7th World Wilderness Congress Symposium, November 2001, Port Elizabeth

MOUNTAIN CONSERVATION IN SOUTH AFRICA

Authors: M E Shroyer and P Blignaut

Abstract

South Africa comprises approximately 10 percent mountainous terrain and isolated mountains, based on the criterion of 450 metres local relief. Distinctive hilly terrain and distinctive coastal and river relief make up approximately 13% of the land surface.

The highest mountains are located in the Drakensberg with peaks reaching 3 400 metres with local relief up to 2 100 metres. The extensive Cape Fold mountain range (totaling about 21 000 square kilometres) also have several peaks with local relief close to 2 000 metres. Many other less extensive mountain ranges exist throughout South Africa.

Developments and poor management practices in mountain areas are increasing on private and government land and mountain wilderness is shrinking. This paper aims to: § provide an overview of major mountain ranges, their conservation status and the type of communities that live in close proximity to these mountains; § highlight key threats to mountain wilderness; § discuss and analyse policies, legislation and other "social contracts" that deal with mountain management in South Africa, focussing on how key issues such as over-exploitation, over-burning, lack of finance, law enforcement, lack of knowledge, bad environmental attitudes, water pollution, inappropriate private and infrastructural developments and poorly planned access routes, are being addressed.

To conclude, a hypothetical case study where suitable socio-ecological zoning informed the planning and development of a private mountain reserve, is discussed. The rationale for using socio-ecological zoning is to encourage the conservation of mountain wilderness by only developing in areas where potential negative effects on wilderness qualities can be minimised and to restrict non-wilderness dependent activities in identified wilderness areas. Socio-ecological zoning requires that a pre-determined range of social needs and uses, applicable to the characteristics of the mountain environment in the country, is scientifically matched to the appropriate ecological and physical characteristics of the mountain area.

M.E. Shroyer is Independent Natural Resource Researcher, 2 Chudleigh Court, Carstens Street, Tamboerskloof, Cape Town, 8001, South Africa Fax: 27 - 21 4262746 Email: shroyer@iafrica.com and P. Blignaut is mountain environment consultant, coordinator for Africa of IUCN Mountain Protected Areas Network. Southern Africa Mountain Environment Consultancy (SAMEC) 14 Kreupelbosch Way, Constantia, 7806, South Africa Fax 27 - 21 7944836, email: blignaut@icon.co.za.

Based on the criterion that a mountain constitutes an area elevated by at least 450 metres (m) from the local relief (the height difference measured from the lowest point within the area being considered), South Africa comprises approximately 10% mountainous terrain and isolated mountains. Distinctive hilly terrain and distinctive coastal and river relief make up approximately a further 13% of the land surface.

Mountains in South Africa either form part of the Great Escarpment or are free standing. The Great Escarpment extends from the mountainous regions of the Northern Province southwards to the Drakensberg, past Lesotho and the Eastern Cape into the Southern Cape. It then continues north of the Cape Fold mountains to Sutherland in the Karoo, before turning northwards towards Springbok in the Northern Cape (DEAT, 1997). The highest mountains in South Africa are located in the Drakensberg with peaks reaching 3 400m with local relief up to 2 100m. The extensive Cape Fold sandstone mountain ranges (totaling about 21 000 square kilometres) also have several peaks with local relief close to 2 000m. Many other less extensive mountain ranges exist throughout South Africa (Blignaut, 2000A).

Some mountainous areas are still wild and unspoilt as a result of harsh living conditions for humans, rough topography and remoteness. In these pristine wilderness areas there are few signs of human modification. Indigenous fauna and flora are very dominant. These places provide a range of opportunities to visitors for solitude and to interact with nature on nature's terms. The wilderness qualities in mountains vary depending on geomorphology, climate, surrounding land-use and fauna and flora. For example:
· The Cape Fold mountains form part of the extremely biodiverse Cape Floral Kingdom ecosystem and offer many undisturbed mountain peaks and kloofs. Visiting these wilderness areas can be strenuous. Leopard and signs of free-ranging wildlife are present in some areas, but the wilderness character of these mountains is linked to solitude, striking scenic beauty with steep ascents and rough terrain, sandstone cliffs, pure mountain water and multi-coloured unsurpassed endemism among flora.
· The KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg harbours one of the world's greatest rock art collections. There are an estimated 600 sites with more than 35 000 individual rock art images. It contains high-altitude and unique Southern African alpine-tundra vegetation and its associated endemic palaeo-invertebrates. It offers outstanding views and a range of peaks to climb. Wildlife can be encountered at varying altitudes.
· The Lebombo mountains are less than 800 metres high, but probably the richest wildlife mountain habitat south of the Zambezi Escarpment, mostly by virtue of their length down the Kruger National Park and the wilderness of Mozambique on the eastern side. Parts of it are inhabited by elephant, lion, leopard, buffalo, rhino and another 40 or 50 large mammals, mainly antelope, as well as an enormously rich birdlife.
· The Richtersveld is a mountain desert with summer daytime temperatures regularly higher than 40ºC where both plants and animals have adapted to the harsh desert conditions.

Although a mountain zonation policy (refer to Figure 1), has been proposed (Blignaut, 1992) there is currently no formal policy specifically aimed at mountain conservation. Many mountainous areas are not zoned and there are no specific management objectives or indicators to monitor compliance to set targets, on State or private land. In many cases the diverse mountain wilderness landscapes are "unmanaged".

Figure 1: Socio-Ecological Zoning

There is currently no attempt to protect the remaining mountain wilderness by restricting access and making inducements to go elsewhere through the provision of recreational facilities in more appropriate areas. As a result, many of these wilderness areas are being targeted for ecotourism. Even with a moderate increase in the use of wilderness areas, the nature conservation status may be totally unimpaired, while the wilderness experience may be ruined.

True mountain communities, people who have traditionally lived in mountain areas, are quite a rare phenomenon in South Africa. African communities are mostly located in hilly terrain and few communities actually inhabit the mountains, unlike mountain communities in South America, Asia and Europe.

Diversity of mountain communities

The culture of people living in close proximity to mountains varies from mountain to mountain, depending on agricultural potential, proximity to markets, climate, scenic value, rock formation, biodiversity, presence of wildlife, conservation status, recreational opportunities offered, socio-economic factors, etc. The following loose categories attempt to describe different communities who live close to mountains or who enjoy benefits provided by mountains:

· Traditional mountain communities. People who live in the foothills or who live in mountains on a permanent basis, whose ancestors also lived in mountainous terrain, who utilise resources provided by mountains, mountain slopes or mountain streams as their primary livelihood. This includes livestock farming (cattle, goats and sheep), crop farming and dagga growing. Examples of mountain communities are: Basotho people who live on the Great Escarpment between South Africa and Lesotho, the Hananwa people of Blouberg in the Northern Province and the people of the Richtersveld, the Namas and the Bosluis Basters (Van den Berg, 2000).
· Subsistence communities e.g. at Wupperthal in the Western Cape, Qudeni in Zululand, and Mnweni and Singati in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg.
· Rural communities, which include commercial farmers, small-scale commercial farmers and farm labourers. Farms can be managed by private individuals, companies or consortiums. Examples are flower farms in the Cape mountains, trout farms in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg, and cattle-farms in the Waterberg.
· Communities living within or on the boundaries of private or public mountain conservation areas, e.g. in the Richtersveld and Drakensberg.
· Landowners of private nature reserves and those including their land in nature conservancies such as the Cederberg, Voëlvlei and Grootvadersbosch conservancies in the Western Cape.
· Foresters and personnel working for mining or logging companies.
· Urban communities living within or on the boundaries of private or public mountain conservation areas, e.g. in Cape Town, Ceres, Franschhoek. Two groups can be identified: "Armchair mountain admirers", the people who are fairly passionate about mountains but who seldom climb them; and "local mountain users", the people who utilise the mountains on a regular basis for exercise, recreation, spiritual renewal, to socialise or to enjoy the scenic beauty.
· Business people running ecotourism operations who use the mountains as the attractant.
· Mountain tourists, the visitors from other areas, nationally or internationally, who travel to mountainous areas to enjoy stunning mountain landscapes or to hike.

In general, people living in mountainous areas have become eco-conscious and take a direct interest in the management of mountains as well as their resources. This has led to the formation of Mountain Forums, Friends of the Mountain Groups and Hiking and Mountain Clubs.

Projects involving mountain communities

Sustainable mountain development, as per Chapter 13 of Agenda 21, requires the involvement of local mountain communities to ensure that both community needs and conservation needs are met. Some local projects involving mountain communities are:

Mnweni Donga Erosion Reclamation Project. This project in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg is coordinated by the Mnweni Community Trust. Trained groups are now offering a commercial service to other communities along the slopes of the mountain range. This is an excellent example where the community formed a partnership to combat environmental degradation on mountain slopes in their area.

Working for Water Project. The Government's Working for Water Programme, spearheaded by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, was launched in 1995 to gain control of the growing problem of invasive alien plants. The programme currently runs over 200 projects in all nine of South Africa's provinces. Special teams have been trained to undertake high-altitude alien vegetation clearing in mountainous terrain. Through Working For Water projects people living in mountainous terrain have been given opportunities to develop new skills and to work as contract labourers.

The Zululand Trail Project (ZTP). This SA Youth Exchange Project, started in 1992. The aim of the ZTP is to explore the remote and beautiful areas of Zululand, very often scarcely populated, to identify possible routes for hiking trails incorporating local villages as "stop-overs". Visiting local villages provides an interesting cultural experience to exchange students, and provides tangible financial benefits to the locals.

Threats to South African mountains are numerous and can be categorized under two headings, namely, unsustainable land use practices, and potentially threatening situations as follows (Blignaut, 2000B):

Unsustainable land use practices

Unsustainable land use practices could include:
· Burning and over-burning of indigenous mountain vegetation. Indigenous vegetation is adapted to the incidence of lightning and rock falls. These start the mountain fires that are necessary for the germination of some plant species. However, deliberate and frequent man-made fires have devastating and severe effects on mountain vegetation, particularly at altitude and on dry slopes where regeneration is slow. Mature vegetation in South African mountains is currently rare.
· Cultivation, even on moderately steep mountain slopes, leads to erosion, particularly during fallow periods and heavy rainfall. The loss of vegetation cover has multiple consequences, namely, landslides, siltation of dams, drying up of perennial streams, flash floods downstream, and loss of biotic diversity and genetic resources as well as insect and other faunal populations so essential for pollination of fruit and seed sources.
· Plantations and invasive alien vegetation. Plantations of imported invasive tree species located in mountain catchments cause a massive loss of run-off and perenniality. The water yield from a mountain catchment covered by invasive vegetation, such as hakea, pine and wattle, is reduced by 50% compared to a catchment covered by indigenous fynbos (Burgers, 1993).
· Grazing in fragile mountain areas and overgrazing. Bad farming practices by owners of mountain land, and demographic pressures in mountain communities coupled with unsustainable cultural practices that do not match current realities, result in over-stocking. This leads to loss of natural vegetation cover, with its serious consequences. It also increases pollution from animals and humans within the catchment areas, resulting in ill-health, greater filtration costs and negative effects on tourism and recreation.
· Badly located and inappropriate infrastructure has an accumulative adverse effect on mountain ecology and landscapes, leading to loss of natural vegetation cover and to pollution. For example: illegal impoundments made by farmers diminish water supply to main dams and degrade riverine ecology; illegal tourism developments such as roads for off-road vehicles and mountain cottages cause erosion and pollution; masts and other communication devices on mountain summits adversely impact landscapes and ruin wilderness.

Potentially threatening situations

Potentially threatening situations include:
· Easy access. South African mountains are not high in global terms, nor indeed extensive. Many of the mountain ranges are narrow. In the Cape Fold mountains, there is an average width of only 7 kilometres. Similar to the Drakensberg, this permits reasonably easy access for exploitation to core wilderness areas.
· Many largely unspoilt public mountain reserves are being developed for eco-tourism to provide funds for management and other government agendas. This occurrence has at its source, the general weakness in the economy and the indifference of many politicians to long-term conservation and most certainly to wilderness. Even protected areas are being opened up for limited exploitation by adjacent communities and to provide new livelihood opportunities. Whilst in much of the developed world conservation of protected areas is becoming more strict, the reverse is occurring in Africa. This augers badly for wilderness which once destroyed can seldom be restored.
· Economics is at the root of many land exploitation problems: Some private land owners are now looking at exploiting their mountain land to gain short-term benefits for economic survival. The withdrawal of farming subsidies, low agricultural prices, steep increases in fuel costs and higher labour expenses all contribute to this.
· Politics. Some commercial farmers are apprehensive about their future in South Africa. This perception has been exacerbated by local farm murders, the Zimbabwe land grabs and land claims. Insecurity of title usually leads to exploitation of land in the short term, which could have a noticeable impact on mountains.
· Lack of respect for the natural environment is often at the root of exploitation of mountain land. This attitude has its source in lack of knowledge and/or education, coupled with indifference and greed for personal gain. If we were healthy morally we would not consider the mountains as "waste land" to be exploited and ruined for personal and public gain.
· Climate change. If carbon dioxide levels double by 2050, some of the Cape fynbos biome will disappear as it will be unable to adapt to climate/atmospheric changes. However, much of the species rich montane fynbos is likely to adapt because of the climatic diversity found in mountain environments (Bond, 2000). Mountain areas in South Africa are therefore likely to be significantly important repositories of biotic diversity in the future.

Social contracts regarding mountain conservation involves a range of government, private and communal stakeholders. The instruments for mountain conservation range from formal explicit contracts such as national legislation, to undocumented implicit private initiatives. There are also various public-private partnerships that contribute to mountain conservation. These social contracts mainly relate to land-use, infrastructural developments, commercial opportunities and access.

Ownership of mountains

Mountains, hilly country, coastal buttresses or cliffs in South Africa can be owned or managed by: the State (national, provincial, regional or municipal authorities); private individuals; communities; NGOs or partnerships between the above-mentioned parties. The area of mountain catchments on State land amounts to 1,7 million hectares, about 15% of the total area of major catchments. 85% of mountain catchments, about 9,7 million hectares, is privately owned (Rabie and others, 1992). Of the privately owned areas, 5,5% are proclaimed mountain catchment areas, while 79,5% are undeclared catchments (Rabie and others, 1992). The result is that many mountainous areas with high wilderness qualities are not proclaimed as such. It is thus essential that public-private partnerships be promoted to conserve South Africa's mountain heritage.

Legislation relating to mountains

The only legal definition in South Africa related to "mountain" is that of "mountain catchment area" in terms of the Mountain Catchment Areas Act (Act 63 of 1970) (MCAA). Such an area is simply described as an area defined and declared by the Minister of Environmental Affairs by notice in the gazette to be a mountain catchment area. This definition fails to describe the characteristics of such an area, although a good idea of what represents a mountain catchment is obtained from the Interdepartmental Ross report which culminised in the MCAA (Ross, 1961).

Legislation that pertains to mountain areas are (Price, 2000):
· The MCAA applies to State owned mountains and a percentage of privately owned important mountain catchment land. Its overall purpose is the production of clear, pure water. The biotic diversity of these proclaimed mountain areas has been reasonably well conserved as unsilted, unpolluted water is achieved through the retention of a reasonably mature vegetation cover.
· National Forests Act (Act 84 of 1998). This Act makes provision for the protection of indigenous forest as well as for the support of community forestry (http://www.gov.za/ yearbook/water.htm). It provides for the designation of wilderness areas on State forest land.
· National Veld and Forest Fire Act (Act 101 of 1998). In terms of this Act Fire Protection Associations (FPAs) need to be established. While it is compulsory to establish FPAs on all State land FPAs on private land are voluntary. The purpose of the Act is to prevent and combat veld, forest and mountain fires throughout the Republic.
· National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998). This Act provides for the protection of water resources (the definition includes streams) and the use of water, including its abstraction from streams and other sources, and regulates activities which result in the reduction of stream flow. In some regions steering committees have been established to compile catchment reports that provide input into the development of integrated Catchment Management Plans. Integrated Catchment Management is a focus of the new Water Act.
· National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA). This Act is broadly aimed at the decision-making processes and co-ordination of governmental functions relating to the environment. Of general interest is the Act's adherence to principles of Integrated Environmental Management and Environmental Management Plans.
· Environment Conservation Act (Act 73 of 1989). This Act provides among other things for the declaration of Protected Natural Environments, the control of pollution, the control of environmentally harmful activities and the creation of regulations to govern procedures to be followed in environmental impact assessments.
· The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act 43 of 1983) (CARA). The new regulations under CARA add substantial legal capacity to the quest to control invasive alien plants, especially in mountain catchments.

Government initiatives towards mountain conservation

Government initiatives regarding mountain conservation include:

Wilderness Areas. Since 1971, eleven wilderness areas have been designated in terms of the Forest Act. All but one (Ntendeka W.A.) protect high altitude ecosystems in the principal mountain systems of the country (Bainbridge, 2001).

National Parks. National Parks are proclaimed in terms of the National Parks Act (Act 57 of 1976). South African National Parks (SANParks) manages four National Parks where mountains are the key attraction: Cape Peninsula, Golden Gate, Tsitsikamma and Richtersveld. Other National Parks with mountainous terrain are the Kruger, Karoo, Addo Elephant, Marakele and Mountain Zebra. Private, communal or NGO land can be incorporated into national parks on a contractual basis.

Provincial Nature Reserves. Some Provincial nature reserves are proclaimed in accordance with empowering provincial legislation by which the Provinces manage State land. Many of these reserves contain mountains, hilly country, coastal buttresses or cliffs. A breakdown of Provincial reserves per province is as follows: Eastern Cape (47); Free State (17); Gauteng (6); KwaZulu-Natal (87); Mpumalanga (14); Northern Cape (6), Northern Province (52); North West (14); and Western Cape (51). Some of the mountainous nature reserves do not have resident managers.

Indigenous Forests. A National Forestry Action Programme (NFAP) for South Africa was developed in 1997. Indigenous high forest covers only about 300 000 hectares or 0,25% of the country's surface, mainly on the eastern and southern slopes of mountain ranges from the Cape Peninsula in the Western Cape to the Soutpansberg in the Northern Province. Some 43% of indigenous high forests are managed by the Department of Forestry according to certain multi-use objectives.

Protected Natural Environments. There are three Protected Natural Environments in mountainous areas. These are: the Cape Peninsula Protected Natural Environment (CPPNE) portions of which are included in the CPNP, the Magaliesberg Protected Natural Environment (MPNE), and the Lourens River Protected Natural Environment.

World Heritage Sites. On 29 November 2000, the uKhahlamba-Drakensberg Park was inscribed as a "mixed" natural and cultural World Heritage Site in terms of the Convention on the Protection of the World's Cultural and Natural Heritage. An application for World Heritage Status, for eight representative constellation sites, is currently being prepared for the Cape Floral Kingdom and the Cape Fold mountains.

Transfrontier Conservation Areas. A Memorandum of Understanding was signed between South Africa and Lesotho in June 2001 for the establishment of the Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation Area (TFCA). The uKhahlamba-Drakensberg Park World Heritage Site is located within the Maluti-Drakensberg TFCA (SA Game and Hunt, August 2001). On 17 August 2001 a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between South Africa and Namibia to put in place an environmental collaboration programme through the establishment of the Ai-Ais/Richtersveld Transfrontier Conservation Park.

Mega Reserves. The Cape Action Plan for the Environment (CAPE) project recommended that three mega-conservation areas (400 000 - 600 000 ha) be established in the Cederberg, Little Karoo and Baviaanskloof areas (WWF-SA, 2000). This important initiative will contribute respectively to an integrated approach to mountain conservation in the Western and Eastern Cape Provinces.

Public-private partnerships

Public-private partnership initiatives regarding mountain conservation include:

Biosphere Reserves. Three biosphere reserves have been registered with UNESCO and there are 9 initiatives underway. Declared Biosphere Reserves in mountainous terrain are Kogelberg (established in 1998) and Waterberg (established in 2000). Biosphere Reserves in mountainous areas currently in the planning phase are: Soutpansberg/Limpopo; Kruger to Canyons; Drakensberg Special Case Area (included is Pholela Biosphere Reserve); Thukela (Weenen); Cederberg; Boland; and Royal Zulu.

Conservancies. A conservancy is an association of private landowners or tenants who voluntarily set aside and consolidate the natural resources of their properties for the purpose of their conservation and sustainable utilisation. Through co-operation between the farming community and conservation authorities this concept has grown into a national conservation movement (Cape Nature Conservation, 1997).

Private initiatives

Private initiatives regarding mountain conservation include:

Natural Heritage Sites. South African Natural Heritage Sites are designated where certain criteria are met and where landowners commit themselves to the conservation management of the site. The number of natural heritage sites in mountainous areas is not available.

Private Game farms. Presently there are more than 9 000 game farms, from unregistered farms to those officially recognised by nature conservation departments as "exempted game farms" which allow the capture, selling and hunting of game (Mail and Guardian, April 3, 2001). Many game farms are located in mountainous areas.

Private reserves. There are approximately 160 private reserves in South Africa. Figures per vegetation type are not available (SA State of Environment Report, 2000).

SA Natural Heritage Programme. Private landowners can apply to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism to have properties awarded Natural Heritage Programme status.

Access to mountain areas, rock faces and coastal cliffs

Access to mountains in South Africa is dependent on the ownership of the area i.e. there is no legal right for access to climb or mountaineer - therefore 'no right to ramble'. Only a limited extent of mountain land meeting the criteria for wilderness exists and a fair percentage is privately owned.

Access on private land. Private landowners may give permission to climb mountains in their ownership or they may refuse. Mountain and hiking clubs undertake extensive measures, including the purchase of mountains and Rights of Way, in order to obtain access. Payment is now required by some landowners, at least for road maintenance across farms and parking.

Access on State land. In mountain ranges located in national or provincial parks, access is granted according to permit conditions and in a few areas there is no access for mountaineering. In proclaimed wilderness areas access is also per permit and is restricted to prevent over-crowding and a degradation of the wilderness experience.

Access to communal land. Some mountainous areas fall within communal tribal ownership, and permission to climb must be obtained from the tribal authorities concerned. Payment for access to such areas is now becoming common.

Access to coastal cliffs. Land below the high water mark belongs to the state in terms of the Sea Shore Act (Act 21 of 1935) and is accessible to everyone. However, coastal cliffs above the high water mark could be in private ownership. Rocky coastlines may thus become inaccessible without obtaining permission.

Access in conservation areas. In certain areas, access for mountaineering has been lost or restricted due to the establishment of national parks or private nature reserves. In particular, an emphasis on conservation of the 'Big Five' (lion, elephant, leopard, rhino and buffalo), resulting in the creation of additional national parks (e.g. Marakele National Park) has in cases meant that climbers and hikers can now only access such areas under guard, if at all. Trails in some national parks have been closed due to the introduction of buffalo (e.g. Mountain Zebra National Park). In other areas (e.g. Baviaanskloof), mountaineering is popular, even though buffalo have been released.

User fees and financing

Provincial and national authorities have nearly always charged a fee. An exception is the Cape Peninsula National Park which has partial free access. With the cut in conservation budgets in South Africa, fees are increasing, in some instances dramatically. Although some private landowners still allow free access, many are now charging fees to mountaineer and hike on their property.

Financial resources to cover the objectives of sustainable mountain development are obtained from each national, provincial or municipal authorities' budget. In certain instances financial assistance is provided by donor organisations such as the GEF or Peace Parks Foundation. On occasion, conservation-worthy mountainous land is purchased by NGOs such as WWF for approved projects, by The Mountain Club of South Africa for mountaineering, and by other NGOs.

Legal liability

The situation regarding the legal liabilities of landowners for mountain accidents on their land, varies. Some national and provincial authorities and some private landowners require indemnity forms to be completed; in other instances, there are no agreements. There is no legislation ruling on this and there has not been a court case in South Africa to test this aspect. Rescue services are provided by provincial emergency services and on a volunteer basis by members of the Mountain Club of South Africa. On land managed by KwaZulu-Natal Wildlife, including some areas in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg, a rescue services levy forms part of entrance fees.

Background: Mr Smith bought a share in a beautiful farm in the mountains as a week-end get-away. He is a keen botanist and mountaineer and wanted to conserve the mountain land in an appropriate, scientific way, while making some money through ecotourism. He spoke to the consortium of landowners, which he was part of, and they decided to appoint a consultant to advise them on a mountain management strategy that combines ecotourism with conservation.

Consultant's strategy: The first step was to undertake a fieldtrip to identify core wilderness areas that need to be protected, to get an idea of wilderness qualities, to identify features of outstanding scenic beauty, to gather information on topography, fauna and flora, and to identify eco-tourism opportunities. The second step was to consult the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry regarding the catchment management plan of the area. The third step was to zone the area to inform future land-use. The fourth step was to set objectives and targets for the management of each zone, with measurable indicators. Thereafter a mountain management and monitoring plan was developed. Four zones were identified:
· Pristine mountain wilderness: The purest form of wilderness with no signs of modern modification (no roads, fences, dams, windmills, powerlines, fire breaks, solar panels etc), only natural sound, no motorised access. Recreational activities: backpacking, kloofing, rock-climbing, swimming.
· Remote mountain wilderness. As above but signs of modern modification visible in the distance. Recreational activities: backpacking, kloofing, rock-climbing, swimming.
· Modified wilderness. Areas with easy access that retain naturalness. The road to the farmhouse and the footpath to the tented camp were included in this zone.
· Developed area. The farmhouse and labourers' cottages were included in this category.

Process: A meeting was held with the landowners to discuss the mountain management and monitoring plan, aimed at combining mountain conservation with low-impact ecotourism.

Outcome:
· The landowners supported the idea of protecting the wilderness qualities of the mountain reserve. They agreed that infrastructure should be limited to the existing footprint which included an old farmhouse and two labourers cottages. No new roads were to be constructed, thus limiting vehicular access to the existing farmhouse. Where present, old boundary fences were to be removed to improve the wilderness qualities.
· They decided to erect two tented camps and a "long-drop" to accommodate overnight visitors. Visitors would have to walk to these camps. Local people were employed to manage the tented camps. This included cooking, cleaning and "portarage" from the farmhouse to the tented camps.
· Visitor opportunities included day walks, kloofing, rock-climbing, bird viewing and botanising.
· All supported the removal of alien vegetation in a phased approach, taking cognisance of the importance of follow-up clearing. Local contractors were to be used.
· A meeting was organised with neighbouring farmers to join a Fire Protection Association.
· A decision was made to re-introduce wildlife to the area. In this regard a meeting was set up with the nature conservation authority.
· A monitoring programme was implemented to establish if management objectives were met.

Assumptions
The above-mentioned scenario assumes that:
1. A socio-ecological national mountain zoning policy is not in place. If such a policy was operating, mountain ranges would already have been socio-ecologically zoned by a panel of experts in cooperation with all landowners concerned. Thereafter a Mountain Management Board comprising landowners, affected parties and authorities would have ensured that the landowners' application met the criteria of the existing zoning plans. This is the policy advocated by Blignaut via oral and written submissions to the Council for the Environment and other institutions, since 1987. The principle aim being to preserve remaining mountain wilderness.
2. The landowner(s) co-operates with the concept of wilderness. This is usually not the case, as the landowners' principle objective is to make money. Thus 4-wheel drive tracks through the mountains and chalets deep into the mountains with concomitant access and communication infrastructure are likely pressures. As there is no national mountain policy and what legislation there is, is poorly enforced, massive wilderness degradation may take place. When landowners view their land for benefits, wilderness is nearly always the first casualty.

Although South Africa does not have a formal wilderness management or mountain management policy, various partnerships are being implemented towards achieving sustainable development in mountains. In some instance developments in mountains areas are not sustainable as short-term financial gains are perceived as more important than long-term sustainability.

The government is responsible for conserving mountains in national parks, provincial and municipal reserves, and in wilderness and indigenous forest areas on State land, while a range of mechanisms, e.g. Biosphere Reserves, Natural Heritage Sites and Conservancies are available for mountain conservation on private land. In addition, private, communal or NGO land can also be incorporated into national parks on a contractual basis.

There is a need to include mountain communities in decision-making regarding mountain management and to ensure that these people derive benefits from ecotourism. More projects aimed at environmental education and job creation for mountain communities need to be initiated.

As a way forward, the only remedy to save remaining mountain wilderness is to undertake socio-ecological zoning of South Africa's mountain ranges, preferably as part of a national mountain management policy, in order to identify and protect these wilderness areas for posterity. The existence of unambiguous zoning plans covering South Africa's important mountain ranges would pre-empt development pressures and inappropriate compromises with the resultant loss of wilderness.

Art Publishers (2001). UKhahlamba-Drakensberg: World Heritage Site. A pictorial Souvenir and Holiday Resort Guide.
Bainbridge, B (2001). Mountain wildernesses in South Africa. International Journal of Wilderness (to be published August 2001)
Blignaut, P (1992). Towards a zoning policy for the conservation and sustainable utilisation of the mountain environments of South Africa: Working Document. Prepared in partial fulfillment for a Ph.D. at the University of Cape Town.
Blignaut, P (2000A). Status of Mountain Management in South Africa. Mountain Forum, Volume 3, Issue 2, September 2000, ISSN 1029-3760.
Blignaut, P (2000B). A National Policy and Strategy for more effective management of mountains in South Africa. African Mountain Association, Conference paper.
Bristow, D and Ward, C (1985). Mountains of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers: Cape Town.
Burgers, CJ, (1993). The cost-effectiveness of mountain catchment conservation in the fynbos biome. Scientific Services. Cape Nature Conservation, Stellenbosch.
Coulson, D and Clark, J (1983). Mountain Odyssey in Southern Africa. MacMillan South Africa Publishers: Johannesburg.
Cowling, R and Pierce, S (1999). Namaqualand: A succulent desert. Fernwood Press: Vlaeberg.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) 1997. Environmental Potential Atlas for South Africa. J.L van Schaik Publishers: Pretoria.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) 1999. South African Country Report to the Commission on Sustainable Development.
Rabie, M.A, Blignaut, P.E. & Fatti, L.P (1992). Mountains. In Environmental Management in South Africa. Juta & Co, Ltd: Cape Town.
Journals of the Mountain Club of South Africa - Various.
Pfotenhauer, Meridy and Everson, Terry (2000). Report from the Mnweni Drakensberg Community Trust. In Africa Mountain Protected Areas Update, 6 August, 2000. (Ed). Peter. E. Blignaut. World Commission on Protected Areas/IUCN.
Price, T (2000). Environmental Legislation of relevance to the MCSA as a landowner. Environment Subcommittee: MCSA (Cape Town Section).
Reader's Digest (1994). Illustrated Atlas of Southern Africa. Reader's Digest: Cape Town.
Ross Report (1961). Report of the Interdepartmental committee on the conservation of mountain catchments in South Africa. Department of Agricultural Technical Services.
SA Game and Hunt (August 2001). Bushcraft, page 12.
SA State of Environment Report: http:// www.ngo.grida.no/soesa /nsoer/issues/ land/ state.htm).
Shroyer, M E (3 August 2001) Mountains: The Access and Conservation situation in South Africa. A State of the Nations Report to the UIAA Access and Environment Commission. The Mountain Club of South Africa.
South African Biosphere Reserve Learning Seminar. 2-5 May 2000. Hans Hoheisen Research Station, Orpen Gate, Southern African Wildlife College, Kruger National Park.
Stuart, Chris and Tilde (1988). Field Guide to the Mammals of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers: Cape Town.
Van den Berg, Heinrich (2000). Rock garden of the sun. Timbila, Vol 3, Issue 1, p 30 to 40). South African National Parks.
Van Schalkwyk, Johan (1997). The People of Blouberg: 500 000 years of human history. Journal of the Mountain Club of South Africa, Nr 100, p 170 to 175.
Working For Water (1999). The Environmental Impacts of invading alien plants in South Africa.
http://www.environment.gov.za/soer/ag-21/ex55~1.htm
http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/safrica/natur.htm