New Bill for managing coastlines

Earlier this month, the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism introduced the Integrated Coastal Management Bill, which aims to regulate human activities within, or that affect, the coastal zone. Commercial and industrial expert Warren Jack gives his thoughts on the newly tabled Bill.

In order to understand the value of the Bill, let's just dwell on our coastline for a second. It is undeniably a unique part of the environment; a limited spatial area that supports many activities, as the Bill's public participation document so aptly puts it.

There is no denying the fact that it is a distinctive system with a range of considerations that requires a dedicated and integrated management approach.

It is probably fair to say that in the past the value of coastal ecosystems, as a cornerstone for development, was not sufficiently acknowledged. To quote the White Paper, which emphasises the intrinsic worth of the coast, the value of the direct benefits obtained from coastal "goods and services" was estimated in 1998 to be about R168 billion annually (35% of the country's annual Gross Domestic Product).

The public participation document further reads, ". . . much of the wealth locked up in our coast continues to be wasted due to environmentally insensitive development and activities. Economic and social opportunities for wealth creation and equity are being missed and coastal ecosystems are being degraded.

"The coast needs to be managed as a system in order to make optimal use of the opportunities and benefits it provides."

The Bill – which defines areas such as coastal buffer zones, coastal access land, coastal protected areas, special management areas and coastal set-back lines – now gives the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, a vehicle to manage the coastline, holistically.

However, the mere mention of a term such as a "coastal buffer zone" is sure to have parties with development fingers in coastal pies sitting nervously upright. Especially since this zone extends one hundred metres inland from the high-water mark in areas that have already been zoned for residential, commercial, industrial or multiple-use purposes (up to one kilometre inland in other areas).

A mouthful, but, nevertheless, a warning signalled loud and clear.

Perhaps the future (for developers) is not as dire and as cutthroat as the Bill makes it seem like at first glance, but, as it stands now (and once it is published as law), it could have a huge impact on all sectors of the coastal property market.

Granted, we definitely need better control measures along our coastlines, and certain areas are precious gems for tourism, but, if we were to develop like the rest of the world, which has prime properties on the coastline, then this Bill would need to be seriously reconsidered.

Government should decide if we are to become a first world country, or make a U-turn and gallop back into the Dark Ages.

For more information email commercial@warrenjack.co.za or visit www.warrenjack.co.za.

Readers' Comments
Thanks for this good article. I think that it is an excellent move by Government and should be supported by everybody. Our coastline is ruined by money hungry developers. In some instance it is not even possible to reach the beaches. Houses are almost built on the water. Government should also think of removing buildings that are to close to the sea. - Philip van Schalkwyk

"...make a U-turn and gallop back into the Dark Ages?" What? In terms of what policies that developed nations are imlpementing (out of their own mistakes and experience, usually), this is a progressive policy - planning for the future, protecting land owners, preventing loss of property and industry during freak events of nature and protecting sensitive ecosystems. In addition, it's not like there is a shortage of sea-side properties in this country. I live in a small seaside town with lots of houses standing empty and for sale (and people struggling to sell their houses). It's only the developers that are worried about these new policies. - Michelle Greve

I live in Blouberg Sands on the West Coast, some 20 odd km's from Cape Town. We are about 500 meters from the sea, but there is a piece of undeveloped bush between us and the beach. About a month ago we, as residents, were informed of a mining application that was submitted to mine for building sand on that piece of land between us and the beach. At the following public meeting it became abundantly clear that this whole application was greed driven (so what's news). Fact is and I can confirm that our coast line is under tremendous pressure and I'm hoping that this Bill can play a role to keep greedy, short and fat fingered developers at bay. Not to mention the BEE deals that contributed to the Big Bay development being mismanaged and raped and turning into a high density slum! This Bill should actually be aimed at rooting out greed. - Paul Cilliers

I must admit that I am shocked by the conclusion of this article:

"Government should decide if we are to become a first world country, or make a U-turn and gallop back into the Dark Ages".

I take it that you speak solely from the perspective of a property developer. I would like to point out to you an alternative view...

This Bill is in fact an indicator that we are not galloping back in to the dark ages, but making huge strides beyond some first world nations. There are probably few countries in the world, I imagine, that have done something this sensible! The so-called First World countries are not perfect by any means, and they should not be considered as templates by which to develop a country. You have to take into consideration that the world is a broader place than just a "profit margin". ESPECIALLY in today's world where the non-science portion of the population are finally realizing that environmental issues affect, and increasingly so, the human economic and survival environment as an extension of the natural world. Climate change. Over utilization of marine food resources. Breakdown of marine, coastal and terrestrial ecosystems due to population growth, property development, and pollution. These are things which in your lifetime will greatly change for the worst and which has the potential to dramatically impact the economic environment of the country and in fact the world. Although I have not read it in its entirety, I doubt this bill was constructed willy-nilly. It is probably a sensible stock-taking of how to prevent negative impact on the country and it's sustainability. We can ill-afford the careless days of measuring wealth by seeing how much money we can squeeze out of natural resources without taking its management into account. Welcome to the times . . . and if the property development community gets it's way, it WILL be closer to the Dark Ages! - Anonymous

Have a comment or question about this article? Email us now..