By Liane Greeff of EcoDoc Africa Tel: +27 (0) 83 415 2365 Email: liane@kingsley.co.za         For GeaSphere Tel: +27 (0) 13 733 5267 Email: owen@soft.co.za www.geasphere.co.za         Title illustration and illustrations of eucalyptus and pine trees using water were commissioned from Janet Botes. Tel: +27 (0) 72 331 5057 Email: janetbotes@yahoo.com       All photographs were taken by Liane Greeff, except for the photographs of the community interviews which were filmed by Deirdre May for the GeaSphere Documentary Pulp Friction.       With thanks to Roy MacGregor for constant support and advice and to Wally Menne for valuable editorial recommendations.       Made possible with financial support from the Siemenpuu Foundation and the Swedish Society for nature Conservation, SSNC. The views herein shall not necessarily be taken to reflect the official opinion of the Siemenpuu Foundation or SSNC

--Download A Copy Here--

Introduction

The main tenet of this paper is that there is not enough water available for South Africa's current and planned development programme, and that there is a need to examine the nexus between our scarce water resources, potential significant climate change impacts, and the decision to plant more water intensive timber plantations. Coupled with this conundrum are the issues of food security, or the lack thereof, and the potential water and food security impact of non plantation alien invasive plants, including the uncontrolled expansion of invasive timber plantation species such as Black Wattle, Pines and Eucalyptus taking over valuable land and water resources.

This paper will attempt to weave many related threads together in a way that links with the broader sustainable development issues that our whole planet is facing, and our current collision course with an unknown climatic crisis. One definition of madness proposed by Einstein is when people do the same thing over and over again and expect a different outcome, and there is a related cliché says that if you keep on doing what you are doing you will arrive where you are headed. Right now we are not headed in the right direction, and that is why so many recent films are exploring the end of humanity – “2012”, “The Age of Stupid”, “Knowing”, whilst others are painting a picture of humanity in crisis such as “Children of men” and “Avatar”. The archivist in “The Age of Stupid” asks the question: Why didn't our generation do something when we knew that we had to and we still could make a difference, and “Avatar” highlights the sharp contrast between living in and with Nature versus destroying Nature in order to obtain a resource. Just because a plantation consists of trees, and trees are a key component of forests, does not mean that plantations are forests, and all the language that implies that they are, is misleading. In similar vein to “Avatar”, converting pristine grasslands to timber plantations in order to obtain a needed but economically undervalued and wastefully used resource both for national use and for export to earn foreign currency; and to neglect the larger and longer term impacts that this will have on water security, our rivers, biodiversity, food security, climate change, etc. is one more step in robbing our children of the Earth as we found it.

There is no ambiguity about alien trees consuming water excessively, and there is no ambiguity in terms of southern Africa being one of the driest regions of the world, or that South Africa has been classified as the 30th most dry country on the planet. There is no ambiguity in that scientists have predicted that climate change will affect Africa disproportionately and that southern Africa in particular is likely to experience less rainfall over most of the region, with longer dry periods and increased storm events. According to recent statistics (Blignaut and Van Heerden, 2009) South Africa is already using 98% of the available water with 12 of its 19 water management catchments experiencing a water deficit. Further, the Department of Water Affairs and Environment (Formerly Water and Forestry) predicts that, South Africa will have a water deficit of 1.7% by 2025.

The deficits in many of the Water Management Areas do not necessarily imply that water use exceeds the amount available but that the allowance for the ecological1 reserve cannot be met at current levels of use – this means river systems are being deprived of the minimum flow needed to maintain their basic ecological functions. Whilst the requirements for the Reserve are based on estimates at present, in many areas, there is no allowance to sustain the ecological viability of the resource, and substantial changes will be needed when the Reserve is implemented (DEAT, 2009).

These statements are not ambiguous, but in combination they portray a very bleak picture of water availability in the future. Indeed, the UNEP 2008 report “Freshwater under Threat: Africa” states that projected figures for 2025 suggest that per capita water availability will decrease and that “the projections for Malawi and South Africa look particularly bleak”. This scenario could be exacerbated if countries such as Lesotho want more access to water stored in the Lesotho Highlands Water Project dams.

1 The ecological reserve in South Africa refers to the quantity and quality of water that is required to: (1) satisfy the basic needs of all people who are or who may be supplied from a water resource, and (2) to protect the aquatic ecosystems in order to secure ecologically sustainable development and use of the relevant water resource.

Blignaut and Van Heerden (2009) in their paper entitled “Is Water Shedding2 Next?” state: “water use cannot continue to grow at current rates indefinitely given the supply constraints and the likely decline in the water availability due to change in climatic conditions, and the socio-economic and demographic pressure to increase the use of potable water for domestic use and to allocate water to higher value added industries. Something has to change, and fast.”

They reviewed the 12 flagship projects of the South African Government's Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (AsgiSA) and noted that the first six of the flagship projects which includes the Umzimvubu Catchment and Timber Industries Development Initiative in the Eastern Cape are all water intensive and that it seems as if “these projects were identified in complete isolation from the fact that South Africa is a water-scarce and arid country.” Their analysis reveals that macro-economic planning in South Africa needs to take
much greater cognisance of natural resource constraints, which are likely to worsen due to climate change and the spread of invasive alien plants. Quoting Cullis et al 2007, they say that is it estimated that if left unchecked unmanaged invasive alien plants could consume as much as 16% of the water in the near future.

In their concluding statement they state: Yes, water shedding is next “if macroeconomic decision making is not conducted in such as way as to acknowledge and plan with implicit resource constraints and bio-physical and hydrological patterns and features.” Water security, they warn is much more serious from a livelihoods and health perspective than electricity because there is no alternative. In his plenary address to the Second Africa Water Week (November 2009), it was said by Trevor Manuel that “Water is life”, and unlike electricity there are no alternatives, which makes water scarcity a matter of national security.

2 Shedding is a term used recently in “load shedding” which referred to the recent practice of interrupting electricity supply or rotating electricity supply between different users in order to share the burden of insufficient supply of electricity between different users in South Africa. The question raised by Blignaut and Van Heerden refers to the immanent under-supply of water which will necessitate some form of restriction or limitation.

In an updated paper, Blignaut and Van Heerden (2009) state “introducing the proposed [AsgiSA] programmes in a business as usual and water intensive manner will strengthen the current growth in the demand for water. This will bring forward or accelerate the need for introducing water rationing among sectors.” And they reiterate that whilst rationing is imminent the reality has not yet led to a rethink of macro-economic policies, and hence there is a sense of complacency whereas in fact there is an urgent need for proactive measures towards water conservation.

In September last year the Water Research Commission (WRC) released a press statement which stated that one of their latest studies has revealed that SA has even less water than was previously estimated. This was based on data from new technology and on integrated surface and ground water resources. The project leader, Brian Middleton, stated: “According to this study, our assessment of surface water resources, for example, shows that we have 4% less than we estimated in the 1995 study. If we were allocating water according to the higher estimates made in previous studies, we would find that there is simply not the water available to meet our needs.” According to the WRC study, South Africa's mean annual runoff was just over 49 000 million cubic metres of water; utilisable groundwater exploitation potential was estimated at about 10 000 million cubic metres per annum (and 25% less during drought conditions). The report also highlighted concerns around the quality of South Africa's water. The WRC believed that this study will influence South Africa's development sectors including timber plantations.

A recent World Bank sponsored study by the McKinsey Group brought to light that South Africa, by 2030, will face a shortage of 2.7 million m³ water. Dr Roelof Botha pointed out that according to the McKinsey research, 40% of available water worldwide is utilised for agricultural purposes. If adequate arrangements are not made, food security could also come under threat. Additionally because South Africa has low rainfall, few large rivers and has relatively restricted under-surface water sources, which are often polluted, this makes South Africa dependent on its neighbouring countries and existing projects in Lesotho. Dr Botha also included water pollution in cities and the mining industry as key threats to the country's water security (Water Security, 2010).

Based on this discussion it is clear that South Africa is running out of available water even faster than we previously thought and as a country we need to urgently rethink our development agenda. We should not launch any new water intensive projects unless completely confident that there will be sufficient water taking into consideration potential climate change impacts and invasive alien plant invasions. The need for the precautionary principle to be implemented is very clear – i.e. assume the worst case scenario with respect to actions whose outcomes are uncertain, in this case water scarcity and the increasing likelihood of water restrictions across all sectors. Population growth is another area of uncertainty with some statisticians believing that the population will decrease due to early deaths caused by HIV/Aids. The National Water Resources Strategy (2004) has predicted that a low population growth will lead to 50 million people in South Africa by 2025 and a high population growth path outcome will be closer to 55 million people. It is unclear whether this has taken into account the political and environmental refugees that are flocking to South Africa from the rest of Africa.



Limited water and recurring drought in the Eastern Cape

What does all of this mean for the timber plantations in South Africa and the proposed expansion of the Eastern Cape timber industry? In terms of the current planning and the Forestry Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Charter (BBBEE), government aims to establish an additional 150 000 ha of timber in the Eastern Cape and between 30 000 and 40 000 hectares in KwaZulu-Natal. This is being assisted by the special-purpose vehicle AsgiSA
Eastern Cape (Pty) Limited which is intended to assist in driving the implementation of the plantation programme in key areas (DWAF website). The question is whether these water intensive plans are feasible or whether they will effectively accelerate the introduction of water restrictions, or the development of further engineering solutions with their broad range of negative environmental impacts.

The current drought in the Eastern Cape is exacerbating the situation, and one question we can ask is that if the proposed new timber plantations had already been planted, what would their impact be on the current drought situation, and existing water users? However, drought seems to be a recurring phenomenon in the Eastern Cape, with media reports indicating that parts of the province had been or were being considered for declaration as disaster areas in February 2009, July 2009, and again in January 2010 (SABC, 2010, Gumenge, 2010; Dispatch
Online). In July 2009 the army was called in to assist the Eastern Cape government in dealing with the drought. Water Affairs Minister Sonjica is reported to have stated: “We have a crisis when it comes to water in the Eastern Cape” and she cited the drought as evidence of how climate change was impacting on the province, with predictions that within the next 20 years the province would be semi-desert. She said: “We already have scientific evidence that the rivers in the eastern part of the Eastern Cape are drying up.” (Dispatch Online, 2009)

The potential climate change implications for South Africa are discussed in more detail in a later section of this paper, together with concerns around the Kyoto Protocol Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) that is being used to promote new plantations that will compound the problem of water shortages.

This brings us to the critical matter of how much water is consumed by timber plantations and other related uses such as paper production. The following sections represent an exploration of the science around timber plantations and water use, which for the non-hydrologist is very confusing and very contradictory, and like most sciences is also a function of perspective. Industry scientists tend to be more conservative in their estimates of water use than environmentalists and everyone else is in the middle somewhere. South Africa is however, renowned for being world leaders in the research on plantations and water use. So these following sections are intended to highlight areas which are particularly confusing and where clarity is needed.




How much water do timber plantations consume?

According to Statistics SA (2009) in their discussion document entitled “Water Accounts for South Africa: 2000” they include a number of tables depicting water flow accounts of supply and use of water for South Africa for the year 2000. Table 17 highlights that South Africa receives approximately 611 600 million m3 of annual rainfall per year, of which 83% is directly evaporated or used by the natural vegetation and the remaining 17% (105 528 million m3) is available for Gross Annual Runoff, of which about 68 274 million m3 is used by the various sectors in South Africa. (The rest of the water flows remain in the natural environment to augment surface water, groundwater and ecological reserve). In describing how this water is used by the various sectors, the report states: “In 2000 water use in South Africa was driven by the agricultural sector, about 94%
(64 065 million m3), mostly for dryland crops (45 000 million m3 or 66%) and forestry (10 828 million m3 or 16%), while irrigation consumed only 12% of water (7 920 million m3) and livestock and game only 313 million m3. Leaving the rest of the economy with 6% of the total water use by sectors in South Africa”.

This figure of 10 828 million cubic metres for timber plantations includes the water that the trees suck up through transpiration, whilst the NWRS figure (below) refers to the reduction in stream flow. The easiest way to visualise just how much water plantation trees use in terms of evapotranspiration i.e. 10 828 million cubic metres, you just need to imagine four of the five biggest dams in South Africa – the Pongolapoort, Sterkfontein, Vaal and Vanderkloof dams, and know that plantation trees transpire and use more water than the dams can store (their combined storage amounts to 10 681 million m3 (SANCOLD, 2009)).

The National Water Resources Strategy (First Edition, 2004) indicates that for the same year – 2000 - the incremental water use of the timber plantations (in excess of the natural vegetation) amounted to 1 460 million m3 for South Africa as a whole, which is basically 1/10th of the SSA Report and represents 3% of South Africa's water
use (Blignaut and Van Heerden,2009) and according to DEAT plantations cover 1.7 million hectares and demand 1.5 million m3 per year (3.3%) of the available water resources in South Africa. The following section investigates how these figures are calculated.

In the film “Pulping the Future” produced by GeaSphere (2009) the same question was asked – how much water does timber production use in South Africa. The rationale they used was based on South Africa having 1.5 million hectares of managed plantations and then estimating that each hectare has at least 1000 trees, and using the conservative estimate that each tree uses at least 25 litres per day (equivalent to the South African free basic water allowance). The 1.5 million ha x 1000 trees x 25 litres/day amounts to timber plantations using 37.5 billion litres of water per day (37.5 million m3 per day). This was compared with a South African population of 50 million people getting a free basic water allocation of 25 litres per person per day, which amounts to 1.25 billion litres per day. GeaSphere's conclusion was that timber plantations use 30 times more water each day than the entire population's free basic water allocation.

However one interprets the statistics, it is clear that timber plantations are using a significant amount of South Africa's natural water resources, and a figure of 1460 million m3 is equivalent to the amount of water used by industry, slightly less than the amount of water used for urban and domestic purposes, although much less than the amount used by agriculture (CSIR, 1999a).

However, what makes timber production very different from most other water uses is that the trees use the water before it gets into the stream flows, which means that once the trees are planted the increase in water-use is committed indefinitely. Further, according to DWAF (2000), timber plantations are “oftenplaced in the headwaters of rivers and unlike other water users, likeirrigation, industry and domestic, forestry cannot be switched off duringperiods of drought. Restrictions on water use cannot be imposed inperiods of need”. This is a critical management consideration. Additionally, according to the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism in the State of the Environment Report, they mention that the major concern “is that plantations reduce the in-stream flow (that is, the amount of water in streams and rivers) during drier, low-flow periods when there is less rainfall (for example, during winter in inland areas and during summer in the Western Cape)”. According to
this same report, as much as 1.71 million ha of natural habitat, mainly grassland and fynbos, have been cleared for timber plantations, and this has greatly threatened the biodiversity resources offered by these biomes. The impact on groundwater, which is substantial, will be covered in the next section.


The evolving history of timber plantations and water research

The history of timber plantations and their impact on water resources has been very succinctly summarised in a paper by Chapman (CSIR, 2006) where he describes how in the early part of the 20th Century evidence of declining streamflow downstream of the plantations was mounting, and after the Fourth Empire Forestry Conference was held in South Africa in 1935, the Jonkershoek Forest Research Station was established that same year near Stellenbosch. By 1938 measurement of rainfall and stream flow was underway and other experimental sites were established elsewhere in South Africa. The experimental design was based on gathering baseline water data by comparing two unplanted catchments, and then planting one to timber. The difference in the runoff between the two catchments after planting timber could then be ascribed to the plantations.

Jonkershoek Plantation Research Station, Western Cape

The Jonkershoek paired catchment experiments consisting of eight catchments ranging from 27 – 246 ha were established, with relatively steep slopes, with strong seasonal rainfall gradients, and mean annual rainfalls of about 1 200 mm on the lower slopes that can go as high as 3 000- 3 600 mm at the top of the valley. The percentages of catchment planted ranged from 36 – 98% with pine species, mostly P. radiatae (Chapman, 2008).

The findings of the experiments indicated that the onset of stream flow reductions became evident in the data when the P. radiatae reached 5 years (up till 5 years compensated by groundwater), and peak reduction occurred at about 15 years, followed by a gentle decline in water use. According to Chapman (EcoDoc Africa, 2010), a rule of thumb formula they used was that for every 10% of the catchment planted to pines, they expected a 30 to 40 mm reduction in stream flow.

Chapman was very clear about the scientific data supporting the direct impact that timber plantations have on water resources, with eucalypts using approximately 600mm of rainfall equivalent and pines using about 400-450mm of rainfall equivalent. When he was asked about the amount of water used per tree per day, he replied that hydrologically speaking this was not a very useful measurement of water use as they prefer to use area and rainfall equivalent, but generally speaking a eucalyptus tree will use anything from 100 to one thousand litres of water per day and a pine from 50 to 600 litres of water per day. The amount of water varied according to tree species, age, position in landscape, size, the size of its canopy, how close it is to a river and whether it growing by itself or as part of a plantation.

Pine Trees Use 400 – 450mm rainfall equivalent Eucalyptus trees use 600 – 650 mm rainfall equivalent
No plantations big stream	Pine Plantation: Rainfall of 600mm and above stream reduced
Eucalyptus Plantation: Rainfall above 600mm/a and stream reduced	Rainfall of 600mm/a or less and the stream dries up completely

One of the reasons for the higher use of water by eucalypts is their ability to grow deep roots. The exact measurements vary with Scott and le Maitre (1998) stating that roots of eucalyptus trees can penetrate 50 metres or more into the soil profile in contrast to hard woody indigenous trees whose root systems penetrating about seven metres. Even young eucalyptus trees of three years of age can already have root systems penetrating and extracting water to depths of 10 metres. Other researchers have estimated the roots reach 30 metres in South Africa and 50 metres elsewhere (Dye et al. 1997, Chapman, 2006). Due to these deep roots the eucalypts are able to “mine” water from the water table, contributing to the desiccation of a catchment. In a South African catchment with deep soils and planted with eucalypts, the perennial stream dried up completely and only began to flow again 3-4 years after the trees were removed (while ground water recharge took place). The trees had used all the rainfall (about 1200 mm/annum) as well as ground water (Dye et al., 1997; Scott et al., 2000). Streamflow only reappeared after the soil profile had become saturated again. Farley et al. (2005) recorded eight instances where eucalypts stopped the streamflow completely.

Whitmore (1972) from the Department of Water Affairs undertook a preliminary assessment of the effects of plantations on run-off in Catchment Control Areas in the KwaZulu-Natal Midlands where plantations of wattle (75%), as well as pines and eucalypts had expanded steadily until the 1950s when a slump in the price of wattle bark led to clear felling and a reduction in the planted area. Subsequently timber plantations of pines and eucalyptus trees expanded rapidly into the areas cleared of wattle as well as agricultural land. Whitmore stated: “It has been estimated that 30-50% of the land at present afforested could be used for agriculture.”

He concluded that “based on the data, assumptions and methods used in this analysis it would seem that each km2 afforested in the CCA [Catchment Control Areas in the KwaZulu-Natal Midlands] is associated with the loss of about 200,000 m3 of water” and that the “fact that these reductions exceed the mean run-off in some seasons can be explained by the fact that the trees have access to surface flow, interflow and ground water draining from non-afforested parts of the catchment - in effect, water piracy occurs.”

Experiments at the Mokobulaan research catchments on the Mpumalanga escarpment showed stream flow reductions following the planting of grassland with both eucalyptus (E.grandis) and pine (Pinus patula), and the subsequent response in stream flow after the eucalyptus plantation was clearcut (Scott and Lesch, 1997). In these experiments, a whole catchment was planted with eucalyptus resulting in a statistically significant decrease in stream flow in the third year after planting and the stream dried up completely in the ninth year. When the eucalyptus trees were 16 years old they were clearcut, but full perennial stream flow did not return until five years later. Similarly, planting of an entire catchment with P. patula produced a significant decrease in stream flow in the fourth year after planting and caused the stream to dry up completely in the twelfth year after planting.

Whilst Scott and Lesch (1997) reported that the drying up of the streams was not surprising as the annual runoff was lower than the expected reductions owing to the full catchment area being planted, they were surprised at the delayed return of stream flow in the clearcut catchment and they attributed this to the soil mantle acting like a large reservoir and the long roots of the eucalypts “desiccating” these deep, soil-water stores. Only after these soil water stores had been replenished did the stream flow return to normal. The table below summarises results of stream flow reductions after plantations had been established from some of the South African catchment experiments.

Smith (1991) reported that when pines were removed to test the effects of deforestation on catchment water yield at Witklip, near White River in
Mpumalanga - the results showed that clearcutting led to "a significant increase in catchment water yield of approximately 280 mm/annum during the first 4 years after completion of treatment”. Further he found a 50mm/annum increase for every 10% of the catchment cleared of plantations.

According to Scott, Le Maitre and Fairbanks (1998) early estimates for stream flow reduction were estimated for the Afforestation Permit System (APS) using a modification of the Nanni curve, which were based on hydrological studies of grassland and pine plantations at Cathedral peak in the Drakensberg. These were replaced by the Van der Zel curves which were able to predict the effects of two different types of rotation lengths of plantations but could not differentiate between species or location.

As competition for increasingly scarce water resources grew, newer improved approaches were needed. The CSIR developed an approach which included a range of factors that contribute to water use and that could be used in a computer model to simulate the effects of planting or clearcutting. Factors included rainfall (MAP), tree species and growth potential, surface runoff, class of catchment, rotation length (period between clearcuts) and magisterial district.

The results of the Scott et al (1998) modelling approach led to some significant results, which revealed the important difference between impacts of timber plantations on total flows versus the impact on low flows, and how this differs between different tree species. This contributed to the Afforestation Permit System issuing permits based on timber species rather than just on plantation area. The difference between total and low flow reductions can be significant especially in catchments where most of the sub-catchments produce little or no low flow and they gave the example of the Letaba River where only 3.6% of the catchment area is planted but the stream flow reductions are close to 9% and 28% for total and low flows respectively (Scott et al, 1998).

As plantations are concentrated in the higher rainfall regions, they consume a disproportionately large share of the stream flow, especially the low dry season flows. So whilst the estimates are that plantations reduced national average annual stream flow by 3.2% (1 417 million cubic metres) the low flow reductions are much higher and said to be almost 8% (101 million m3).

Mpumalanga with the highest concentration of plantations – over 7% of the land area - experiences reductions of about 10% for total flows and 18% of low flows. This amount for the entire province – means that actual plantation water usage could be as much as equivalent to 130% of runoff from the plantation footprint. Scott (1998) calculated an average net effect of timber growing on total South African water resources to be a reduction of 98.6 mm/year which was lower than the Department of Water Affairs estimate of 113.6 mm/year. This applies to normal years not during droughts, so even if you take the two numbers and average them to get a result of 105 mm/year this actually represents consumption of more than 20% of the national average precipitation of 450mm, by only 1,2% of the total land surface area of South Africa (122 million ha).

Another important finding was that the best means of reducing the impacts of plantations on water resources was to reduce the proportion of each individual catchment that was planted to timber and to keep the riparian and wetland zones free of trees and to shorten the rotations, and at a broader scale to maintain an average normal age class distribution within each catchment and this would even out the differences in flow reduction and reduce the peak flow reductions. Still, Scott et all (1998) said there are a number of uncertainties and changes in the assumptions that can lead to much higher figures in water use such as increasing the use of fertilisers can increase water use, and the shorter lag time in subsequent rotations of pine trees, and that planting in mist belt areas or places where there are frequent long, low intensity storms can increase water uptake. This later approach excluded approximately 10% of the catchment land as modern plantations are required to leave the riparian zones clear as it is claimed that the trees use two to three times less water if they are planted outside of riparian zones.

Scott et al (1998) included a number of tables in their paper which are very useful and some of the more significant results are shown below:

These figures indicate that for some catchments the results are quite extreme – such as the Sabie and Sand River Catchments where the total flow is reduced by almost 20% and the low flow by almost 37%. The low flows on the Mpumalanga escarpment are reduced by just over 22%. One of the well known and devastating illustrations of the impact of plantations on a single river is the example of the Klaserie River, which
originates at Mariepskop, Limpopo Province. The water measurements reflected in the table below were taken where the river crosses the road
between Tzaneen and Nelspruit, beneath the mountain. All that had changed between 1935 and 1964 was the progressive establishment of plantations in the catchment area (and possibly climate change).

According to Scott et al (1998) the highest impacts on low flow are in the Limpopo Province “where small areas [of plantations] are confined to humid upper catchments that are the principle source of dry-season flow in otherwise dry secondary catchments”. This means there is very little remaining flow for the rest of the catchment that has a limited alternative source of water.

Gush (2006) explained the methodology of quantifying stream flow reductions resulting from timber plantations using time series simulation modelling, in this case the ACRU agrohydrological rainfall-runoff modelling system which enables the simulation of a wider range of plantation situations than those represented by the paired catchment experiments upon which the earlier models were based. A verification phase of the ACRU Model used these earlier paired catchment experiments. For the national simulations they used a simplified water balance equation where precipitation was equal to the evapotranspiration plus stream flow. The stream flow reductions were simulated for eucalyptus and pine and water and soils depths of all the relevant quaternary catchments, and depicted in the form of spatial maps.

Findings included that the simulation of the low flows was less successful than for the total flows, and they discovered that the model was not accounting for the large water storage capacity of the soil and the year-toyear carry over of storage or usage. They also found that when compared with observed data, that the evapotranspiration rates of the eucalyptus plantations were being significantly under-simulated. They concluded that the stream flow may have been simulated correctly for the wrong reasons. Despite this shortcoming, which is being remedied, these national stream flow reduction tables have been accepted as a working solution for immediate application in water resource management decision processes to do with plantations.

Gush has also been involved in a CSIR study that found that plantations of indigenous trees such as the Outeniqua yellowwood, sneezewood and the white stinkwood, may be economically more viable when it comes to the value of the timber and impact on scarce water resources than the current alien species used in timber plantations. Apparently the improved performance of the indigenous systems based on economic criteria is because they have lower maintenance costs with substantially larger product prices. In addition, further economic benefits from indigenous plantations may be gained from by-products such as traditional medicine, fruits, recreation, climate-change mitigation through carbon storage and
tourism. According to Gush they are working on developing concrete recommendations and are expanding the research to indigenous trees growing in different bioclimatic zones, and to start site/species matching in the most wateruse efficient species." This could also go some distance towards ameliorating the community impacts described below.



Timber plantations and other invasive alien plants

The above section details the amount of managed timber plantations where estimates of land under plantations vary around 1.5 million hectares. The land under invasive alien plants which include the timber species of pines, wattles and eucalypts as well as other invaders is even more than that – around 1.7 million hectares, and as they invade the riparian zones of rivers and wetlands their water use is exponentially higher.

These fast-growing alien tree species were introduced from Australia (eucalypts and wattle) and America and Europe (pines) in order to maximize timber production. Some of these species spread rapidly through the lack of natural seed predators in South Africa, invading areas disturbed by increased human activity, as well as riparian and wetland habitats and high mountain catchments (DEAT, State of the Environment Report). Chapman (EcoDoc Africa, 2010) highlighted the fact that many of the species used in plantations are highly invasive, including the pine species at Jonkershoek – Pinus radiata and Pinus pinaster. He said if you look up to the peaks you can see the pines have invaded the higher peaks, and the eucalyptus trees are known for invading rivers – such as the Berg River and Riviersonderend in the southern Cape. This has a serious effect on the water runoff of the high catchments of the Cape and the Drakensberg as well as being a significant protected area management issue (not to mention privately owned land).

Another issue is that pines are also a fire influenced species so when they are exposed to fire, they are stimulated to release seeds, which can result in a massive invasions that out compete indigenous flora (EcoDoc Africa, 2010). Of the 1436 000 hectares of timber plantation, 35% is eucalyptus (505 785ha), 57% is pine and 8% is wattle.

Cullis, Görgens and Marais (2007) found in their study on the impact of invasive alien plants in high rainfall and catchment areas on the total water yield, that invasive alien plants currently use 4% of water in South Africa, but that this figure could go up to 16% if the plants continue to spread as per current conditions. This is a vital finding that needs to be taken seriously especially when one takes into account the unknown future impact of climate change and according to some studies, rising temperatures can result in species that are not invasive now becoming invasive.

The graphic provided by Working for Water illustrates the same point:

A study by Görgens and van Wilgen (2004) revealed that when riparian and nonriparian invasive alien plants were removed from catchments at Witklip (Mpumalanga) and Biesiesvlei (Western Cape) - clearing riparian pines and scrub increased stream flow by approximately two or three times the amount that clearing non-riparian zones made available.

What is confusing is why these invasive species continue to be grown even though we understand the significance of their impact. Those that grow wattle, one of the most invasive species in the country have lobbied government to prevent it being classed as a weed, so it is still being planted. According to Chapman, wattle is out of control and is spreading all over Southern Africa. Similarly wherever, one finds alien tree plantations, one finds that the indigenous forests and non-planted grasslands and fynbos soon become invaded.

There is concern also that climate change will have an impact on the invasiveness of some species, with the fear that some plant species that are currently not invasive may also become so.



Community experiences of water scarcity and food insecurity

According to Karumbidza (2005), studies in the northern KwaZulu-Natal indicated that over a period of 20 years, grasslands converted to plantations suffered a staggering 82% reduction in stream flow with the impact of water flow reduction being particularly crucial in the dry season. In rural community areas, especially in the study area, the loss of surface water has severely negative implications for people's ability to survive. Karumbidza's research showed that plantations cause small springs, streams and ponds to disappear, and that this forced people to move into ecologically sensitive marginal areas to find water for their livestock and vegetable gardening. He quotes one of the senior women in Sabokwe, Mrs Ziqubu (April, 2005) who argued: “The thing is that we compete for water with these plantations. They use up a lot of water. I remember when we go here in 1996, the stream close to our garden was running perennially because the eucalyptus trees were not here….Since [the company planted trees], water has become scarcer. The stream is drying up. The land, which we had to drain because it was swampy, has become very dry. We used to dig very small wells to water the reclaimed land. Now we have to dig deeper and we get the water from far away. Water for drinking has also equally become scarce. We also have to fetch water for our cattle, chickens and goats, besides the water for domestic consumption. This makes the work for women even harder.

Research by GeaSphere has reached the same conclusions with communities in Mpumalanga. Interviews recorded in the documentary “Pulping the Future” (GeaSphere, 2009) highlighted the example of the sangoma (traditional healer) Mrs Manyike who could no longer find the muthi (medicinal) plants that grow on the river bank, nor the ones that grow in the moist soils up the hill because everywhere the streams and soils have dried up due to the plantations. Additionally and even more seriously is the long history of land dispossession of South African majority populations through the history of colonialism and apartheid, and the timber plantations have been intrinsically part of that process of land dispossession which is why about 40% of plantations are the being claimed as ancestral lands through the land restitution process. This has resulted in plantations exploring community plantations programmes.

Food security is an increasingly vital issue and is linked to the affordability of food and how communities can access it. The ongoing encroachment of non-food crops onto grazing and agricultural land will continue to erode the amount of staple food available and increasing scarcity will lead to higher prices which contribute to malnutrition and a host of other social problems. Sinagugu Zikulu from Northern KwaZulu-Natal (Geasphere, 2009) wrote about his visit to the area of Mtubatuba where he comes from that "all families had converted their land into either sugar cane or gum tree plantations. The result was that all the local springs and local streams were drying up. There were long queues at what used to be a permanent
spring… The grazing lands for cattle were gone, as gumtrees had replaced all the grasslands ...people had to rely on shops for grocery supplies every month. These commercial crops were not food crops. People who had no money to buy groceries starved. Mielie crops surrounded by gum plantations turned yellow as roots were spreading all over the place. …" Similarly, Msweli (GeaSphere, 2009) wrote about the impacts of timber plantations on the rural communities of Swaziland:"It is thanks to Sappi and Mondi that today about a fifth of land that was productive, used to grow food and for cattle grazing, and used to grow grass to build houses, has been turned into money making forest." He said that both the timber
plantations and the sugar cane crops had destroyed traditional community living because both crops tend "to destroy the community by amassing vast land and destroying the community life that has been part of our culture for years, and that many of these plantations have come about from the mass eviction of people from their productive lands onto non-productive land, and that this has resulted in the “massive food shortages in Swaziland.”

This issue is an increasingly worldwide phenomenon and is seen by many as the new form of colonialism in Africa. Indeed Vidal (2010) reported that 50 million hectares of land in Africa – an area double the size of the United Kingdom - has been acquired by rich countries to guarantee their own food supplies in a world where global food shortages is increasing. He said that it was ironic that a country like Ethiopia where hunger is prevalent is offering 3 million hectares of its most fertile land for growing food for rich countries rather than for themselves. Timber plantations where much of the produce is being used to support excessive per capita use of resources in developed world contexts is inextricably part of resource colonialism which ultimately deprives local people (and local biodiversity) from using that land and associated resources. This is a core issue that we as a species need to deliberate in our increasingly urgent need to find ecologically and economically sustainable ways of living on Earth, ways of living with the concept of sufficiency rather than constant acquisition, and to find ways of determining when enough is enough.



Timber plantations and fire

According to Chapman (EcoDoc Africa, 2010) the pines and eucalyptus trees have a much greater biomass than indigenous fynbos and grasslands, and therefore when fires come through the plantations, the heat generated is much, much greater than normal fires, and effectively „cook' the soils. Hot fires increase the hydrophobicity of the soils which means the soils repel water instead of absorbing it. This results in rainfall running straight off the soil surface and very quickly generates a lot of kinetic energy that causes soil erosion. This also does not help to replenish ground water and according to DEAT (State of Environment Report) soil erosion in turn has a negative impact on water quality through the sedimentation of wetlands, rivers and streams. This is why Chapman says that it is not advisable to have alien plantations in a fire-dominated landscape.

Industrial timber plantations suffer extensive financial losses every year as uncontrolled fires destroy plantations, buildings and equipment. According to Godsmark (2007) fire damaged a total of 64 000 ha in South Africa in the first eight months of 2007 and an additional 20 000 in Swaziland. According to his statistics, the amount that had been fire damaged from 1980 to 2006 amounted to 387 000 with an average fire damage of 14 300 ha per annum. According to the Working for Fire Website, fires of all sorts produce a mixture of gases and particles known as smoke, which negatively impacts on global climate, air quality and human health.
These veld fires in South Africa generate every year about:
   • 64 thousand tons of methane,
   • 76 thousand tons of non-methane hydrocarbons,
   • 39 thousand tons of nitric oxide,
   • 6 thousand tons of nitrous oxide and about
   • 40 thousand tons of smoke particles per year. They also produce about
   • 12 million tons of carbon dioxide (some of which gets reabsorbed when the vegetation grows and therefore stable fire regimes are theoretically
     'carbon neutral')

This is not true for the other trace gases, which remain net emissions. Thus a change in fire frequency and/or extent leads to a change in greenhouse gas emissions, which can be accurately quantified. It is worth noting that methane is about 22 times worse than carbon dioxide in terms of climate impact, and this does not get reabsorbed, but does dissipate after about 10 years.

According to Owen (2008) fire plays a natural and essential role in the formation and maintenance of southern African grasslands and is called the 'life blood' of the grassland. The bulk of the biomass in grassland is made up of rootstocks and bulbs, and because they are underground the grassland recovers quickly from fires which usually occur during the late winter / early spring - just before the first spring rains. During this period the grass is extremely dry, and there is a high probability of lightning strikes. However, grassland should not be burnt too often, and the removal of fire has a very negative impact on the biome, and some plants which are fire dependant for germination will die out. This is true also for the fynbos of the Western Cape.

When fire is excluded from an area due to plantations the adjacent grasslands or fynbos do not burn for many years, with the result that they develop a large fuel load that when eventually burned releases great heat that affectively sterilises the seed bank in the area. This is what happened at Silvermine and other parts of the Cape peninsula in 2000. In some areas the strict fire management regime near plantations has resulted in the grasslands being burnt at the wrong time of the year, which degrades them and affects germination.


Climate Change Predictions for South Africa and the double burden of the Clean Development Mechanism

Chapman believes that the Jonkershoek data sets provide a vital opportunity for studying the evolution of climate change in South Africa, as they consist of over 70 years of detailed data. Apparently since the records began, rainfall in Jonkershoek has declined by approximately 14%, and the runoff from the pristine catchments has declined by approximately 20%. He stated that on average 500mm rainfall equivalent per annum has been lost since the Jonkershoek research began, which is significant because the high mountains are the sources of water for the lower catchments.

The data indicates that the nature of the rainfall is also changing – and that this is likely to continue because as the atmosphere warms, more moisture can be held in the air, which results in more intense rainfall episodes with longer dry periods in between (Chapman, 2008). According to DEAT (2009), projected climate changes in South Africa over the next 50 years indicate that the western parts of the country will become dryer, that certain areas will experience shorter rainfall seasons, and that air temperatures will rise, particularly in the interior, and there will be potentially increased frequency of floods and droughts.

These changes will affect all components of our natural environment and will also impact on the economy. Scientists are saying that it is too late to focus on mitigation alone as the climate has changed and that we need to also look at adaptation. Civil society organisations such as 350.org are trying to get government to reduce the carbon load in the atmosphere back to 350 parts per million, which scientists believe will keep the global warming increase below or equal to 2 degrees Celsius, above which there are a range of tipping points that may result in climate change getting exponentially out of control.

Because of this need to focus on adaptation, the Department of Environmental Affairs is saying that this adaptation needs to be incorporated in all strategies that are linked to planning and decision-making processes at all levels, such as ASGISA. However this is not happening. In his presentation, Blignaut mentions that whilst government has the legislation and policies in place, the implementation is not happening and the ethos is “dynamics as usual” with a conundrum between the vision of ASGISA and water availability.

Bond, in his presentation to the Carbon Trading Africa Conference (2009) explained the issue of the CDM (clean development mechanism) which is embedded in the Kyoto Protocol that enables trading based on carbon offsets. For example, the carbon emissions of a power station in the USA could be allowed to continue or expand if the equivalent amount of carbon is absorbed somewhere else, for instance in a tree plantation. This is also called carbon sequestration - removing carbon (CO2) from the atmosphere and storing it in carbon sinks such as oceans, forests or soils.


George Monbiot, who is considered to be one of the cutting-edge thinkers on climate change, has debunked the notion of plantations as carbon sink investments: “When you drain or clear the soil to plant trees, for example, you are likely to release some carbon, but it is hard to tell how much. Planting trees in one place might stunt trees elsewhere, as they could dry up a river which was feeding a forest downstream. Or by protecting your forest against loggers, you might be driving them into another forest. As global temperatures rise, trees in many places will begin to die back, releasing the carbon they contain. Forest fires could wipe them out completely” (Bond, 2009).



Using timber plantations as carbon sinks has been described by some authors as trading water for carbon - in the article by Jackson et al (2005) titled “Trading water for carbon with biological carbon sequestration” they emphasise the need to consider full environmental consequences of carbon sequestration programmes. Their research of more than 600 observations and climate and economic modelling
showed that substantial losses in stream flow and increased soil salinisation and acidification occurred together with development of plantations. Their findings indicated that climate change feedback would probably exacerbate the water losses rather than offset them.

Another paper by Farley et al (2005) further elaborated on the link between carbon sequestration programmes using timber plantations and their impact on water yield. They undertook a global analysis of 26 catchment data sets with over 500 observations, including annual runoff and low flows. Taking the different variables into account, they found that the annual runoff was reduced on average by 44% and 31% respectively when grasslands and shrub-lands were planted to trees. Eucalypts had a larger impact than other trees when planted on grasslands, reducing runoff by 75% compared to Pines that reduced runoff by 40%. Results also indicated impacts on low flows and that impacts may be more severe in drier
regions. Their results indicated that in regions where runoff is less than 10% of the MAR (mean annual rainfall), tree plantations would result in a complete loss of runoff, and that where natural runoff is 30% of the precipitation, it will be reduced by at least half after the trees are planted. The authors concluded that where plantations could cause or intensify water shortages, that this factor should be explicitly addressed when considering carbon sequestration programs.

Indeed many environmental organisations complain that carbon sequestration programmes often result in people from developing countries “paying twice” for climate change – firstly, with the climate change itself, and secondly with the often devastating impacts that are associated with so-called development projects such as plantations and large dams.

According to Philip Owen (EcoDoc Africa, 2009) grasslands can absorb more carbon from the atmosphere than timber plantations, as much of the carbon is taken underground by organisms such as termites, resulting in the build up of a carbon reserve underground. Professor Braam van Wyk (Carte Blanche, 2007) stated that grasslands capture “vast amounts of carbon, and that carbon is taken underground by organisms, like termites for example, that incorporate the plant material as part of the humus in the soil, and grassland soils are particularly rich in humus and therefore stored reserves of carbon." Further, a United Nations Project, based on work in Mexico, Thailand and Kenya, shows that grasslands account for more than a quarter of land-based carbon turnover.

This claim has been supported by other researchers. A recent report prepared for the Department of Environment Affairs, (Taviv et al, 2007) states: “permanent grasslands used as pastures, rangelands, and hayfields can maintain large soil carbon stocks due to several characteristics - perennial grasses allocate a high proportion of photosynthetically fixed carbon below ground, maintain plant cover year-round, and promote the formation of stable soil aggregates. Grassland systems that have been degraded in the past or maintained under sub-optimal management conditions are most conducive to sequestering additional carbon with improved land management”.




Converting cultivated cropland to grassland typically increases soil carbon at rates of 0.3 to 1.0 t/ha/a for a period of a few decades. Cultivated organic soils represent another land restoration opportunity. These lands are a significant source of agricultural CO2 emissions, with high rates of up to 10 to 20 t/ha/a of carbon (Ogle in Taviv et al. 2007). Practices such as no-tillage and increasing the carbon load in the soil may also contribute significantly to sequestration potential, and if implemented correctly can increase the water retaining potential of the soils by up 800% (EcoDoc Africa, 2010).

The carbon sequestration programmes in South Africa should look more at how to improve carbon retention in agricultural soils, and to illustrate this point Francis Yeatman (EcoDoc Africa, 2010) showed soils where the organic matter had been increased tenfold from 0.3% to 3%. He said: “one of the things we are finding is that as you start increasing organic matter and carbon in the soil you improve soil structure and the sponge like effect of the organic matter retains moisture for so much longer and you can get an 800% increase in moisture holding capacity of soil which reduces the amount of irrigation required”. Increased organic matter results in a more viable soil with more air spaces and each particle in the soil can be lined with moisture which results in the moisture moving more slowly through the soil so you end up with both moisture in the soil and good drainage, and much less need for added water.



Timber Plantations and payment for water

In a pamphlet titled "Foresters understanding what you pay for" the Department of Water Affairs explained that timber plantations had been

declared as a stream flow reduction activity (SFRA) in terms of the National Water Act 1998, and that this refers to any dryland practice which reduces the yield of water from that land (compared to leaving that land in an undisturbed condition) to downstream users. The pamphlet further states "Industrial forestry is concentrated on 10% ofthe land area that produces 60% of this country's water resources. Industrial plantations represent, to all intents and purposes, a permanent change of land use from relatively low water use veld or pasture, to a higher water use crop. This higher water use (= runoff reduction) therefore demands a proper control in a water scarce country." Declared activities that reduce stream flow would be charged a water resource management charge which varied across the different water management areas.

In the 2002/03 financial year that the new water resource management charge was introduced, plantation owners would pay between 0.2 and 1 cent per cubic metre. Included in the pamphlet are the average prices for three water use
sectors with the average water price for domestic and irrigated being R1.55, for industrial agriculture R0.48 and timber plantations being the lowest at 0.32c per cubic metre.



In a speech, Minister Sonjica chided the forestry industry for its opposition to paying water charges and called on them to join in a review of the pricing strategy to achieve a consensus approach. She commented: “Water users must contribute to the costs of secure water access. So I was concerned that a representative of Forestry South Africa should tell Parliament that they may refuse to pay the water resource management charges, which are essential for the Catchment Management Agencies' (CMA) success. …When state forestry was restructured, we agreed to “cap” the water charge for forestry at R10 per hectare. This amounts to only R15 million for all plantation forests in the country. Since the turnover of the industry is over R20 billion and the profits of just one company's local division were over R300 million, we do not believe that this is excessive”.


In his article Tewari (2005) researched the questions of whether commercial (industrial) forestry (timber plantations) in South Africa should pay for water. He went through a complicated analysis of timber use and water value and came to
the conclusion that the value of the water is very significant (an amount of approximately R3.6 billion), and that it accounts for 30% of the R12 billion revenue of the timber industry being attributable to water alone. The results of his
study indicated that actual water values are much higher than the water management charge levied on industrial plantations, confirming therefore that large subsidies are being received by the industry. Tewari believes that since large
subsidies are being transferred to the industry that this makes its value questionable, and he concludes with the question of whether South Africa shouldhave more commercial (industrial) plantations or significantly convert them to grasslands, given that water is such a limiting factor in South Africa.






The pulp and paper industry

Environmental pressure group GeaSphere (2009) has been calling for a halt to the expansion of the industrial timber plantation model in southern Africa, citing the exorbitant water use of the timber species as a primary concern. The impacts on water resources which also evident at the mills where the timber is processed to pulp and paper, is also a major issue. At least 6kl of water is used to produce one ton of pulp at the Ngodwana mill, and effluent from the various mills around southern Africa further pollute rivers, estuaries and the ocean.

During low rainfall periods these pollution impacts become particularly severe, as the dilution capacity of the rivers is reduced leading to higher levels of chloride and other chemicals in the system. In the past, accidents at the largest pulp mill in Southern Africa (Sappi Ngodwana) have resulted in acute poisoning of the river with dramatic consequences for aquatic life.

Owen asks the question: “If one considers the cumulative impacts that industrial timber plantations exert on Southern Africa's scarce water resources, it is clear that this 'export orientated' production model should not be promoted, as the long term costs far outweigh any short term financial benefits”.

Additionally, paper is one of the resources that is used very wastefully especially by developed countries, and the campaign called “shrink” is aiming to “stop the madness of paper over-consumption” (Lang, 2008). In his article he describes a book called Paper Trails: From Trees to Trash – The True Cost of Paper written by Mandy Haggith who travelled by train and boat from her home in Scotland to Sumatra, Indonesia, to do her research. She stated: “I was horrified by how destructive our paper footprint is,” she says. “I met Indonesian villagers fighting a land-claim with a paper company that is growing acacia on their community land to make copy paper for sale in European and North American markets. I asked them what I could do to help their fight, and they told me to ask people in Europe to use less copy paper. To show real solidarity with people struggling with multinational extractive industries, it is not enough for us to shift our consumption from one brand to some other, hopefully slightly less obnoxious, brand. That only displaces the problem. Consuming differently is not good enough, we need to consume less AND differently.”

According to Lang (2007) the pulp and paper industry is the main driver of the expansion of plantations and consumes over two-thirds of the timber from South Africa's plantations. He described the two main companies that dominate the pulp and paper industry in South Africa which are Sappi and Mondi. According to Lang, Sappi (formerly South African Pulp and Paper Industries Ltd) was registered in 1936 and today owns 465,000 hectares of plantations in South Africa and 75,000 hectares in Swaziland.

Worldwide, the company manufactures 5 million tonnes of paper and 3 million tonnes of pulp a year. In South Africa, Sappi is currently expanding its Saiccor dissolving pulp mill's capacity by
more than 200,000 tonnes a year. The company also plans to expand pulp production at its Ngodwana mill by 225,000 tonnes a year. The company is planning to convert the plantations feeding its mill from pine to eucalyptus. Mondi, formed in 1967 by Anglo American, one of the world's largest mining companies, manages 430,000 hectares of plantations. Today Mondi has 35,000 employees in 35 countries. In early 2007, Anglo American announced that it would demerge the company and Mondi would become independent. Mondi, with its head office in
Austria, has a paper mill in Durban and a wood chip mill and pulp mills at Richards Bay and Felixton.

Thus according to Owen, these companies are multi-national companies in the true sense of the world, and the real beneficiaries of their operations are their international shareholders.

Paper and paperboard consumption increased from over 77 million tons in 1961 to 350 million tons in 2005 representing a five-fold increase (World Resources Institute Website) with the USA using over 88 million tons in 2005 compared to South Africa using 3.3 million tons in 2005 (leaving 1.4 million tons for the rest of sub-Saharan Africa. South Africa had a per capita use of 69 tons per annum in 2005 and USA 297 tons per capita in the same year. Clearly this is excessive. Recycling figures for paper for South Africa also indicate that there is some room for improvement with 44% of recyclable paper being recycled (Enviroserve website), as each ton of paper recycled results in 17 less trees being used and 3m3 of landfill sites saved and there is a reduction of coal based emissions of 1 ton of CO2 and electricity based emissions of 1.8 tons of CO2 (Paper Recycling Association of South Africa, www.prase.co.za). This last statistics whilst being favourable towards recycling actually gives testimony to just how bad it is to waste paper.



Conclusion

The intention of this article is to share with you some of the issues around just how thirsty alien trees are and to try and give you an idea of how vast the plantations are in terms of land area, and the size of the problem with respect to the shortage of available water that this generation is facing – where we will go from a possible slight surplus to a deficit within the next decade. This means that in ten years time (if not now) each new water allocation means that water has to be taken from someone who already uses it. This has impacts on all of our lives – affecting what we eat, what we drink, where we can live, etc., and compounding this scenario is the huge and terrifying unknown of climate change.

Our world has therefore become a scary place to live in, huge disasters seem to be happening more frequently and the economic system based on resource exploitation is failing. Scientists are clearly saying that climate change has arrived, and civil society is clearly saying that our political leaders seem unable or are disinterested in reaching a global consensus on the part that all must play to enable future generations to have an Earth where the climate is no more than 2% hotter than the Earth that we inherited. The quote at the beginning of the article references “the fear to bring children into this world”, and for me, this fear is real, and we need to ask ourselves “what kind of future can we offer our children in a world that seems to be committing suicide.”

It seems that most if not all our steps towards destroying ecosystems are steps in the direction of disaster, and that our steps towards maintaining and restoring the natural world are steps towards the definition of sustainability, where future generations are central, and issues around resource use should be promoting sufficiency rather than luxury. The scientists say that we need to adapt to climate change, as we no longer have the luxury of time to focus only on mitigation. Some say that timber plantations are part of that adaptation whilst this paper has argued that the costs specifically in terms of water use and biodiversity are too great and that timber plantations should not be expanded further, and indeed where possible, removed, and that other forms of carbon sequestration, such as increasing organic soil concentrations and promoting grassland health, are
preferable.

The statement by Daly (quoted by Blignaut, 2005) has resonance with this world view, that more and more the limiting factor “is remaining natural capital, not manmade capital as it used to be. For example, populations of fish, not fishing boats, limit fish catch world wide” therefore the economic logic says to invest in the limiting factor, to invest in leaving nature in the best condition possible, and this includes our grasslands which is the most
under-protected biome in our country.

Our efforts to conserve natural capital will be what your grandchildren (not mine as I will not have any) will thank you for, not the resources that we take from the earth and use before their time.

We can imagine the prairies in North America that were once full of buffalo and the migrations of springbok followed by predatory lions that took days to pass in southern Africa, but future generations will try to imagine the land that was once full of prairie or grasslands, that were converted into timber, into mines, into shopping malls, into suburbs, into dams and into agriculture land, and like the Archivist from “The age of Stupid” they will ask: “Why?”

References:

All references cited are available on the internet, including the GeaSphere and EcoDoc Africa Documentaries.

Blignaut, J. and Van Heerden, J. 2008 and 2009. (Two versions). Is Water Shedding Next? University of Pretoria. Working Paper No 141.

Blignaut, J. and Van Heerden, J. 2009. The impact of water scarcity on economic development initiatives. Water SA Vol 35 No 4 July 2009.

Blignaut, J. 2006. Ecological Restoration: Catalyst for Economic Development.

VryeAfrikaan, Vol. 3(6). 21 April 2006. www.vryeafrikaan.co.za/lees.php?id=540

Blignaut, J. Macro Perspectives on water supply and demand: the implications of the 6% economic growth rate. Powerpoint Presentation.

Bond, P. 2009. Achieving Environmental Targets: Who Wins and Loses in Carbon Trading for Emissions Mitigation? Presentation to the Carbon Trading Africa Conference Climate and African food.

Carte Blanche. 2007. Sudwala Caves drying up due to timber plantations Documentary. (7 October 2007).

Chapman, R.A. CSIR 2006. Forests and Water – An Overview of Forest Hydrology.

Chapman, RA CSIR. The Jonkershoek Research Catchments.

Chapman, R.A. 2008. Long-term hydrological monitoring at Jonkershoek aids climate change studies. CSIR
www.saeon.ac.za/eNewsletter/Online/2008/september/doc02

Cullis, J, Görgens, A. and Marais, C. (2007). A strategic study of the impact of invasive alien plants in the high rainfall catchments and riparian zones of South Africa on total surface water yield. Water SA 33(1) 35-42. www.wrc.org.za

Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). 2009. State of Environment Report.

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2000. Water Conservation and Demand Management Strategy for the Forest Sector in South Africa.

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2004 Media Release. Minister Sonjica firm on forestry water charges. 17 June 2004

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2002. Foresters understand what you pay for. Water Resource Management Charges Pamphlet.

EcoDoc Africa. (2009) GeaSphere Earth Matters Documentary on Timber

Plantations www.myvideo.co.za/video/Geasphere-earth-matters-part-one and www.myvideo.co.za/video/Geasphere-earth-matters-part-two

EcoDoc Africa 2010. A morning with Francis Yeatman: Soil Health and Ecologically Sustainable Farming Documentary (in process).

EcoDoc Africa Documentary. 2010. Interview with Arthur Chapman at Jonkershoek

Farley, K. Jobbagy, E and Jackson, R (2006). Effects of Afforestation on water yield: a global synthesis with implications for policy. Global Change Biology (2005) 11, 1-12

Geasphere 2009. Pulping the Future Documentary. See www.geasphere.co.za and www.YouTube.com

GeaSphere 2009. A Critical Look at the Industrial Timber Plantation Industry.

Godsmark, R. August 2007. The impact of the 2007 Plantation Fires on the SA Forestry and Forest Products Industry. Forestry South Africa

Görgens and van Wilgen (2004) Invasive alien plants and water resources in South Africa: Current understanding, predictive ability and research challenges. South African Journal of Science Vol. 100 27-33.

Gumenge, P. 19 January 2010. Eastern Cape reels - drought persists, (www.grocotts.co.za/content/eastern-cape-reels-drought-persists-19-01-2010)

Gush, M. 2006. Modelling streamflow reductions resulting from commercial afforestation in South Africa: From research to application. CSIR.

Hennop, J. 2009. Eastern Cape declared drought disaster area! Dispatch Online.

Jackson, R., Jobbagy, E, Avissar, R., Roy, S., Barrett, D., Cook, C., Farley, K., le Maitre, D., McCarl, B., and Murray, B. 2005. Trading water for carbon with biological carbon sequestration. Science. Vol. 310.

Jacobson, M. 2003. Water Policy and Pricing Timber Plantations in South Africa:
Implications for Sustainable Forestry http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ARTICLE/WFC/XII/0308- C1.HTM

Jarmain, C., Everson, C., Gush, M. and Clulow. A. 2009. The quantification of green water in South Africa: Advances to support integrated water resources management. CSIR.

Karumbidza, J. 2005. A Study of the Social and Economic Impacts of Industrial Tree Plantations in the KwaZulu-Natal Province of South Africa

Lang, C. 2008. Argentina: Scientists confirm that plantations dry up streams and salinise groundwater. WRM Bulletin no. 128, March 2008.

Lang, C. (2008) Shrink: A new campaign to stop the madness of paper overconsumption. WRM Bulletin 131, June 2008.

Lang, C. 2007. Pulpmill Water Website. Page on South Africa. Department of Water Affairs. National Water Resources Strategy (NWRS) First Edition. 2004.

Owen, P. (2008) Fire and the Grassland. GeaSphere Website. www.geasphere.co.za

SABC News 3 February 2009. Eastern Cape declares disaster areas owing to drought.

SANCOLD News May, 2009.

Scott, D. and Lesch,W. 1997. Streamflow responses to afforestation with Eucalyptus grandis and Pinus patula and to felling in the Mokobulaan experimental catchments, South Africa. Journal of Hydrology 199 (1997) 360-377

Scott, D and Smith R. 1997. Preliminary empirical models to predict reductions in total and low flows resulting from afforestation. Water SA 23 (2)

Scott, D and Le Maitre, D. 1998. Interaction between vegetation and groundwater. Water Research Commission Report, No 730-1-98.

Scott, D. Le Maitre, D and Fairbanks, D. 1998. Forestry and streamflow reductions in South Africa: A reference system for assessing extent and distribution 1998 Water SA 24 (3)

Smith, R. 1991. Effects of clearfelling pines on water yield in a small Eastern Transvaal catchment, South Africa. CSIR. Water SA Vol 17 (3)

Statistics South Africa. Discussion Document D0405.1 March 2009. Water Accounts in South Africa: 2000

Taviv, R., Van der Merwe, M., Scholes, B and Collet, G. (2007) Non-energy Emissions Agriculture, Forestry and Waste: An input into the Long Term Mitigation Scenarios process. Prepared for Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism South Africa (Council for Scientific and Industrial Research)

Tewari, DD. (2005) Should commercial forestry in South Africa pay for water? Valuing water and its contribution to the industry. Water SA Vol 31 (3) 2005 p 319 - 326

UNEP AMCOW WRC 2008. Freshwater under Threat Vulnerability Assessment of Freshwater Resources to Environmental Change Africa

Van der Schyff, H and Schoonraad, E. 1971. The Flora of Mariepskop. Bothali 10 (3) 461 - 500

Vidal, J. 2010. Food, Water driving 21st Century Land Grab. The Observer Online. 7 March 2010.

Water Research Commission (2009) Press Release: Study reveals less water than previously estimated.

Water Security: International problem - acute in South Africa. 2010. (www.servicepublication.co.za/index.php/magazine/environment/204-watersecurity)

Whitmore, J. 1972. An estimation of the possible effects of land management practices on run-off from the Catchment Control Areas in the Natal Midlands. Technical Note Number 26. Department of Water Affairs Hydrological Research Division

Working for Fire Website www.workingonfire.org/

World Resources Institute. 2006. South Africa Country Study http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/forests-grasslands-drylands/country-profile- 165.html