SANParks has adopted a dual zoning system for itsparks. The system comprises:a) Visitor use zones covering the entire park, andb) Special management overlays which designate spe-
cific areas of a park that require special managementinterventions.
The zoning of Wilderness National Park is shown in Map4, and summarized in Table One.
The Zoning process and its linkage to the underlyingenvironmental analysis
The park use zonation plan is a lean version of theConservation Development Framework (CDF). The parkuse zonation is based on the same biodiversity and land-scape analyses undertaken for a CDF. However, certainelements underlying the CDF may not be fully incorpo-rated into the park use zonation. In particular, the parkuse zonation plan will usually not incorporate elementssuch as a full tourism market analysis. Typically the parkuse zonation approach is applied developing parks suchas Wilderness National Park, though the long termobjective is to have a full CDF for all parks.
The zoning for Wilderness National Park was undertakenin conjunction with the zonings for all the areas anticipat-ed for inclusion into the Garden Route National Park.The zoning for Wilderness National Park was under-pinned by an analysis and mapping of the sensitivity andvalue of a park’s biophysical, heritage and scenicresources. This analysis examined the biophysical attrib-utes of the park including habitat value (in particular the
contribution to national conservation objectives), specialhabitat value (the value of the area to rare and endan-gered species), hydrological sensitivity (areas vulnerableto disruption of hydrological processes such as flood-plains and wetlands), topographic sensitivity (steepslopes), soil sensitivity (soils that are vulnerable to ero-sion) and vegetation vulnerability to physical distur-bance. In addition, the heritage value and sensitivity ofsites was examined (including palaeontological, archae-ological, historical and current cultural aspects). Thevisual sensitivity of the landscape was also examined inorder to identify sites where infrastructure developmentcould have a strong aesthetic impact. This analysis wasused to inform the appropriate use of different areas ofthe park, as well as to help define the boundariesbetween zones. The zoning was also informed by thepark’s current infrastructure and tourism products, aswell as the regional context (especially linkages to neigh-bouring areas and impacts from activities outside thereserve). Planned infrastructure and tourism productswere also accommodated where these were compatiblewith the environmental informants. These were all inter-preted in the context of the park objectives. This wasundertaken in an iterative and consultative process.
Map 5 shows the relationship between the use zoningand the summary products of the biodiversity and land-scape sensitivity-value analysis. This indicates that ingeneral it was possible to include most of the environ-mentally sensitive and valuable areas into zones that arestrongly orientated towards resource conservationrather than tourist use. Table 2 summarizes the percent-age area of the park covered by each zone, as well as thepercentage of the highly environmentally sensitive andvaluable areas (defined as areas with values in the topquartile of the sensitivity value analysis) that are in eachzone.
The analysis suggests that although the zonationscheme helps protect most environmentally sensitiveareas, this protection is a function of the high proportionof conservation orientated zones, rather than a functionof these zones being particularly well located. Almost87% of the park is covered by zones that are stronglyconservation orientated in terms of their objectives (i.e.Remote and Primitive), with a very significant 38% zonedRemote, the most strongly conservation orientatedzone. The result is that almost 85% of the highly sensi-tive habitats of the park are protected by conservationorientated zones. Unfortunately, as a legacy of existinginfrastructure and use patterns (especially around thesensitive lake systems), there isn’t a strong spatial corre-lation between highly sensitive habitats and the conser-vation orientated zones. It should however be notedthat many of the sensitive habitats present in high useareas are covered by Special Conservation Overlays.
WILDERNESS NATIONAL PARK ZONING PLAN (INCLUDING KNYSNA)
INTRODUCTION
The primary objective of a park zoning plan is to establish a coherent spatial frame-work in and around a park to guide and co-ordinate conservation, tourism and vis-itor experience initiatives. A zoning plan plays an important role in minimizing con-flicts between different users of a park by separating potentially conflicting activi-ties such as game viewing and day-visitor picnic areas whilst ensuring that activi-ties which do not conflict with the park’s values and objectives (especially the con-servation of the protected area’s natural systems and its biodiversity) can continuein appropriate areas. A zoning plan is also a legislated requirement of theProtected Areas Act, which stipulates that the management plan, which is to beapproved by the Minister, must contain “a zoning of the area indicating what activ-ities may take place in different sections of the area and the conservation objec-tives of those sections”.
The zoning of Wilderness National Park was based on an analysis and mapping ofthe sensitivity and value of a park’s biophysical, heritage and scenic resources; anassessment of the regional context; and an assessment of the park’s current andplanned infrastructure and tourist routes/products; all interpreted in the context ofpark objectives. The zoning for Wilderness National Park needs to be seen in thecontext of it being integrated in the short term into the Garden Route NationalPark. This was undertaken in an iterative and consultative process. This documentsets out the rationale for use zones, describes the zones, and provides manage-ment guidelines for each of the zones.
RATIONALE FOR USE ZONES
The prime function of a protected area is to conserve biodiversity. Other functionssuch as the need to ensure that visitors have access to, and that adjoining commu-nities and local economies derive benefits from the area, potentially conflict withand compromise this primary function. Use zoning is the primary tool to ensurethat visitors can have a wide range of quality experiences without comprising theintegrity of the environment.
Further, people visit a park with differing expectations and recreational objectives.Some people are visiting a park purely to see wildlife as well as natural landscapes.Others wish to experience intangible attributes such as solitude, remoteness, wild-ness, and serenity (which can be grouped as wilderness qualities), while some visit
APPENDIX 1
60 61
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Table 2: Summary of the percentage area of the park covered by each zone, as well as the percentage of thehighly environmentally sensitive and valuable areas (defined as areas with values in the top quartile of the sensi-tivity value analysis) that are in each zone. Note that the values are for the entire proposed Garden RouteNational Park.
Table 1: Summary of Use Zones Characteristics
Remote Zone
Characteristics
This area retains an intrinsically wild appearance and character, or is capable ofbeing restored to such, and is undeveloped and roadless. There are no permanentimprovements or any form of human habitation. It provides outstanding opportu-nities for solitude with awe inspiring natural characteristics. If present at all, sightand sound of human habitation and activities are barely discernable and at far dis-tance. The zone also serves to protect sensitive environments from developmentimpacts and tourism pressure.
Visitor activities and experience
Activities: Access is strictly controlled and on foot. Groups must be small, and caneither be accompanied by a guide or unaccompanied. Several groups may be inarea at the same time, but if necessary densities and routes should be defined sothat no signs can be seen or heard between the groups. The principles of “Pack itin Pack it out” must be applied.
Interaction with other users: There is no interaction between groups. The num-bers of groups within the area will be determined by the ability to ensure thatthere is no interaction between groups.
the accent on controlled access. Access is controlled interms of numbers, frequency and size of groups. Thezone shares the wilderness qualities of Wilderness Areasand Remote zones, but with the provision of basic self-catering facilities and access. It also provides access tothe Remote zone and Wilderness Area. Views of humanactivities and development outside of the park may bevisible from this zone.
This zone has the following functions:• It provides the basic facilities and access to serve
Wilderness Areas and Remote zones.• It contains concession sites and other facilities where
impacts are managed through strict control of themovement and numbers of tourists, for example if alltourists are in concession safari vehicles.
• It serves as a buffer to the fringe of the park andother zones, in particular Wilderness and Remote.
• It serves to protect sensitive environments from highlevels of development.
Visitor activities and experience
Activities: Access is controlled in terms of numbers, fre-quency and size of groups. Activities include hiking, 4x4drives and game viewing. Access is controlled eitherthrough only allowing access to those with bookings forspecific facilities, or alternatively through a specificbooking or permit for a particular hiking trail or 4x4route. Several groups may be in area at the same time,but access should be managed to minimize interactionbetween groups if necessary.
Interaction with other users: Interaction betweengroups of users is low, and care must be taken in deter-mining the number and nature of facilities located in thearea in order to minimize these interactions.
Limits of acceptable change
Biophysical environment: Deviation from a natural/pris-tine state should be small and limited to restrictedimpact footprints. Existing impacts should be reduced.Any facilities constructed in these areas, and activitiesundertaken here should be done in a way that limitsenvironmental impacts. Road and infrastructure specifi-cations should be designed to limit impacts.
Aesthetics and recreational environment: Activitieswhich impact on the intrinsically wild appearance andcharacter of the area, or which impact on the wildernesscharacteristics of the area (solitude, remoteness, wild-ness, serenity, peace etc) should be restricted andimpacts limited to the site of the facility. Ideally visitorsshould only be aware of the facility or infrastructure thatthey are using, and this infrastructure/facility should bedesigned to fit in with the environment within which it islocated in order to avoid aesthetic impacts.
Facilities Type and size: Facilities are small, often very basic, andare distributed to avoid contact between users.Alternatively facilities designed for high levels of luxury,but limited visitor numbers can be accommodated here(e.g. controlled access private camps or concessionsites).
Sophistication of facilities: Generally facilities are small,basic and self-catering, though concession facilities maybe significantly more sophisticated.
Audible equipment and communication structures:None.
Access and roads: Vehicular access to facilities is limit-ed to low-spec roads, often 4x4 only. Tourist and gameviewing roads are 4x4 only. Established footpaths areprovided to avoid erosion and braiding.
Location in ParkThe designation of Primitive areas in WildernessNational Park in the areas that were historically underSANParks management was severely limited by existinginfrastructure impacts associated with the peri-urbannature of this section of the park. Although the zone cancontain limited access roads and the potential for basicsmall-scale self-catering accommodation facilities suchas a bushcamp, this would be inappropriate within thelimited extent of the high conservation value area pro-tected by the Primitive Zone in these sections ofWilderness NP. In the older sections of Wilderness NP,Primitive areas were designated to protect the high con-servation value and Ramsar listed Rondevlei, Bo-Langvlei and surrounding areas from tourist and infra-structure impacts. The areas previously managed byDWAF and the forest exit areas provide far more scopefor the designation of Primitive areas in order to bothprotect sensitive environments and to provide the scopefor appropriate controlled tourist use and resource uti-lization of these areas. Most forest and fynbos areasidentified as environmentally sensitive, that were notincluded in the Remote zones or subject to existinginfrastructure impacts, were include in the PrimitiveZone. This included the bulk of the indigenous Harkevilleforest as well as forest and fynbos areas north of Knysna. Quiet Zone:
CharacteristicsThis zone is characterized by unaccompanied non-motorized access without specific access control andpermits. Visitors are allowed unaccompanied (or accom-panied) access, mainly on foot, for a wide range of expe-riences. Larger numbers of visitors are allowed than inthe Primitive zone and contact between visitors is fre-quent. The main accent is on unaccompanied nonmotorized access. Larger numbers of visitors are allowedand contact between visitors is frequent. It is importantto note that this zone may have different interpretations
63
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Limits of acceptable change:
Biophysical environment: Deviation from a natural/pristine state should be mini-mized, and existing impacts should be reduced.
Aesthetics and recreational environment: Activities which impact on the intrinsi-cally wild appearance and character of the area, or which impact on the wildernesscharacteristics of the area (solitude, remoteness, wildness, serenity, peace etc) willnot be tolerated.
Facilities
Type and size: No facilities are provided. Should overnight facilities be required toserve this zone, these should be placed in the adjoining zones.
Sophistication of facilities: No facilities except self carried portable tents.Guidelines for washing, ablution and cooking must be defined according to the“Pack it in Pack” it out principles. Camping only at designated sites.
Audible equipment and communication structures: None.
Access and roads: Public access is non-motorized. Vehicular access and parking isprovided in the adjoining Primitive zone. Established footpaths may be providedwhere erosion risks occur.
Location in Park
In Wilderness NP, Remote areas were designated in the mountainous areas aboveand east of the Bergplaas sections of the park, as these areas are both logisticallydifficult for development and sensitive to development pressures (in particular dis-ruption of catchment areas). Environmentally sensitive forest areas, including butnot limited to those areas previously managed by DWAF as Forest Special NatureReserves, were designated as Remote in order to protect them from infrastructuredevelopment and intensive tourism activities. Sections of the important coastalforest in the western sections of Harkerville were also included in the RemoteZone.
Primitive Zone
Characteristics:
The prime characteristic of the zone is the experience of wilderness qualities with
62
Location in ParkIn Wilderness NP, Quiet zones were designated to allowvisitors access on foot to hiking trails around the Lowintensity leisure areas. Sections of beach away frommajor access points (such as west of Gericke Point) werealso zoned Quiet. Sensitive lake and estuary areas suchas the Serpentine, the far western and eastern sectionsof Swartvlei, Swartvlei Estuary below the railway andabove Sedgefield lagoon, and Knysna Estuary above theroad bridge, were zoned Quiet to limit access to non-motorized vessels only. In the forest areas previouslymanaged by DWAF, Quiet zones were designatedaround the access points and development nodes atGoudveld, Gouna, Diepwalle and Harkerville to encour-age non-motorised tourist access to these areas. As faras possible, the sensitive sections of the park which werenot included into the Primitive zone were zoned Quiet toprotect them from infrastructure development andexcessive tourist impacts.
Low Intensity Leisure Zone
Characteristics:
The underlying characteristic of this zone is motorizedself-drive access with basic self-catering facilities. Thenumbers of visitors are higher than in the Remote andPrimitive zones. These camps are without modern facili-ties such as shops and restaurants. Relatively comfort-able facilities are positioned in the landscape retainingthe inherent natural and visual quality which enhancesthe visitor experience of a more natural and self provid-ing experience. Access roads are low key, preferablygravel roads and/or tracks to provide a more wild expe-rience. Facilities along roads are limited to basic self-catering picnic sites with toilet facilities. In some parks,large busses and open safari vehicles are not permitted.
Visitor activities and experience:Activities: Self drive motorized game viewing, picnick-ing, walking, cycling, game viewing, rock climbing, hik-ing, adventure activities.
Interaction with other users: Moderate to high
Limits of acceptable change:Biophysical environment: Deviation from a natural/pris-tine state should be minimized and limited to restrictedimpact footprints as far as possible. However, it isaccepted that some damage to the biophysical environ-ment associated with tourist activities and facilities willbe inevitable.
Aesthetics and recreational environment: Althoughactivities and facilities will impact on the wild appear-ance and reduction of the wilderness characteristics ofthe area (solitude, remoteness, wildness etc) isinevitable, these should be managed and limited toensure that the area still provides a relatively natural out-
door experience.
Facilities
Type and size: Picnic sites, view sites, information cen-tres, ablution facilities, parking areas, education centresetc. Small self-catering (including camping) camps oflow to medium density 25-35 beds. Additional facilitiescan include swimming pools. Trails for 4x4 trails can alsobe provided. Day visitor site are not placed within thecamps. Day visitor sites must relate to the general self-catering characteristic of the zone.
Sophistication of facilities: Self contained self-cateringunits with bathroom facilities. Camp sites will includeablution facilities. These camps are without modernfacilities such as shops and restaurants.
Audible equipment and communication structures:Cell phone coverage in vicinity of camps. Code of usefor cell phones and radios required to retain relativelevel of solitude.
Access and roads: Motorized self drive sedan car access(traditional game viewing) on designated routes whichare preferably gravel roads. In some parks, large bussesand open safari vehicles are not permitted. Whenbusses are permitted some roads should be designatedas accessible to self drive only. Roads are secondarygravel tourist roads or minor game viewing roads. In lakeand estuary areas, Low intensity leisure implies thatmotorized vessels are generally allowed, but they maybe excluded from certain sections either to minimizeenvironmental impacts or to reduce conflict with otherrecreational water users. Low intensity leisure does notimply motorized access to beaches.
Location in ParkLow intensity leisure areas were designated in most ofthe high use beach areas of the park (except around theTouw River mouth), in the area between the Touw Rivermouth and the Ebb and Flow Rest camp, Eilandvlei,Swartvlei above the railway bridge, Sedgefield Lagoon,and Knysna Estuary south of the road bridge. Currentpublic access roads around Bo-Langvlei and Rondevlei(including access to the hides), as well as park infrastruc-ture at Rondevlei were accommodated within this zone.In lake and estuary areas, Low intensity leisure impliesthat motorized vessels are generally allowed, but theymay be excluded from certain sections either to mini-mize environmental impacts or to reduce conflict withother recreational water users. Low intensity leisure doesnot imply motorized access to beaches. In the areas pre-viously managed by DWAF, low intensity leisure areaswere designated along the access routes to Diepwalle(including Kom se Pad), Gouna, the access to Goudveld,a section of the Harkerville forest near the N2 identifiedfor potential development, as well as the access routesto Krantzkloof. Most of the Low Intensity Leisure areas
65
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
in different parks and the CDF documentation for each park should set the objec-tives specific to that park. Thus, in some instances horses, non-motorized watercraft, and mountain bikes could be accommodated. This zone can also provide nonmotorized access within Low and High Intensity Leisure zones away from vehicularaccess roads.
Visitor activities and experience
Activities: Hiking, canoeing, sailing, rock climbing, bird watching, self guided con-structed trails and walks.
Interaction with other users: Interaction between groups of users is frequent.
Limits of acceptable change:Biophysical environment: Some deviation from a natural/pristine state is allowed,but care should be taken to restrict the development footprint. Infrastructure,especially paths and viewpoints should be designed to limit the impacts of largenumbers of visitors on the biophysical environment.
Aesthetics and recreational environment: Activities which impact on the relative-ly natural appearance and character of the area should be restricted, though thepresence of larger numbers of visitors and the facilities they require, may impacton the feeling of “wildness” found in this zone.
FacilitiesType and size: Hiking trails, footpaths, bird hides. No accommodation. Ablutionfacilities may be provided in high use areas. Heritage structures may be used forrecreation purposes.
Sophistication of facilities: Where provided these should be basic.
Audible equipment and communication structures: Allowed, but should bemanaged to retain a relative level of solitude.
Access and roads: Essentially pedestrian access, but in certain parks horse andMountain bikes can be accommodated. Pedestrian only or in some cases cycles.No access for tourists by vehicle. The only roads are essential two wheeled man-agement tracks. In lake and estuary areas, the Quiet zone implies that only non-motorized vessels will be allowed access.
64
amenities. Restaurants, shops, education centres, botan-ical gardens. Day visitor sites are provide outside of maincamps. Day visitor sites or picnic sites may providecatered facilities and kiosks. In some parks it may benecessary to provide high density recreational sites witha wide range of intensive activities (edutainment centres)close to the periphery of the park. Picnic sites, view sites,information centres, ablution facilities, parking areas,education centres etc. Staff villages and administrativecentres restricted to core staff. Non essential staff hous-ing, administration and industrial activities positionedoutside of or peripheral to the park.
Sophistication of facilities: Moderate to high densityfacilities. Self catering and catered. These camps havemodern facilities such as shops and restaurants.
Audible equipment and communication structures:Cell phone coverage in vicinity of camps. Code of usefor cell phones and radios required to retain relativelevel of solitude.
Access and roads: The zone is highly motorized includ-ing busses and delivery vehicles on designated routeswhich are often tarred. Care must be taken to distinguishbetween roads that serve as high access delivery routesto camps, link roads between camps, and game viewingroads to minimize conflict between users.
Location in ParkIn Wilderness NP, High Intensity Leisure areas designat-ed around the current Ebb and Flow Camp, at the TouwRiver Mouth and to accommodate major public accessroads through the park. In the areas previously managedby DWAF, the two existing nodes at Diepwall andGoudveld that have been identified for developmentwere designated as High Intensity Leisure.
Overview of the Special Management Overlays ofWilderness National Park
Special management overlays which designate specificareas of the park that require special management inter-ventions were identified (Map 4). Four overlay typeswere designated:
Special Conservation Areas – Forest SpecialProtection: Particular areas of specified forest typeswere designated for special protection in order toreduce the risk of habitat loss and mitigate any ongoingenvironmental impacts.
Special Conservation Areas – Wetlands: High conser-vation value wetlands such as Rondevlei, Bo-Langvlei,Eilandvlei, the Serpentine channel and floodplain, andSwartvlei Estuary below the railway line were identifiedfor special protection in order to reduce any potentialhabitat loss and minimize tourist and developmentimpacts.
Special Conservation Areas – Fishing exclusion area:Rondevlei, Bo-Langvlei and the channels between themwere designated as fishing exclusion areas to preventimpacts associated with fishing and bait collection.
Special Conservation Areas – Bait collection exclusionarea: The eastern sections of Knysna Estuary were des-ignated as a bait collection exclusion area to preventimpacts associated with bait collection.
67
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
represent existing development nodes and access routes to the major forest sta-tions.High Intensity Leisure Zone:
Characteristics: The main characteristic is that of a high density tourist development node withmodern amenities such as restaurants and shops. This is the zone where more con-centrated human activities are allowed. As impacts and particularly cumulativeimpacts are higher, such facilities should be placed on the periphery of the park.Staff not directly associated with tourism facilities should be accommodated out-side of the park if possible. All industrial type facilities such as laundries, abattoirs,maintenance depots and workshops should ideally be located outside of the parkwithin suitably zoned adjoining urban or rural areas. Accessible by motorizedtransport (Car/bus) on high volume transport routes. More concentrated activitiesoccur than in than Low Intensity leisure.
Visitor activities and experience:Activities: Traditional game viewing routes with associated more sophisticatedinfrastructure, sight seeing at tourist destinations, picnicking, walking, cycling, rockclimbing, hiking, adventure activities (orienteering, scuba diving, fun runs), activi-ties associated with amenities such as dining in restaurants.
Interaction with other users: High
Limits of acceptable change
Biophysical environment: The greatest level of deviation from deviation from anatural/pristine state is allowed in this zone, and, it is accepted that damage to thebiophysical environment associated with tourist activities and facilities will beinevitable. However, care must be taken to ensure that the zone still retains a levelof ecological integrity consistent with a protected area.
Aesthetics and recreational environment: Although the high visitor numbers,activities and facilities will impact on the wild appearance and reduction of thewilderness characteristics of the area (solitude, remoteness, wildness etc) isinevitable, these should be managed and limited to ensure that the area general-ly still provides a relatively natural outdoor experience.
Facilities
Type and size: High density camps providing tourist accommodation with modern
66
vation friendly land use within a broader area. Guidelinesapplicable for the Catchment Protection Section wouldalso apply to these areas.
Catchment Protection
These are areas important for maintaining key hydrolog-ical processes (surface and groundwater) within the park.
Development guidelines
Within these areas inappropriate development such asdam construction, loss of riparian vegetation and exces-sive aquifer exploitation should be opposed. In addition,the control of alien vegetation, the control of soil ero-sion, and appropriate land care (e.g. appropriate stock-ing rates) should be promoted.
Viewshed protection
These are areas where developments could impact onthe aesthetic quality of a visitors experience in a park.This zone is particularly concerned with visual impacts(both day and night), but could also include sound pol-lution.
Development guidelines
Within these areas any development proposals shouldbe carefully screened to ensure that they do not impact excessively on the aesthetics ofthe park. The areas identified are only broadly indicative of sensitive areas, as at a finescale many areas within this zone would be perfectly suited for development. In
addition, major projects with large scale regional impacts may have to be considered evenif they are outside the Viewshed Protection Zone.
5. CURRENT STATUS AND FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
The zoning for Wilderness National Park needs to beseen in the context of it being integrated in the shortterm into the Garden Route National Park. This rapidlychanging context will potentially require re-assessmentof the current park zoning. The current park use zonationis based on the same biodiversity and landscape analy-ses undertaken for a Conservation DevelopmentFramework (CDF); however certain elements underlyingthe CDF such as a tourism market analysis are not befully incorporated into the park use zonation. A full CDFwill be developed for Garden Route National Park with-in the current update cycle.
6. REFERENCES
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. 2003.National Environmental Management: Protected AreasAct (Act 57 of 2003). Department of EnvironmentalAffairs and Tourism, Pretoria.
SANParks. September 2005. Sensitivity-Value analysisManual. Unpublished. SANParks , Pretoria.
SANParks. November 2005. CDF Planning Manual.Unpublished. SANParks , Pretoria
69
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
4. THE PARK INTERFACE ZONE
The Park Interface Zones shows the areas within which landuse changes couldaffect a national Park. The zones, in combination with guidelines, will serve as abasis for a.) identifying the focus areas in which park management and scientistsshould respond to EIA’s, b.) helping to identify the sort of impacts that would beimportant at a particular site, and most importantly c.) serving as the basis for inte-grating long term protection of a national park into the spatial development plansof municipalities (SDF/IDP) and other local authorities. In terms of EIA response,the zones serve largely to raise red-flags and do not remove the need for careful-ly considering the exact impact of a proposed development. In particular, they donot address activities with broad regional aesthetic or biodiversity impacts.
Wilderness National Park has three Park Interface Zone categories (Map 5). Thefirst two are mutually exclusive, but the final visual/aesthetic category can overlaythe others.
Priority Natural Areas
This zone aims to ensure the long term persistence of biodiversity, within andaround the park, by identifying the key areas on which the long term survival of thepark depends. This includes areas important to both biodiversity pattern (especial-ly reasonably intact high priority natural habitats) and processes (ecological link-ages, catchments, intact hydrological systems, etc.). This does not imply any lossof existing rights (e.g. current agricultural activities or legal extractive biodiversityuse such as fishing), but rather aims to ensure the parks survival in a living land-scape.
Priority natural areas include areas identified for future park expansion as well asreasonably natural areas of high biodiversity value which are critical for the long-term persistence of biodiversity within the park. These include adjacent naturalareas (especially high priority habitats) which function as an ecologically integrat-ed unit with the park, as well as areas critical for maintaining ecological links andconnectivity with the broader landscape.
Development guidelines
Inappropriate developments and negative land use changes (such as additionalploughing of natural veld, development beyond existing transformation footprints,urban expansion, intensification of landuse through golf estates etc) should beopposed within this area. Developments with site specific impacts (e.g. a lodge ona game farm) should be favourably viewed if they contribute to ensuring conser-
68
70 71
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Map 1 – Regional Map
APPENDIX 2
72 73
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Map 2 – Physical features of the park
74 75
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Map 3 – Land tenure and park expansion
76 77
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Map 4 – Zoning maps
78 79
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Map 5 – Zoning with sensitivity value
80 81
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Map 6 – Areas or interface zones
82 83
WI
LD
ER
NE
SS
N
AT
IO
NA
L
PA
RK
•
P
AR
K
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
P
LA
N
Map 7 – Infrastructure and development
WILDERNESS NATIONAL PARK
P O Box 35
WILDERNESS
6560
Tel: (044) 877-0046
Fax: (044) 877-011
