Introduction
This document is intended for discussion purposes only and was drafted pursuant to preliminary discussions regarding bark stripping of indigenous trees in the Table Mountain National Park between Rob Adam, a member of FOTM, and a local intelligence and risk consultancy, who donated their time gratis because of the worthiness of the cause,.
The National Park incorporates three areas, namely the Table Mountain Section, the Silvermine-Tokai section and the Cape Point section. It spans an area of approximately 220 square kilometres with numerous access points for pedestrians and vehicles. Added significance is that it is part of the UNESCO Cape Floral Region World Heritage Site.
Media reports indicate that bark stripping on Table Mountain has reached alarming proportions and that, if left unattended, could have a significant long-term prejudicial impact on the national park. This document is a framework for and approach to combatting it.
The phenomenon
Bark stripping has been taking place over many years affecting a number of flora. It is not restricted to Table Mountain National Park; however, indications are that its impact on the reserve has been severe requiring urgent attention. From the available information the persons responsible for stripping have a good understanding of which trees to target, their locations and routes to use to remain undetected. The supply chain is not known but it is suspected that the consumers of the stripped bark are traditional healers, who use their illegal harvest for medicinal purposes.
Attempts by the authorities to combat the practice have largely been unsuccessful. A compounding factor is that there does not seem to be any coordination between law enforcement, South African National Parks (SANPARKS), the custodian of the National Park, and civil society groups.
Elements of a combatting strategy
The following is a high-level approach on ways to combat this phenomenon. It is by no means comprehensive and requires further refinement. As such, it is merely for discussion purposes.
The approach has to be premised on two main pillars of enforcement and education. The enforcement approach is tactical and, on its own, will merely address symptomatic issues and, as has been shown in other crime trends, is not a long-term solution. Education through advocacy and creating awareness – targeted at specific groups – is lengthy and produces results in the long term, but if properly applied, can result in sustainable solutions. These two elements therefore go hand-in-hand and are interdependent.
Enforcement
Intelligence gathering
Enforcement operations should be guided by intelligence. This requires an in-depth analysis of past incidents including data on modus operandi of persons involved, locations of trees, routes that were used. This data will also be useful in developing threat assessments. Data rich institutions, (San Parks, Kirstenbosch, City of Cape Town, Western Cape Government, University of Western Cape, UCT) should be approached to follow a collaborative approach in collection of relevant data
The possible downstream national and international trade in bark products should be identified and analysed.
Enforcement operations
As stated, the park covers an area of approximately 220 square kilometres located adjacent to human settlements. There are a few controlled access points, but due to the nature of the Park, there are many more uncontrolled access points available to the bark strippers.
Patrolling such a vast area will require significant resources.
Monitoring / observations
Public education and awareness campaigns
Visible policing
Social media platforms highlighting the issue
Gathering intel in prevention
Installing trail camera traps
Aerial surveillance
Response / recovery
Intervention by conservation authorities
Response by public and private security forces
Consequences / prosecution
Arrests by SAPS and private security forces
Prosecution, fines or imprisonment
Advocacy
Stakeholder engagement will be important to ensure that enforcement initiatives produce results. This includes:
The South African National Parks (SANPARKS): SANPARKS currently undertakes conservation management services where there is a gap in collaboration with conservation projects and initiatives. Collaborative engagements with SANPARKS on bark stripping through webinars and other public engagements would highlight ongoing phenomenon.
City of Cape Town (CoCT): Within the CoCT Environmental Strategy, there are opportunities for further engagement on how to contribute to the Tree Management Policy. Key documents to this effect include the Green Infrastructure Programme where a contact list of key stake holders is provided for further engagement on tree conservation.
Law enforcement and prosecuting authorities: Currently, community organisations such as neighbourhood watch groups and private security companies have been in the forefront of bringing law enforcement to the ongoing crisis of bark stripping. This continues to be a key point of contact furthering engagement with law
enforcement in the form of community workshops and events.
Education
The enforcement approach should be complemented by a comprehensive awareness campaign targeting civil society organisations as well as schools and bodies representing traditional healers. In doing so, the following strategies may be considered:
Social media: Delivering educational and engaging content on main social media platforms on bark stripping. This should be underpinned by collaborative engagements with notable existing initiatives and media personalities promoting environmental sustainability agendas.
Media: Participating in media interviews on notable radio and television platforms to raise awareness of bark stripping and its impact on the environment.
Community engagement: Hosting community workshops and events in collaboration law enforcement and neighbourhood groups, as well as schools.