Capability

Ek is nie altyd seker hulle is geskilled om dit te antwoord, die ouens wat hier op die grond is nie ()
(I22) (I am not always sure that the people on the ground have the skills to answer questions)
So I spend a lot of time with () when she first came in. Going into what happens. She didnt, she
couldnt understand the engineering side of things. She didnt really understand a lot of the
ecology, (), we will do another hydrological study. (I2)
I think I also becoming very cynical about a whole lot of appointees and what have you and rightly or
wrongly I carry baggage of the past and Ive seen so many things transformed from a
successful organization into a disastrous organization, just for the sake of transformation and
that doesnt sit comfortably with me. If things are transformed and it stays the same or it
improves then Im delighted, but we dont have the resources to waste and were losing skills
like we hemorrhaging skills as a country and thats the type of thing that worries me. (I34)

Co-management
Because of increasing growth in population more and more of our conservation systems are in urban
settings or have people involved who are interested in them who have a stake in them. These
are National parks they are not ours they belong to the people of the country, we just help try
and manage them in a meaningful way on behalf of the people of that country and things like
that. So, we fully understand that other people are involved and are impacting and things like
that. And have the right to have input, to have a say and to participation in these sort of
places and things like that. And one cannot do that in an alienating environment. You can't
turn around and say I have nothing, I dont wish to sit and hear your viewpoint or not
interested in what you say and things like that. If you do that you are a bad manager. (I6)
It's very difficult and sometimes you will have success and sometimes you must understand that you
won't. You will never meet half way sort of thing. Look if we took thing purely from a
conservation stand point. We say that we want to manage this system the best we can from a
viewpoint of conserving the lakes we would not breach it at all. You know that would be the
best thing for it from an environmental perspective. Let it manage itself, let it breach itself.
() You would reinstate wetlands that are now lost and so forth but we can't do that because
there are people living next to it. You know the other sort of the end of the argument that one
is being raised all the time - why do you not manage the system so it is permanently open and
you must have heard that view being raised as well and if one considers it and you know from
a conservation perspective it is not logical. It is not a permanently open system. It is a
naturally temporarily open/close system. () you are taking a system and you altering it
completely into something else because it meets your need. And you can do that on farm land
but this is a national park this is not a farmland so we are bound to certainly preserve the
processes and things like that but we need to sit and meet these people halfway. So, we sort

of try and find this middle ground so we breach at a lower level. We know there are
environmental consequences to it. (I6)
Weve just broken a deal with Knysna Municipality that we would, weve informally been removing
aliens there, but weve now poised to sign an agreement whereby we will maintain them and
you know not enhance them, but maintain them as undeveloped indigenous vegetation areas
and the bonus is Knysna Municipality is giving us R10 000 a year to do it. Well employ a
couple of historical disadvantaged people on ad hoc basis and everyone is happy.

Its

important because if you get pieces of land like that, that lay unused, somebody gets a bright
idea and say hey we could be doing something else with it, whatever and you know on our
mandate to protect, get these, make these some place of refuge for the wildlife such as it is,
its going in the right directions. (I23)
Gaan na die voorsitter van die Honorary Rangers en s vir hom jy wil die laaste vyf jaar se Kersfees
verslagte sien. Jy sal dieselfde ding daar sien, dieselfde ding daar sien, dieselfde ding daar
sien. Wat verslagte ingegee wat ons kon s dit is leemtes, dit is dit. Niks gedoen nie. Dis
hoekom ek s hulle het n snaakse, dit is die tipe van ding, jy word naderhand moedeloos. Ek
gee my tyd, ek gee hulle kwaliteit tyd.

As ek n besigheid moet loop, gaan werk vir n

besigheid sal my salaris nie onder R400, R500 n uur wees nie. Ek gee dit vir hulle verniet.
Hulle maak nie daarvan gebruik nie. () my tyd is vry ek kan daar vir 6 maande bly. Hulle
het my nie eers geantwoord nie. (I35)
One of the things that would be a real achievement if you managed it, is to tone down the believe on
the important part of SANParks that they have absolute authority. That has been a stumbling
block for years and years. () was a very accomplished manager of difficult relationships,
and he had the somewhat grudging but not very grudging cooperation of (), who as you
know now is god one and god two, (). (I28)
We are adjacent to the estuary which is SANParks Reserve and I think its crude to say that over,
certainly over, in my period of time weve actually had very little contact with SANParks. They
sort of can tend to keep you know they dont volunteer their services or their presence. (I23)
They thinking, ah we are town planners, we want money from this little lot. There was a company,
(), but as soon as we saw a meeting chaired by them, wed say oh my God, not another
one of those, you know. And we knew exactly what the end thing, (). (I17)
They do, they do. They dont tend to ask for suggestions, but they certainly, I think, you know, where
there has been comments, certainly sensible, you know, because were practically down to
earth, non-developers. Weve got no hidden agendas to make money and bent rules. But I
must admit, they are, Parks Board are rather bad as they go through commotions and
pretending they can solve it but they never do actually. (I18)

Toe het ons, die () het n brief geskryf aan Knysna se Munisipaliteit om vir hulle te s maar ons voel
hulle moet ons ken voordat daar ontwikkelings en goed goedgekeur word. Moet die () soort
van n okay gee en besluit hulle dink daar is genoeg water of nie, een van die twee. Die
antwoord wat ons gekry het, ek dink nie eers hulle het ons skriftelik geantwoord nie, ek dink
hulle het sommer maar net vir () gestuur om te s daar is geen manier dat ontwikkeling sal
gedemp word nie, water moet net gevind word. Nou waar de donner vind jy dit, jy weet. (I26)
These days I think theres far more transparency. I mean we went to a meeting up at the Reservoir
Hills in Sedgefield. They wanted to develop it and the consultant was a guy that we knew
very well, meant to be an environmentalist, meant to be a conservationist, he had worked for
either SANParks or CapeNature. We all went up there, we were invited, the first time wed
ever been invited as () to go to one of these things, and he stood there and he said, oh no,
theres no indigenous plants here, so we dont have to () and this other friend and I were
great botanists and said excuse me, whats that? And we started pointing out all around us
and it was stopped, because we could show them that the facts were not correct. But, now
its gone ahead and whos allowed it to go ahead? I dont know? (I17)
So the ANC, for reasons I think is associated with power decided that they would reduce a number of
municipalities after 1999. () he was given the job of reducing the number of municipalities
and he came around and we saw him when he came to Sedgefield and we put together a
very strong case for Sedgefield and Wilderness to be amalgamated into a municipality and we
used watershed boundaries.

I happen to have a thing about watershed boundaries.

Watercourse boundaries is about the worst thing you could do. () came and in 10 seconds
he made it absolutely clear that he did not wish to be confused with facts. He would go and do
what he thought was best and he drew a boundary through the middle of Swartvlei and left
half of Swartvlei in George and half in Knysna (). (I28)

Communication
Apart from that in terms of SANParks contact we have very little contact. Okay we talk to the person
when you eventually find them. Finding the right person within SANParks is pretty damn
tricky. You know you go from the lady who runs the Wilderness you know up and down
between Knysna and here are to find the right person. For science fishing regulations
science, SANParks has got actually a very nice sign which has the fish and their known info
on it, but we thought it would be a good idea to have update the one weve got here () and
the one up in the mouth I think, but they ran out of money and weve had one printed and they
you know their thing at our cost, but we would very much like them to remember us and you
know were sort of on the same side fighting. (I23)

Were actually working quite well. Particularly the Hoekwil Ratepayers, ourselves the paragliding
guys, weve got good input from the cycling fraternity, the fishing fraternity okay. When I say
fishing I mean sports fishermen, dare I say it, the white collar sport fishermen. (I34)
Kyk hier is nog heelwat ander Conservancies ook. Daar is Touwsrivier Conservancy en daar het ons
ook nou vriende so ons praat met hulle ook. Ek ruil partykeer met hulle nuusbriewe uit. n
Bietjie hoor wat doen hulle. (I24)
() theres a woman who is part of Parks Board () she is based in Knysna and is very much part of
planning and all those sort of things. Now she is in her personal capacity also on the local
committee of the Mountain Club, so a lot of those liaison is done through her, () As it stands
I think if she werent there then probably she would have to be created if you know what that
means. We might have to put it in that sort of liaison. (I11)
Now what happens is they never take a scientific objective view of whats going on. They dont want
to listen and this has been going on for years. They never listen. (I2)
Theyre listening, but not, I mean theyre hearing, but not listening. (I17)
So SANParke kan maar met my kom praat as hulle n dom outjie na my toe stuur, jy weet, wat niks
weet nie. Maar daai slimmetjie, hy luister en dink, ag hy praat nonsens, en dan gaan hy daar
ook so s. (I5)
And very often, I mean the number of structure plan things weve been to and weve had all these
consultants and they take the minutes and then they send you back the report and they take a
statement out of context, which totally changes what the meaning was. And you think theyre
interpreting the meeting to suite themselves. Its not as they were, you know, I mean, yeh
theyre taking everything down and you think theyre listening to you. (I17)
We had a very interesting meeting two, three weeks back now with Knysna Municipality, () were
there from SANParks. () was there from Water Affairs and () was there from Disaster
Management and we were talking about the whole protocols regarding the mouth because
Disaster Management have established a very good working relationship with Weather
Bureau now (). Now () said oh well, this will be put out for public thing. Thats three
weeks ago, it still hasnt been published and I emailed him on Monday, I said whats
happening, oh no Knysna is going to do that. But Knysna were not the people who set up the
protocols. He was the person who set up the protocols with Disaster Management. Why isnt
he putting it out? You know we just get fogged off and it still hasnt happened () article in
the Edge here written by one of the guys who was at the meeting. Thats not an official thing.
Why not just say you know this is what has been agreed. I just feel that if they would actively
get involved in the community here I mean this estuary here is very much a part of our

community. () Maybe theyre not public people, I dont know, but I mean why do they have
a PR Organization then. (I29)
There have been meetings actually held by Parks Board and also explaining their management policy
and I know one famous one at Touwsranten where Sedgefield send 10 delegates up to a
meeting with Parks Board. Parks Board actually appointed consultants to actually gather
opinion from those delegates and none of that was actually recorded or made available and
thats the sort of thing that has happened in the past. (WS)
So I said yes I will write them out and he said he would study those before giving his judgement,
nobody could find any of the papers or that records are completely gone. In other words what
I have written wasnt there. What happened in cross-examination wasnt there, just to give
you another idea. (I2)
I mean () wasnt at the last meeting, so () was there, I can guarantee you that youll go to the
next meeting and not a single issue that was raised at the last meeting () will even know
about, because theres just jealousy in the office or who, what, politics or whatever, that they
dont talk to each other about anything. (I34)
Okay well I will repeat what Ive said just now and that is our concern in Sedgefield about the lack of
communication or indeed interaction of any sort by Parks Board on the community over quite
a number of years, its a common complaint, its one that have really caused much concern
and unhappiness within our community. Getting Parks Board to come and talk. Its as simple
as that and it hasnt happened. Requests have been made. Those requests have been
ignored. (WS)
Would you guys, even be willing to give expertise and (). Yes of course, absolutely. After all were
all technical people and their way of sorting things out is actually talk and listen to other
people points of view and may change ones attitude or change ones particular policy toward
things. If they can show theres a very good reasons for doing what they do. Oh yes theres
no doubt about it whatsoever, but you cant do anything if people refuse to come and talk to
you. (I25)
Die problem is natuurlik maar ontwikkeling en jou met respek ges jou ontwikkelaars is, werk baie
aggressiewer as wat die bewarings ouens tans werk en almal wil hier kom bly maar sodra jy
hier bly dan wil jy h dit moet bewaar word. So ons doen almal mee met die ontwikkeling en
dan raak ons dalk betrokke by bewaring of raak ons besorg. So, ek dink dat hulle baie meer
gedoen kan word en behoort te word om die algemene publiek bewus en betrokke te kry.
(I14)
So aan die einde van die dag ons sukkel n bietjie om daai tipe van mense nader te trek of om vir hulle
betrokke te kry. Hulle sal byvoorbeeld kom vir die eerste vergadering en dan sal hulle sien

daar word te veel Engels gepraat. Ons verstaan nie so lekker Engels nie daar word
geakkomodeer met Afrikaans en soms word daar Xhosa ook vertaal. Eerste meeting woon
hulle by en daarvandaan steek hulle, of hulle kom net nie terug nie basies nie. (I4)
Kyk hierso, daar gaan tolke wees. Daar is mos n tolk daar. Ons vergaderings wat ons hier hou, is n
Swartman van PE en hy het n tolk by. (I30)

Compassion
The shocking thing is also that you have people who are living in low laying areas. Now you cant do
anything about that. You can say, well they shouldnt have built there in the first place, but the
municipality agreed to it, Parks Board agreed to it although they didnt at first apparently but
they did in the end. Never quite sure why they agree to it, but the fact of the matter is there
are people living in the estuary. So its gonna make a good combination between healthy
ecology and looking after the interest of the people. Also if you know that the people
responsible for looking after the health of the estuary and managing it are on your side, how
much better lifestyle can you have? You know what I mean, not worry too much about
flooding but the people over there are shit scared. If there is a real flood theyre going to get
flooded out again and many of them cant get insurance. I mean if you were in that situation
what would you think. What would you do? (I25)
The issue with SANParks I mean for example weve got a lot of people, I mean during the 2000 flood
there were about 200 properties in Sedgefield that were affected by the floods directly or
indirectly and yet we never had a forum with SANParks to be able to point and somebody said
a lot of the SANParks people forget that people are also a part of the environment. You know
theyre looking only at the biota and theyre not looking at the people and people are a very
critical part, in fact they shouldnt even be on the Island, because then the flood plain is a
separate issue, they are there. (WS)
She (SANParks employee) wasnt at all sympathetic. She (angried) them greatly and that act more
than anything else have made them in fact effectively withdraw from all the forum meetings.
(I18)
Daar is van hulle wat ek mee 100% saam stem maar wanneer jy oorbewaar maak jy n fout in die
mensdom. Jy moet nie oorbewaar, jy kan bewaar maar moet nie oorbewaar. Want ek meen
die goed wat hier is man, dit is vir ons hier gesit en as jy dit nie oppas en benut nie, dan ek
meen. (I5)
Die ander deel van spesiaal parkeraad se kant af, ons agter gekom dat nou kry parkeraad die van die
gemeenskap teen die lagoon sonder n permit, hy het nou wel twee of drie vissies gevang en
wat so meer, maar nou konfiskeer parkeraad die man se gereedskap. Met ander woorde sy
visstok, sy aaspomp en die vis wat hy gevang het. Boonop gee hulle hom nog n ticket ook. Ek

dink nie dis van toepassing nie. En die vispomp en sy visstok word nooit so ver gebring dat
die man op die hof kom dat die items by die hof ingedien word nie. Dit raak net weg. Ek het al
saam met Thinus, hy werk vir parkeraad ek het met Davey gepraat ek se vir hulle eintlik wat
julle nou doen ek se julle roof die mense. Want dit is so ek dit sien. Julle roof die mense jy kan
hom nie n boete gee en nog sy gereedskap vat nie, at least die vissie wat hy gevang het, at
least kan hy sy kinders, sy kinders kon geet het vanaand. Hy het dan nou die boete hoekom
vat jy nou sy gereedskap? En as jy nou moet verder kyk, jy vat sy gereedskap, jy vat sy
pomp, jy vat sy vis wat hy vang. Waarnatoe lei dit nou. (I13)
Hy het sy les gekry by die magistraat, die magistraat het ges maar dis nie gesteel nie, hulle het dit
gevang om te gaan eet. Sommige mense vang nie vis om te gaan verkoop nie, hulle vang dit
want jy weet nie wat in hulle kaste aangaan nie. (I30)
I think, I don't think humanity has the right sit and destroy and mess up everything in existence simply
for their own utilisation and so forth. So one does it for, because I believe that the organisms
and systems that one tries to conserve have a right to exist, but one also, but one also have
to be, one lives in this world. We utilise this world and things like that and you know you also
do it for yourself. I don't want to go and live in a place like in the middle of a build-up area and
I think many other people don't want it or they want the opportunity to escape to places to
where you can enjoy nature. Be sort of happy that there is natural environments. So for that
personal sort of gains, for myself and people in the future and things like that. It is also the
whole thing in terms of sustainable utilisation and these things. We don't just conserve just
because they have right. They do have a right but if you, if you look after things properly you
can definitely utilise things properly. In a meaningful way. It is not just a case of protectionism,
in place of, people always talk about sustainable utilisation. () If you manage it well and you
look after it well you can get multiple benefits from it forever rather than just exploiting it and
destroying it. So, I get satisfaction out of thinking that we can potentially try to achieve that
and my part in trying to, certainly try and achieve those things. Cause it makes my
environment better, it makes my quality of life better and I believe that it certainly makes other
peoples quality of life better. (I6)

Complexity
Its very complex. Weve run into it in several occasions when, youve probably heard that at the
AGM, that we were trying to, now they say they were going to do it, but were trying to get
Working for Water or anybody to clear what they call the Serpentine Road. The road up to
Hoekwil, just because it would look nice without all the aliens and it would be at least an
example for people who live there and drive up and weve run into all sorts of problems as to
who actually controls either side of the road, you know, we run into this is it SANRAL, is it
George, who does it really fall under? Everybody seems to pass the buck. (I37)

I think with managing it is close to being a nightmare, because property values are very high and I
dont even think that the boundaries of the park are even properly settled. If they are, the
Park Board seems to know where they are. Ill give you an example, see here. There across
the road, that is, were part of Ward 4 according to the George Municipality. The road on the
other hand, Im not quite sure who looks after it, though 100m along the road its Eden District.
This lot I believe is provincial but managed by the municipality, but dont quote me on that.
You go out here, this is National Park. Now where my boundary with the National Park is,
heaven knows. It keeps shifting. This was here before the Park. You go out of there on the
other side and behind that first lot of bushes is the old Choo-Tjoe Railway lines. Thats
Transnet property. You carry on across there on the other side and there is the N2 and that is
SANRAL. You go up to where those houses are and now youre back into Ward 4, George
Municipality and you go down onto the beach and I think that is SANParks again. Now you
want to ask me how you should manage that. You see what I mean about a nightmare. (I11)

Cooperative governance
I think thats one of the tragedies, but I mean if you look at this the environmental side theres so
many governmental departments that are involved in that and I get the impression that they
dont ever talk to each other. They all (inaudible) bits of information. (I29)
Wie het beheer oor die hele estuary? Dis wat ek wil weet. Ons weet dat SANParks die bestuur reg het
op dit. Hy het boggerall te doen met enige iets anders. Hy het niks te doen daar nie. Die
grond is hierdie mense se ding. Nou het hulle ges nee dit is nou Eden. They pass the buck,
maar hulle het nog grond hierso. Hulle verkoop hier grond sonder Eden se toestemming. Nou
hulle gaan daarvoor verantwoordelikheid moet gee. Nou die ander vraag is. Ons weet almal
wat n vlei is en wat sy doel is en hoe hy sy funksies uitvoer, n? Hoekom het hulle mense
toegelaat om in die vleie te bou? Nog n punt. Die eiland, die regulasies van die munisipaliteit
het ges hulle moet n fondasie, hulle moet bokant die fondasie moet hulle n muur bou 2.5m
bokant die hoog meter vlak en dan die huis bou. Hoeveel van daai huise het daai? Wie het
hulle toestemming gegee? Wie het toesig gehou? Dis hoekom ek s, (). Daar is geen toesig
gehou nie. Daars geen bestuur nie. (I35)
Nee ek het al met () gepraat daaroor, toe s hy die kleinhoewes val onder Landbou. Jy sien ons val
onder munisipaliteit so () kan vir daai ou s hoor hier jou hele plot is vol Wattle, laat dit
skoonmaak, maar hy kan nie, want hulle val onder die Departement van Landbou en, oh my
dear, dit is nou weer n heeltemal ander ballgame daai. So jy sien die probleem is lyk my die
staat in daai sin druk nie die boere om hulle grond skoon te maak nie want hulle eie grond lyk
nog soos. Ek meen hier is baie staatsgrond ook wat hier l wat oortrek is met Wattle. (I24)
So ek moet miskien vir () vra dat hy sy spannetjie stuur en kom kyk en s luister ek moet hierso
strook wat ons kan doen. Maar daai ouens het my ook verduidelik, jy weet dit gaan oor in wie

se jurisdiksie dit l. As dit in SANRAL se padreserwe dan kan hulle nou weer nie daaraan vat
nie en sulke stories. (I19)
One gentleman brought up a roads issue, speed limit and again its a practical thing. I understand it, I
worked in that area for a long enough. The roads go straight through your property but Eden
Districts maintain it and theyre provincial road. So theres nothing you could do about it, I
mean I used to work, we had an enormous amount of Lantana and Blackwood growing on the
road reserve and we thought from our side as a good gesture, we send our alien clearing
team () So we did and then we got a really snotty threat to say that please stay out of our
road reserves. () An outsider would look at this and say well why arent you doing anything
about the Blackwood and Lantana, but whos the response, I think a lot of it comes down to
who is the responsible sort of party and who can we speak to. Who has direct responsibility
for the issue that we have a problem with. Instead of well we have an issue of this whatever
and so were just going to attack you lot because youre conveniently position at a place
where we can attack you and get a hold of you. So you are going to bare the brunt of it. (I31)
What the problem is, which Ive become more aware of and weve all become much more aware of is
corporate governments, no cooperative governance. Cooperative governance is a rule, shall
we say, whereby authorities, government authorities on various levels do not take each other
to court. Theyre required to cooperate. () As a result of that, I think its fair to say, not over
exaggeration, that South African democracy has suffered in that if you get a strong body of
any sort and they put their foot down and they say thats whats going to happen and
everybody else says, well okay were not allowed to fight with you, we just have to go along
with you and this is very much whats happening here. It sounds a bit dramatic, but you know
you have a change to think and definitely this is whats happened. () The environment is
theirs. It is not theirs. So we have these management plans and what is happening they are
supposed to be finished and approved in 2004/2005 shall we, say its now seven years later
and hardly any of them has got a plan its not just here. Its because there is so much
opposition from people like myself towards SANParks is planning to do. () So they get an
independent consultant. Who does exactly as they told and the public was allowed to
comment on this. And the comments are completely ignored. () When you read up about
these things and it states very clearly that these alternatives should be considered. So I put in
a complete alternative. And I analysed and I got all the stuff I analysed SANParks 2m opening
against the alternative of leaving the mouth open or opening as soon as it closes or in fact
when it starts to close, and I list the reasons for and the reasons against, do a complete
comparison. In detail, detail, detail. It then goes to the consultant. The consultant dont even
bother with it they do as SANParks told. () So anyway I wrote all of this thing up it went in
and they just approved, the Department of environmental affairs approve exactly what
SANParks said even though it was ridiculous, () Thrown out completely, so of course I
appealed it. () There is an act that says that whoever makes a decision needs to explain
everything. () One of the things about this, is that it says in the regulations that if you appeal

against a decision that that should be judged by an independent body, you cannot, the people
who made the decision in the first place to reject you appeal, cannot now look again and that
arrived at the original decision. But this appeal, NEMA, has to go back to Department of
Environmental Affairs, thats where it goes to. () When it really comes to the technical part
they dont have the knowledge so what they did is that when I appeal against this decision as
they went to SANParks, because SANParks is the only people in the organisation supposedly
know what they are doing. So I am appealing to an independent body which is not an
independent body because SANParks is under them in any way. So when it was the first
decision was really made by SANParks, goes back to them to appeal against that and ii is still
the same people and it is not them that goes back to SANParks. It is impossible, its
impossible there is no democracy when you get into that sort of situation. The only trouble is
to take that any further is you have to take them to court and you cant take them through
mainstream, you have to take them to crime. We have to pay for it yourself. (I2)
Its basically a head office. They dont encourage individual decision-making within their own
organisation. They encourage, its a bit like the ANC, its a bit to much like that. You have to
toe the line. Whether you right or wrong. (I2)
Its also that long distance stuff that worries me, for example somebody in Cape Town decides what
size fish you can catch here and how many you can catch and they havent got a clue whats
going on locally. You know to me to use the guys at SANParks () and those guys they can
do some research and come up and say okay well for this season were not going to allow
any Steenbras to be caught, because of the population is falling, but maybe next season well
review it. So youve got a bit more of a dynamic management structure there and you know
youll say between Gerickes and Wilderness no oysters are to be taken for two years or
something like that.

You give the beds a chance to build up. You know that kind of

management. You dont need some guy sitting in a shop, in an office somewhere in Cape
Town for the whole country nogal, I mean its different in PE, its different in East London and
its different in Natal, but they decide on what fish you can catch and how big they must be
and so on from there. For the whole country its insane. So they need to de-regularize or bring
it down to local level. If you talk to the local guys youll learn very quickly whats being caught
and whats not being caught and what the concerns are, because most of them are
concerned. (I36)
Some people have general views on SANParks which dont necessarily apply particularly to here, but
its one of the few of the old pre 94 government things that hasnt changed. All final decision
is virtually all taken in Pretoria where most of them has never seen the side of the Cape coast
and their idea of a Park, I suppose, is to go to Kruger and Mapungubwe or maybe the
Kalahari Gemsbok which is firstly very different flora and fauna and secondly they are fenced,
well if not fenced do not the () people dont live in them and move through them in a random
way. Also its primarily a waterpark but how it was started so there are quite a lot differences

and I would like to see rather more of local control in the sense that local fishers were given
more power and responsibility and things like that. (I11)
And its really only people like yourself in the academic world that I think go across these boundaries
and I think thats a pity, you know to me where the environment is concerned there should be
a liaison person in each government department that you know let one department drive it but
there should be somebody setting up a liaison. () interesting thing is they had very good
liaison with Water Affairs and very good liaison with Environmental Affairs and things like that
so you spoke to one person but they had all the answers and as a result it was always nice
and they had some good people there too. It was always nice to meet with them and they
knew what was going on around as well. You dont get that impression at all here. (I29)

Cost of participation
I would say one obstacle that might affect a lot of us in this area is financial. If they want to get
involved and it means paying, theyve got to be selective.

They cant afford to go for

everything. So, theyve got to be selective and it might not be paying for membership but
paying transport, paying communication, paying time, paying that. So, theyve got to be
selective and go for the one they feel they are making the most contribution to or like some
people dont want to make a contribution, they just want to take. That they become a member
of something, because they getting something back, ja. They might not give anything, but
theyre getting something, you know. So, I would say that that would be the main factor
effecting how people do become involved in anything is the cost. Whether its affordable or
not. (I17)
Look, I think the reason why it didn't go through is because it was such an outcry from the community.
At the end of the day it was a few people who put in really hard work with very little money to
fight a big corporate and they managed to galvanise enough people. It was obviously a big
enough thing that enough people were kind of willing to get involved. But it was down to a
hand full of people really who put in the time in with no reward. It is not they were getting
paid. It was very difficult, you know, one of the major problems I think with people trying to
protect the system is lack of funds because it is difficult to fight a fight against developers with
big financial backing and big lawyers and things when you mostly have retired people or
people with jobs who are doing everything for free. With that particular development there was
pages and pages of documents to wade through and you know it was diligently done by a few
people who had the expertise and time, question if they had the time, but they managed. I
think that was good win. (I12)
I think were all aware of it and we all live in the same country, but theres certain restrictions and
theres certain issues and you when youre dealing with people organizations which hinder
probably the effectivity that the community would like to see them having and you know if its

done in terms of budgetary constraints, like you found out yesterday, mileage you know.
Peoples mileage was cut down. They cant do what they would like to do and they cant
always get to a place that they have to and I think sometimes its, you know as I say speaking
from an outside perspective we dont know those internal politics and facts. (I31)

Historical legacy
Ja, goeie luisteraars. Maar ons is bly daar is mense wat belangstel in ons, hulle het ons hier tussen
die koppe kom weggooi, nou is ons bly daars mense wat belangstel. (I30)
Nou ja, kom ek se vir jou die parkeraad het eintlik my lewe opgefok, because hy het ons daar uit, hy
het ons almal daar uit die see uit, my mense kan nie see toe gaan nie, hulle het daai see
toegemaak, toe hulle die see vat toe maak hulle hom toe, daai was so 48 jaar gelede, het
hulle daai see toegemaak. My mense as hulle wou gaan visvang dan moet hulle skelm in die
nag gaan, gaan visvang, nou se jy nou vir my, skelm in die nag by die see in sulke krans
gebied is mos n baie gevaarlike storie. (I5)
Toe kom die natuurbewaring en hy se kyk hier ek kom nou navorsing doen hierso, af met die bote van
die water af jy gaan nie meer visvang nie. Nou sit daai kleurling mense by die huis. Toe begin
die inbrekings, verkragtings toe begin al daai dinge want die mense word nou op n hoop
geskuif. ..van daai water af wat hulle al die jare gebruik het. Hoeveel maal het die vis nou al
gevrek in daai meer. (I5)
Dit is nie altyd nie, is nie altyd nie. Kyk as ek dit vir jou so kan stel op die oomblik kry ons baie swaar
sal ek dit pleinlik moet se ons kry baie swaar coloureds en swart mense wat wil deel wees of
wat wil kom, verstaan. Dit is meestal ons blanke mense wat dan opkom en hulle kom
vorentoe sodra die kleurlinge en swartes sien daar is te veel wit dan raak dit ewe skielik n
rassistiese ding. Verstaan dan sal hulle rassisme voorgee of hulle wil dit doen omdat hulle wit
is en die kant toe en soontoe which is very counterproductive op die ou einde van die dag.
So, ons laat mense kom om die gedagte dat ons wil saam werk, daar gaan nie n vinger
gewysery wees en apartheid is nie meer ter sprake nie. 1994 is verby () daai is verby en as
jy nie kan weg beweeg van daai af nie dan gaan jy ongelukkig stagneer. En dit is wat die
meeste van ons mense as ek kyk Collin's hoek Karatara area, Beervlei area, daai tipe sal ek
se die plaas areas basies dit is met daai tipe mentalitiet met wat hulle voorendag kom.()
Eerste meeting woon hulle by en daarvandaan steek hulle, of hulle kom net nie terug nie
basies nie. (I4)
That was actually the weir. It had provisions put in and there used to be sort of a collaborative
management. The yachtsman here would complain that the water level is getting to low and
they would put some bulks in the weir to race the water level. Then the fishermen would
complain that the fish arent getting in, so they take them out again. But it was a definite, so

there was a definite management of the lakes. Whether it was effective or not is questionable
and that made quite an impact on the lakes. Whether it was good or bad, its depending on
who you ask. That period of management and of course the Touwsriver mouth was managed.
They used to open and close it and the management strategy was very different from what it
is now.()They were managing their system quite purposely, quite intensely, based on very
different management priorities that we use now. They were worried they were going to silt
up. They were worried that they were going to get polluted. They were worried that the water
level wouldnt be right for recreation. And it was quite intensive management. Nobody ever
thought of flood control, frankly, because they didnt have floods then. And nobody was
actually, terribly concerned about preserving the natural environment. It was managing it for
maximum recreational utilization. Strange difference. Once Parks Board took over
management it changed dramatically. They introduced immediately a principle, a minimum
interference. (I18)
So that was another big increase in Sedgefield. And when those increases starting happening
suddenly the whole control of the lake became more formalised. I don't know when SA
National parks took over but they were, that also had a big effect on the management of the
Swartvlei. But up until now there is almost a big stand off between the community and SA
National parks. And it is almost a case of, people would write letters to the papers and stand
on soap boxes and say bad things about SA National Parks

and they can't fight back

because they are corporate they can't say that so and so is a liar so they have to keep quiet.
And more and more people say bad things about SA National Parks. And yes, there are
some, they might tend to be a bit of a slow organisation bound by corporate rules and so forth
but there is a large believe by the people that they are absolutely useless and so forth. And
people tend, people say it, then other people believe it, and people say it and it snowballs. But
they are not, a lot of accusations towards them are unfounded. (I3)
Dan het hulle met als wat kon skep, kyk as hulle nog op n dag gekies wanneer dit nou vroegaand,
laatmiddag laagwater ook gewees het. Dan het hullle nou hierdie slootjie deur gegraaf en
dan het die kinders, dit was nou hulle werk gewees, moes in die ding staan met hulle voete
die sand losmaak. Dan gaan dit see toe en dan eweskielik as hy sterk genoeg begin loop dan
s hulle die mond breek, dan vat hy tonne sand af see toe. Net n rukkie daarna dan kom die
vis by die honderde daar af. Duisende. Dan skep almal die vis uit met als wat jy kon skep,
gooi dit op die sand, die see kom en hy spoel jou weg.

Jy kan nie al die goed gaan

droogmaak en bewerk nie. Jy het nie n yskas nie. Nee dit was regtig n groot event. Die
hele gemeenskap was die aand daar op die strand gewees. Maar die vis het baie afgeneem.
Ons het as kinders het ons hierso met n roeibootjie het ons saans met n Tillie lamp voor op
hom met n blik kort agter en n skepnet van draad, kuikendraad. Dan het ons die Harders en
Springers uitgeskep en dan die groot plesier was, afgesien van die vis wat jy nou gevang het,
is om te sien wat als onder die water aangaan, want jy kon tot op die wit sand sien. Sien daar
was nie gras gewees nie en dan het die Stompneusies, die Tanloosies, die Steenbrasies by

die dosyne daar, baie lewe en nou is hier nie meer nie. Ek meen die kinders wat hier langs
die kant sit en visvang en hulle kry nie eers n byt nie. (I22)

Management
Well they certainly doing the best they can under very difficult circumstances. They have difficulties in
terms of contact with the public, because theyre not highly thought of, lots of antagonism.
And theyre constrained by these rather strange South African requirement that theyd be
profitable. I think thats disastrous, a National Park should never be profitable. Ja so their
management is again and again, their management has to take cognizance with the need to
be profitable. Well I think thats a bit wrong, doesnt happen anywhere else in the world. (I18)
Another example for instance. Theres a lot of walks here in the Garden Route and I think all of them,
practically all of them are the responsibility of Parks Board to maintain them. They dont.
They dont look after them in a way they should and yet theyre very keen to charge people for
going on these things. (I25)
Van die ouens wat ek daar voor gekry het. Maar die feit van die, soos ek ges het as daar nie genoeg
geld is nie, is daar nie genoeg geld nie. Gaan dit altyd oor n finansile aspek gaan dat ons dit
moet red, ek weet nie, of het ons dan nou besluit ons gaan alles laat gaan en ons gaan
hierdie goed maar net n natuurlike dood sterf. Dit is ook op die pyplyn. Ek dink nie moeder
natuur sal ons daai plek sommer sonder meer toe te laat om (). (I8)
Hulle het hom nog nie uitgetrek nie. As daai masjien beskadig is gaan hulle betaal. Ek gaan dit
aangee aan die publieke beskermer en vir haar s dit is hoe hulle die geld mors. Hulle het
duisende rande al hier gemors, okay dit is nou die eerste vraag is n. (I35)
I look at the guys sitting at the gates of the park and I say if you take R25 today youve done well.
How much did it cost to put them sitting there all day to collect one entry fee? Ja I think thats
just, you know if youve come out of a business environment you look at resource application
and youve got to apply it where it does the best. Either that or they must have so much
resources that they dont know what to do with it. One or the other and I cant believe that,
theyve got manpower coming out of their ears, but maybe its unskilled manpower, I dont
know. () Where do they clean up first, this whole dedicated team? Jill Bunding-Venter, the
property next to Jill Bunding-Venter. Sorry thats the last place that should be cleaned. How
can you apply the resources to suit yourself? I dont know, just am I wrong or do I just think
differently? If thats your responsibility surely you clean up other peoples mess first. I dont
know, maybe I just think differently. () George municipality says we dont have the
resources, finish, do it yourself. Thats it. So ja, I dont want to say Im on the warpath with
SANParks but I dont think theyre managing the area well at all, to be honest. The poaching,
the ja I mean the lack of you know even mowing the paths of the trails and cleaning in front of

the bird hides. Only if you ask does it get done. Its not difficult to have a roster and say some
of this needs mowing once every two months, in winter once every 6 months. Slot it in then
do it. (I34)

Needs of others
I also liked the fact that in the meeting you had people from all cross sections of our community. Ja, I
never thought to think about the fishing side of things, which you guys brought and which is a
huge, I mean for a lot of people that are unemployed, the growing number of unemployed, its
important that thats taken into consideration. (I32)
Ja, look I think there are a lot of people, I mean particularly the subsistence fishers from Smutsville
here, I think its huge and I think we dont appreciate, I mean there are a lot of people, we see
them going down there, there are a lot of people I think that are depending on that protein
they get out of the water at the moment. () I think, ja I think the average Sedgefield is not
aware of the fact that theres a lot of subsistence fishing going on here at the moment. (I29)
Maar dit moet ook wees dat hulle almal mekaar verstaan, verstaan. Dat hulle almal mekaar verstaan
en dat die een nie kom met die mentaliteit dit is n rassisme en dit is nou weer net wit wat nou
weer net wil overpower en wat, want kom ek stel dit vir jou so. () They don't want to do that
hulle wil nie meer leer nie. Hulle wil sit, dit is oraait die government sal vir my sorg. Hy moet
vir my sorg, hulle verwag dit. Right, dit is basies wat hulle sien as dit is myne, ek moet dit kry,
as ek kyk na die indigenous forest. Dit behoort aan ons almal hierso, aan ons almal, maar nie
almal wil dit sien afgechop wees nie, nie almal wil he daai bome moet afgesaag word nie
sodat die mense op die ou einde van die dag job creation het nie, of kan kos op die tafel sit
nie want daar is ander ways and means om dit ook te kan doen, maar they only see it their
way. Verstaan. So basies my ideal thing () sal wees dat almal wat betrokke kan wees moet
kom en almal wat daar wil wees, moet daar wees en almal wat wil inslae lewer moet
hom/haar punt basies neerl maar hulle ook moet verstaan dat almal se punte in ag geneem
moet word en nie net hulle sin nie, of die een kry nie voorkeur omdat hy PhD het of omdat hy
in Wildernis bly of hy bly in n pandok of wat ook al nie. Almal sin moet equal gekyk word na
aan die einde van die dag en dit is somtyds wat ons mense nie verstaan nie. (I4)

Passion/emotions
My personal perspective, but having dealt with the whole different suite of things and different people
and different issues not mouth openings and I want to speak as someone speak broadly on
an environmental matters and I think its fair to say that my personal opinion is really just that
there are a lot of sort of emotional, a lot of people out there get very emotional when it comes
to certain things and a lot of its got to do with sentiment and the past and the history. What
people are used to and what their opinions are and I think it, something like that youve got a

group of people around the table (). So whenever you get those people around the table
and you start having a discussion about a burning issue like that, you know tempers flare,
people are emotional and people have their way of thinking that that needs to be done in this
particular way. Having dealt with some of the burn issue from a management prospective
obviously theres always room to move in an adaptive management is something that we all
aware of but at the end of the day theres a book or for example there is the management
plan and thats what needs to be implemented and put into place. () I think with any issues
as I say which are highly emotive like what youre dealing with here or as I said in my past
which has been baboon matters, is people like to get their 5 cents worth and they like to
believe its their way is the correct way and I throw caution to things like management. So
often you have these discussions and people arent always aware of the, and I mean now its
taken from my perspective line in science is that people work really hard on management
plans and they collect the data, they interpret it, they put it into management plans and they
put it out there. But in a situation as I say youve got people engaging, you often have people
and I dont want to sound disrespectful, but people who arent always or they havent always
gone and equipped themselves with the relevant information and facts. So as I say its a
difficult situation where you get people, not shooting of the hip but very opinionated on what
they believe is right, but not always taking in all the sort of relevant facts and information. ()
So I like to go on data facts and that sort of thing. So generally in the discussions that Ive
been in my past I removed myself from heavy debate and emotions because I dont believe
that it has a place, but I dont always think you achieve as much as what you should by.
(I31)

Respect
Dit sal dit miskien, want op die oomblik word ons maar, jy weet nou kom daarso in Knysna uit ek
verstaan ook nie baie mense nie. Nou daar wat ons die oesters verkoop dan kom die manne
daar uit, jy weet dit is amper soos n kat wat jou daar aangedra het. Jy word nie eers dag ges
nie. Ons kom uit die koue water uit jy word nie eers nie, dit is amper soos n kat wat jou daar
ingedra het. Dan voel jy so. Kan n mens so wees. () mense, more mense. Hoe het vanmre
gegaan, what so ever. Laat n mens darem voel. (I13)
I don't know when SA National parks took over but they were, that also had a big effect on the
management of the Swartvlei. But up until now there is almost a big stand-off between the
community and SA National parks. And it is almost a case of, people would write letters to the
papers and stand on soap boxes and say bad things about SA National Parks and they can't
fight back because they are corporate they can't say that so and so is a liar so they have to
keep quiet. And more and more people say bad things about SA National Parks. And yes,
there are some, they might tend to be a bit of a slow organisation bound by corporate rules
and so forth but there is a large believe by the people that they are absolutely useless and so

forth. And people tend, people say it, then other people believe it, and people say it and it
snowballs. But they are not, a lot of accusations towards them are unfounded. (I3)
You know its a pity, but having said that I dont actually blame Parks Board, because the nature of
engagement in this part of the world in particular is antagonistic. You know the Numbis here
are extremely powerful, because this area attracts professional people with skills and time on
their hands, like myself, who attend these meetings and many of them are, have pretty high
level qualifications, and to make most of the Parks Board look like amateurs. And public
participation meeting here, they wrong history of them are really hot affairs and so I am afraid
that it does make your average Parks Board official feel a little bit weary. (I18)
Ja, heeltemal, die area kyk die meeste van die mense het ek baie goeie verhoudings mee, en ek
probeer selfs met die veldwagters praat dat hulle ook goeie verhoudings met die mense aan
gaan. Hulle het die een veldwagter se bakkie byvoorbeeld in die dam in gestoot toe hulle vir
hom kry in Eilandvlei toe hy af was. En hy het vis gevang saam met sy kinders. Toe het hulle
net sy bakkie in Eilandvlei ingestoot. () Mense van Touwsranten, mense wat in die
omgewing in bly. Mense wie se vis gekonfiskeer het omdat die permit nie reg was nie, omdat
die size limit nie reg was nie en omdat dit in buite seisoen was basies. En hy het maar net sy
werk gedoen. (I4)
Ek het die foon opgetel die Saterdag oggend ek het die: Don't tell me the fucking this, what where you
guys, die antie skel my in engels. En ek staan net en al wat ek kan se is: Ma'am I do
apologise ma'am but I will get back to you and this. En ek skryf dit toe neer ek kan nie terug
skel nie ek moet my cool hou, verstaan. Die section ranger het byvoorbeeld doods
dreigemente gekry sy het vieslike briewe gekry wat daai vrou heeltemal op n state gesit het
wa sy pille moes gaan kry het sy moes stress kliniek ingeboek gewees het. Sy kon nie
meetings bygewoon het, veral waar Sedgefield se mense betrokke was kon sy glad nie na toe
gegaan het nie, sy moes weggebly het. Daai tipe van goed. Daai vloed het groot, groot, groot
opskudding veroorsaak, die 2007 ene as ek dit nou vir u so kan stel, maar dit is ook as gevolg
van die mens se ignorance. Jy bou nie n huis in n floodplain nie, right. (I4)
So that is where parksboard gained a lot of anti and that they haven't provided public access to
Swartvlei and the third thing is that the parksboard members are typically got PhDs in some
or other science and they are not, they are scientist they are not public engagers they are not
dinner party speakers and so () people refer to them as god 1 and god 2 on the basis that
they think so much of themselves and don't want to speak to the public. That is maybe not the
case if you get to know them they aren't like that at all but they don't want to sit and argue
with the people on why you should do this or that and so forth but the public are fairly ill
informed and have a set opinion. You are not going to change certainly the public opinion. (I3)

Hulle blameer vir ons, ja. () Kyk, omdat hulle vir ons sien in die area en omdat ons basies al die
water bodies in werk omdat daar research gedoen word op al die water bodies van, kyk
Rondevlei is, die sal ek se die water research facility, alles wat te doen het met aquatic living,
hulle doen baie van daai research, so hulle kry baie van ons mense op Swartvlei mond op
Swartvlei lagoon area, daai tipe van areas so automaties, en daar is borde op wat s: no
vessels SANParks management, daai tipe van ding, so hulle verwag, so ek weet nie of hulle
verwag dat ons die weer moet control nie, dat ons moet s dit kan nie vandag ren nie want
daar gaan soveel mense se huise vloed, dit is iets buite ons beheer. Al wat ons kan doen ons
kan net adapt to the situation en ons kan net die beste daarvan maak op die ou einde van die
dag. So, ja dit is basies waarmee ons sit. Die feit dat hulle ons sien patroleer in die area, dat
daar borde op is wat se speedboats not allowed jetskis not allowed en daar is n SANParks
kudu kop op, but we are not totally in charge of that area. Meeste van die area is ook Eden
munisipaliteit wat ook daarna moet kyk, wat ook maintenance in daai tipe areas moet doen,
verstaan. Ons is maar net daar om te kyk dat die mense hulle bote reg gebruik dat hulle nie
sal ek s in Swartvlei gebruik en in Swartvlei mond basies nie. (I4)
People Ive spoken to about the workshop that were there found it very positive. Ja, I think for a while
there was a whole, the poor guy, Richard Batson, that whole story. It was kind of a, if youre
on Richard Batsons side youre against SANParks side and if you are on SANParks side your
against Richard Batson and you know that I think is sort of dissolving. I think a few people
has sort of said okay well Richard had his say, but we need to move forward. We need to
have interaction with SANParks about the lakes management. (I32)
Because hes a legend of truth, ja. ()But I think people are now seeing that theres a lot more to it
than just that and that it is incredibly important that we have dialog with SANParks about it, so
that there isnt animosity here, because they would dig their heels in and say we only open
the river mouth when the water is at 2m or 1.8. You can understand their position when they
had nothing but insults from the community. () At that meeting, I think that was probably the
turning point for () fan club, you know, he sort of stood up at the end and dug his heels in
and said you know youre talking absolute rubbish, you dont know what youre talking about
sort of thing. I think then people realize, because this guy has come to talk about it, to have
dialog and you know Richard was trying to shut it down. (I32)
You cannot operate like that, by the same token one doesn't always have to agree with everybody the
same as they won't always won't agree with you. You will have different viewpoints and that in
many ways are healthy but come back to the relationships. Yes, one has to, where ever
possible foster and maintain good relationships with people. You don't have to like people but
you have to be cordial and polite and mindful of their views and their intentions and things like
that. So, yes we have to do that and we do do that as best we are able. Not always possible.
There are problem areas. But, ya I think for the most part, you know, bar for the few
exceptions we do tend to maintain that and to a fairly high degree. (I6)

Hulle is veronderstel om met ons te kommunikeer. Hulle kom dan nie eers na ons vergaderings toe
nie. Hulle het nou opdrag gekry om na die vergaderings toe te kom, maar dit is tragies hoe
arrogant hulle is. (I35)

Responsibility
I dont know its a sort of entitlement thing I suppose, but of course the other thing as Natalie says
there are a lot of old people there. They dont know really what to do so as long as theyve got
somebody to fight for them theyre fairly happy. (I25)
He could actually, he could fight their things tooth and nail and bring up good arguments and we think
that he probably was a large, in a large way responsible for them not putting the toll road
there. So when he took on SANParks about the river mouth opening we were all sort of, yeah,
yeah, go for it and a lot of what he said made sense about the bridge and trying to get rid of
the rocks underneath, but it seems that he broke law doing that and you know rightly or
wrongly maybe with all the best intentions. (I32)
Hulle sal, oooh, ek het probleme met daai twenties. () Maar kyk nou elke vergadering, hulle is nooit
op die vergadering nie. Elke vergadering wat die officials kom uit die Kaap uit dan moet die
vergadering moet hulle verteenwoordig. Want hulle is die span wat ons, die oestermense
verteenwoordig die kant, so hulle moet. Kyk as daar veranderings kom of, wat at least hulle
moet die eerste mense wees. Hy moenie by my hoor langs die see, hallo daar het n
verandering gekom nie. Dis nie, daar begin die gestreiery nou nie. (I13)
Die parkeraad en SANParke moet dit in hulle breins kry en hulle moet die ander kleurige mense meer
gee om op te pas. Sien hoe mooi pas ek die stukkie op so as die mense meer het om op te
pas dan bewaar ons almal. Jy moenie daai mense se verantwoordelikheid weg vat hom af dat
hy geen verantwoordelikheid het nie. Ek meen hoe proud het ek gewees. (I5)
For science fishing regulations science, SANParks has got actually a very nice sign which has the fish
and their known info on it, but we thought it would be a good idea to have update the one
weve got here () and the one up in the mouth I think, but they ran out of money and weve
had one printed and they, you know there thing at our cost, but we would very much like them
to remember us and you know were sort of on the same side fighting. (I23)
Maar die SANParke moet begin dink, want hy oorbewaar. Hy moet die gemeenskap ook vra om hom
te help bewaar en maar dan moet daai mense daai goeters benut. En dan sal daai mense dit
benut. Sal self sien laat dit nie oorbenut raak nie, want hy weet as dit oorbenut raak dan
gaan hy aan die korste end trek. Maar hy moet nie al die verantwoordelikheid op homself vat
nie en dink hy kan die hele land bewaar en goeters. No way dat dit gebeur. (I5)

If they just get together with the people who are here and say can you help us, you know what about
here. Maybe we dont agree with you but thats fine, but instead of which they just hide
themselves over at Rondevlei and they create so much frustration in the () community.
(I29)
Yes I think that the obstacle, SANParks are always an obstacle, but with almost anything, certainly
theyre an obstacle, but the interesting thing is actually that when we said to Parks Board with
the Perdespruit has been allowed to silt up, its a water course and surely you are responsible
for that, they said no were not. They decided they were not responsible for anything to do
with the Perdespruit. So it wasnt possible to say well look after it, you know, make sure its
flowing. Make sure it works as it should do. So its just been allowed to silt up. Now why they
deny responsibility for that nobody is quite sure, but since they dont come and talk to us we
cant actually ask the question. So thats a mystery. Why are they not responsible for the
maintenance of the Perdespruit? Cause yes thats one thing, a lot of its on private land, but
we dont believe there is any problem in actually speaking to the owners of the land in order to
deepen it, because they probably, it could serve them quite well. (I25)
I mean the number of times Ill get a notice and says, my son calls me a serial objector, and I say, well
maybe I do a bit too much objecting, but all my objections are based on scientific facts. You
know, Im not saying, dont do it just because I dont want it done. Im saying dont do it
because these are the consequences. There definitely, that is the attitude ones got to have
and yes sometimes you look at, and you think, gee thats against it and thats for and maybe
the for are better than all thats against. So, lets see if we can get the right thing out of that.
Come to the right win, win situation. But, unfortunately all too often theres only one thing that
drives everyone and thats greed. Theyll put it down, oh were going to be giving these great
jobs. Great jobs? It doesnt happen. They import people, because the people, the locals are
unemployable. They, not only do they not have a work ethic, but they are unemployable, they
cant, they dont know how to do whatever is required. (I17)
That is part of what I monitor. I monitor the detrimental environment impacts of our own management
actions. So that we can sit and modify them and sit minimize those impacts and there are
impacts. And they are long term and they can be fairly deleterious. (I6)

Rules
Jy wil kom jy wil jouself geniet, jy en jou man en jou kinders. Nie die wet en daai wet, daar is te veel
wette op ons. Is ek reg? Te veel wette in, daai klomp wette maak swaar vir die mense en hy
maak nie net die lewe swaar vir die arm mense nie hy maak ook swaar vir die rykes. Want
almal blame nou die rykes, n. Maar ons rondom ons kyk nie mooi wat kan ons doen laat jy
ook miskien bietjie rykdom kry. (I5)

They think they came to the party, but they put monumental barriers in the way on environmental
grounds. (I18)
Well they certainly doing the best they can under very difficult circumstances. They have difficulties in
terms of contact with the public, because theyre not highly thought of, lots of antagonism.
And theyre constrained by these rather strange South African requirement that theyd be
profitable. I think thats disastrous, a National Park should never be profitable. Ja, so their
management is again and again, their management has to take cognizance with the need to
be profitable. Well I think thats a bit wrong, doesnt happen anywhere else in the world. (I18)
Ek het probleme, met die government mense, en ek het baie probleme, ek het ek se vir jou ek fines
hierso elke keer as ek op die hof kom. Hulle skryf vir my, hier by Goukamma skryf hulle vir
my. Ek gaan dit net hier vir u mooi verduidelik. Hulle skryf vir my op Wilderness, sea fisheries,
see vissery in Knysna, omdat die oggend wat ek opstaan, ons moet bel in die oggend, in die
oggend wat ek opstaan toe bel ek, die Saterdag. Hulle antwoord nie hulle phones nie. Maar
hier in, in my kontrak staan n kantoor nommer hulle gee ons elke plek se kantoor nommer.
Hulle kom daar ek se ek het gebel maar daar was nie antwoord nie. Hulle kom hulle skryf my
in Wilderness n R1500 hulle vat n sak en n half oesters van my, ek se vir hulle man hier het
ek net n kantoor nommer, julle was nie op kantoor nie. Ek gaan hof toe. In George, die hof
dismiss die saak. Hulle se hulle het nie gronde nie dis net. Ek kom hier by Goukamma hulle
skryf vir my in n stukkie gebied wat hulle nou se is deel van reservaat. Dit was nog nooit deel
van die reservaat nie. Ek is weer hof toe, weer prokereur ons wen ook daai saak. Nou ek
moet n prokureur betaal. My oesters word weggevat. Spesiaal, ek is eerlik, ek het met die
outjies, die Wilderness maar met seevisserye en Knysna het ek n helse probleem. (I13)

Resistance to change
Resistance to change. () En dit is n groot ding. Hy moet daardie teenvoeters oorkom voordat hy,
() Hy het groot idees. Ek en hy het gesit en gesls, lekker gesit en gesels met hom, maar
sy hande is gebind. () Personeel. Hulle het sulke, ek kan net s weird ideas about
management. Dis ongelooflik. Ek weet nie waar hulle, hulle idees vandaan kry nie, maar dis
nie bestuur nie. Kyk n bestuur of dit nou in die private sektor is en of dit in die regering is, min
of meer dieselfde. Nie met hierdie ouens nie. Hulle het hulle eie ding en hulle neem aanstoot.
As jy na hulle toe gaan en s hoor hierso jy doen verkeerd dan loop hy reguit op na sy baas
toe en gaan kla hy. () So jy weet, nou Mzwai is, hy is totaal afhanklik van sy werksmense.
Nou s sy werksmense ons gaan strike of ons gaan sit en dan sit hulle. Ons sal met
hoofkantoor praat. Jy sien dis state unions. So sy hande is gebind. Hy het goeie idees. ()
Wil niks weet nie. (I35)

Salience of issue
I have been here 20 odd years and we have always had public involvement in what we do, we just
tend to find that the place that it is happening or the issues that are being discussed change
over time. I mean when I first came down here there was a lot of public opinion and
expressions made about the management of the Touw system. And it just so happen that at
that stage there were quite a few people living in that area who had an interest or wished to
be involved not least of which our ex-prime minister. You know so in those days it was all to
do with the management of the Touw system and the impact of the railway bridge and things
like that and the impact of the N2 bridge and so it went on and on and on. A lot of those
issues have now, I wouldn't say disappeared, the people have disappeared, a lot of them
have actually died. But you know the concerns that were being raised over pollution or
perceived pollution of that system have now abated. We addressed them, we commissioned
a huge study or a huge study was commissioned put it that way in terms to address these
things. We knew that they weren't really a problem but to alleviate people's concerns it was
done. It was funded by water affairs in those days. Now the issues are somewhere else and
things like that. So there has always been involvement it is just different people over different
times and different things. So different issues. (I6)
Probably not to the same extent. Look there has been instances before there had been incidences of
genuine pollution events and things like that with issues going wrong up in the catchment it is
the dairy farms and so forth and you had some people that would take absolute exception to
things like that and be aware of it and would try and get involved in it but what you tend to find
is that if things like that don't affect people directly or they don't perceive them as effecting
them directly the amount of involvement in it is properly very short lived. They would get up
and make a stand and it is solved and it dies down but even if it is not solved but if it if it
doesnt affect you personally its difficult to maintain that level of interest. For me I have to
maintain that level of interest because it is affecting the system that I am part of being
involved with managing. So you know the big issues have been those which have effect
people directly. There direct property, whether it is their rose gardens being washed away in
Wilderness or other things in Sedgefield and so forth. (), it is not as if the incident have
changed it is just public perception of them and public involvement changes when it effects
them more. But the instances are still there and we still have to deal with it and that is also
what people don't tend to always appreciate. There is lots of these things going on all of the
time that we have to deal with. It is not just the ones that people are screaming about
because it affects them personally, it is that require attention it is all of them in different ways.
(I6)
Yes, and Ill tell you I think thats what shocked the owner. He decided that he was going to have
public meetings and he started off with a public meeting at the Wilderness Hotel and I think he
was absolutely overwhelmed, not only by the number of people who attended, but the

expertise of the people who attended, because he thought he was coming to all these old
doddery whatevers. He was confronted with questions he had not even considered and then
he went on to another meeting, now I attended as many meetings as I could and I definitely
found by the time he got to the Sedgefield meeting he polished up his act, because now he
done it at the Wilderness, done it in George, he done it in Knysna, he done it in Plett and then
he came back and did it in Sedgefield. By the time he got to Sedgefield he knew what he was
being confronted with and I mean it was four and a half years of continual meetings, continual
petitions, continual all sorts of things, fights, even sort of bribery in a way, you know, offers of
bribery. Just to try and get everybody to be cooperative. (I17)
Ja, 2009/10 is ons deur n verskriklike droogte. Dit word geskat uit hierdie spesialiste dat dit n een uit
130 jaar droogte was. Ons het baie lesse geleer uit daai droogte uit. Daar is n klomp goed
wat inderhaas in plek gestel moes word. Kontak met die publiek, bewus makings veldtogte, al
daai goed. Uit n bestuurs oogpunt was dit n nagmerrie gewees.
Hoe was die samewerking van die publiek se kant af. Het julle gesukkel om die mense aan boord te
kry?
Nee, baie goed. Onse gemiddelde daaglikse aanvraag was in die orde van 35 mega lt per dag voor
die droogte. En ons het daai aanvraag af gebring, man seker binne die bestek van 4/5
maande het ons dit afgebring na tussen 20 en 25 mega lt n dag. Dis n groot dinges daai.
Waterwese se voorskrif was dat die beperking wat hulle ingestel het was n 40% reduction in
water consumption. Ons sin was, was meer as dit gewees. (I1)
Yes, but I think what my take on is on it. Not to respond when the crises is to big, but to avoid the
crises. (I3)
Then when () came, I mean it was really, it was like a battle all the time, because he just had his
ideas and they werent, they didnt fit in the area. So, that made a big difference, but what it
also did, the positive effect was to bring us all together. So we were united in some function
and now I think this, the fact that theres been crime and thats also brought us all to be more
aware of each other. So that if something happens we will definitely respond, ja. So that has
also been a good thing. (I17)
Ive enjoyed the interaction here. Ive enjoyed the openness and its given me a bit of a new insight
under this problem of public participation which I strongly believe in and how it can be
fostered and I think, (), I agree with him, its the issue that brings about participation,
although powerful characters like PW and Jack Ruben can certainly facilitate that, there has
to be an issue first and these issues are very different depending on your social, economical,
educational background () (WS)

Soos ek se elkeen kom somtyds met sy eie agenda where can I benefit as hy nie kan nie dan is
oraait los dan liewer vir my dan gaan ek liewers my eie dinge doen. (I4)
If I can make a couple of comments. Well two things actually. One is the, much of the local comment
is that Parks Board feels that they own various which are in fact public resources, rather than
acting as guardians of it or of those areas and thats something that boils quite a lot within the
community. Theres another aspect as well and that is that the Ratepayers of Sedgefield have
tried for quite a number of years now to arrange for public access to the Swartvlei for
instance. There is some to the river, but its only to the Swartvlei, the lake. On two proposals
which were made through the Ratepayers on the lake were actually stopped by Parks Board.
Its those sorts of things, remotely they didnt come along and say why they wanted to stop it.
It was just simply no we rejected that application. Its that sort of thing. (WS)
But you see thats a typical example. Theres no liaison with SANParks so you dont know why theyre
not that, I mean at the Wilderness for example that green bank that theyve fenced off there,
the coloured population from George uses that very consistently over weekends and the
summer and then SANParks said, oh theyre going to put a gate up and charge you. So they
dont go there now. Now okay they might have a tight budget but and you know this business
of access to the water, Im just hoping with this new Integrated Coastal Management Act
access is apparently a big thing in that, and Im just hoping that theres going to be pressure
put on them through that ICM to provide access to Swartvlei because the big problem is all
around Swartvlei is all privately owned. () But you know we dont have any sort of
opportunity to sit and discuss with them why. I mean I can bring up something like that, Ive
done it at this liaison committee they go to and they say oh no we dont know anything about
that and this is the problem that I dont know who is making those decisions but it would
appear that the local people are not empowered to make decisions that affect them. (I29)

Set of knowledge
() you have people that possible, again want to go back to that, go the trouble to equip themselves
with the facts and they realize okay well what we thought was the situation is possible not
really it, or we need to change our way of looking at this or thinking about it, because there is
legislation or there are plans in place and these people are trying to manage the situation, but
we also need to come to the party. You know so that sort of move things forward, but at the
end of the day you know what the main thing and discussion that we had with authorities at
that time and us as managers are the problem, was that there needed to be a mindset change
and until people change their way they thought about things or their mindset it wasnt going to
really progress forward. (I31)
So, they use to look at these things and say it is polluted and then they use to also look at the same
time, oo gee the estuary is closed and the water is therefore stagnant. Stagnant was a word

that was often used and if the water is perceived to be stagnant, which I assume they mean it
was not moving therefore it is unhealthy, because there would be no oxygen and things like
that despite the fact that you would find there is high oxygen concentration during those
period. () rather than low so it was people raising what they consider legitimate concerns
about issues that they thought would affect this environment that they liked, or was in front of
their door step or where they wanted to fish or swim or whatever. But which won't necessarily
always accurate. And we had to deal with that in a certain way and part of the way was to
have discussions with these people. I mean that is part of the reason why I write popular
articles and things like that. () So that people could better understand it. Some sort of
involvement are sort of less successful than others. (I6)
I wish that it was that kind of thing and that the reality of it is that it might be, but it is not that easy to
actually kind of, ja, to see it like that. Look, I struggle a lot with the authorities because they
except for (), you know they dont really do things the way I see things. In that case I say I
because a lot of people even in our committee maybe dont see things the way I do, but there
are, thereve been so many bad decisions taken that I think they do affect like the
environment like very negatively and I just, it surprises me that sometimes the authorities
cant see that and that makes me sad, and it makes me, so I have to do what I have to do, I
mean it is like you can call it a curse or a blessing or whatever, you know, but you know
something then the worse is later to walk away and say I couldve done something about that.
There are examples of things that I couldve done stuff about that I didnt, but and the sad
thing is like we shouldnt have to. (I7)
But I think people are now seeing that theres a lot more to it than just that and that it is incredibly
important that we have dialog with SANParks about it, so that there isnt animosity here,
because they would dig their heels in and say we only open the river mouth when the water is
at 2m or 1.8. You can understand their position when they had nothing but insults from the
community. () At that meeting, I think that was probably the turning point for () fan club,
you know, he sort of stood up at the end and dug his heels in and said you know youre
talking absolute rubbish, you dont know what youre talking about sort of thing. I think then
people realize, because this guy has come to talk about it, to have dialog and you know ()
was trying to shut it down. (I32)
And so, () wants to keep the river mouth open all the time. The environmentalist say no that is bad
for the system. The river must do its natural thing. It must closed, and that so forth. Certainly
when the river mouth is open the water quality is more salty and more fresh and so forth. So
he says its good for the environment to be open all the time. I dont know if it is, its not my
expertise, but a lot of people say, look its so much cleaner when the mouth is open, its a
good thing. So that makes him very believable. And it is true that if the river mouth is open it
starts flooding, but the other means he is really proposing I dont really believe it, but the
people are not technical enough to criticize it. (I3)

I suppose, retrospectively it is a better solution than what I first suggested, and so, Parks Board have
been correct there in stopping us putting man made measures into the lagoon. So, I then, I
respect them sometimes but not for their office block and not for their big 4x4s. (I3)
Some people come in with having already made their minds up. What they are seeing and have
concluded is accurate and no matter what you provide them will be good enough to () alter
their view point. Others are much more open minded and sort of open to information that may
sway their view point. So some are successful and some are not. But ya, you deal with it and
there are other issues and things like that one has to deal with. You know the current one is
as you know SV mouth management and things like that. (I6)
Die, ek onthou nie meer wie die persoon was nie, maar hy maak toe n, hy s vir my ja maar man die
bietjie wat ons ookal gebruik kan nie n impak h op die mere en wat ookal nie. Maar dit is
ook lank terug. Dit is seker al 20 jaar terug. Ek onthou nou nie hoe lank terug dit was nie.
Op daai stadium sou ek ook, jy weet ek het nie gedink hys heeltemal stupid as hy dit nou s
nie. Ek het net gedink hy is n bietjie oningelig want eintlik was daar toe al meer water gebruik
as wat vroer die geval was of voor, jy weet wat ooit in die bestaan was. Kyk hier was nie
eintlik vreeslik water en goed uit die riviere ontrek voor ons krag gekry het nie en dit was eers,
Eskom krag is eers in 1991 hier, 1981 hiernatoe versprei. (I26)
Maar nou s hulle n Steenbras moet vanaf die vinger tot hier wees. Nou waar sal ek vir daai
Steenbras, die nette is lankal weg met daai Steenbrasse. Nee elke vis se grootte moet jou
armlengte wees, maar nou vat hulle nie hier op die armpies van ons nie. Hulle vat hulle se
vreeslike lang derms. Die langste Stompneus wat jy kan gebruik moet so groot soos hulle
hand wees. Soos hulle hande, want daai vis waarmee Meraai gevang is, is so groot soos my
hand. (I16)
Hulle sal, Oooh, ek het probleme met daai tweetjies. Mervin en Esleen. Maar kyk nou elke
vergadering, hulle is nooit op die vergadering nie. Elke vergadering wat die officials kom uit
die Kaap uit dan moet hulle verteenwoordig. Want hulle is die span wat ons, die oestermense
verteenwoordig die kant, so hulle moet. Kyk as daar veranderings kom of wat at least hulle
moet die eerste mense wees. Hy moenie by my hoor langs die see, hallo daar het n
verandering gekom nie. Dis nie, daar begin die gestreiery nou nie. N: So jy voel hulle kom nie
na die meetings toe nie so hulle is nie in kontak met julle nie. Julle vertel vir hulle van
veranderings en nie anders om nie. Ja, kyk hulle verteenwoordig ons so hulle is die eerste
wat met die vergadering moet bywoon. Sien, so as daar vir enige iets veranderings kom of
wat ook reels wat gebuig word of wat dan moet hulle weet, sien. Nou kom dit so aan ek trap
bietjie op hulle tone ma ek, ek hou my nou vir wat ek wil nou vir hulle ronds. Ek se nee dit is
nie so nie ek sit net vir julle feite neer maar julle wil nie. Maar ek se daai outjies even van
aanslae jy ken mos aanslae, goeie mense, goeie mense. Ons kom honderd oor die weg. Met
hulle kom ons honderd oor die weg. Maar nou, met die, ons moet vir hulle ook gebel want die

meeste van die tyd werk ons in hulle gebied. Toe se die span nou, nee ons moet vir hulle bel.
(I13)

Silent voices
The forum has never been represented of the poorer community. It is every now and again people
would hook into some () people, be black be coloured and people would come along. And a
lot of other people would come and go. Maybe they will be there for two or three meetings
and they would realise what are they doing here, they are not changing anything and there
would be transport issues and so forth and so there would be, I would imagine there would
be, I would imagine there would be (...) communities who are sharing one water pipe and they
are carrying buckets whatever. The forum has never been able to attract those people and
keep them. And it is probably a big social divide that the people just don't understand each
other. So silent communities I would imagine they in certainly in the urban environment here
in Sedgefield, Smutsville there are pockets of community there that don't have access to
running water. They are uninvolved in the forum and in the rural community. I speculate there
are lots of people without water that aren't involved. They are not using the forum as a means
to push for sustainable water. They probably use more political routes. If anything at all. (I3)
I didnt really meet them but it was interesting, it was the first time Ive ever been to one of these
meetings where lets say that side of the community was there to have a voice and it was nice
to see it and my comment to several of the people who were there as well was how nice to
see that they took the effort to come to the meeting and they gave the odd opinions, they
didnt say much but hopefully they took something away from it as well. (I29)
Look there is a lot of people who are vehemently opposed to what we do some of them have valid
reasons, others might just be vehemently opposed because it is us who are doing it, and
there is going to be other who probably have a better grasp of what we are doing and why we
are doing it. There is a whole bunch of people you can go and speak to, so if you want to get
a whole range of different viewpoints. You will find that every person that you speak to will
give you a different viewpoint. Allot of their viewpoints understandably would be how it
impacts on their live. And that is the way it probably always would be and should be it is, I
don't know, anybody I have yet to come across somebody who will often go along and say
this is really difficult for me and impacts me negatively but I can understand and just carry on
doing that anyhow so, so if you can speak to a hundred people and you will get a hundred
different opinions and that is part of the difficulty of a lot of these management, like we are
meant to do. Because a lot of suggestions people make are doable and might not necessarily
have long term consequences but you can't please all the people all the time, you cannot
always manage by committee. Because not everybody is going to agree and things like that
so we have to hear people and hear their opinions and consider them and when we aren't in
the position to make a sensible judgement on their decision we go and ask advice from

somebody who is. Some expert who is but we have to make a decision about the way things
are going to be and if it is contrary to somebody's viewpoint then the decision is unpopular.
And so every decision that you make is going to be popular with some and unpopular with
others. So it depends on who you ask. () It depends on who is more vocal and things like
that. You know I, there is a huge body of people out there, I believe the silent majority who
are quite enjoy what gets done here. There is a study done by the UCT and they went out and
did a study on public opinions about the future status of the system and what people wanted
in their lives in the future and it was overwhelmingly in favour of conservation. And they
wanted it to be either the same or managed more strictly in conserving the environment
because that is what they came and lived here for. They came to live here because they
wanted to come and live in this environment. But those are not the people that jump up and
make the noise about gee wow you are doing such a great job and things are wonderful it is
so you know the people who disagree are always appear more abundant because they are
the ones that are making the noise. The silent majority are silent. So you need to go and find
some of that silent majority. (I6)

Talk shops
You know, when they, it really just generated into a talk shop. It did not really impacting on them.
Send somebody, went back to their farming. (I18)

Trust
Unless I see or hear what people do I actually dont trust them anymore. So I think it was very good
from that perspective to have a forum where there was discussion yes youre doing this well,
no youre not doing that perhaps as well as could be doing, but it gave me a huge sense of
comfort to know that there are these projects and there are good people doing it. (I34)
Where do they clean up first, this whole dedicated team? Jill Bunding-Venter, the property next to Jill
Bunding-Venter. Sorry thats the last place that should be cleaned. How can you apply the
resources to suit yourself? I dont know, just am I wrong or do I just think differently? If thats
your responsibility surely you clean up other peoples mess first. I dont know, maybe I just
think differently. (I34)
Not only that, but they, although they took minutes, there was an official at the table at the meeting
who actually took minutes and were actually recorded. We had 10 people from Sedgefield
went up there and we all had questions and issues to raise and that was recorded by the
facilitator, but that was never made known to us that it all was recorded and in the end that
was lost and somehow all thrown away or something else like that. So the original policy with
which we were actually wanting to discuss with them just carried on and whatever you do with
Parks Board, they simply dont change by this particular policy when it comes to the how you

handle the river. Now that I think is what upsets people here. Theres no indication. Theres
no willingness on the part of Parks Board. Come out and actually engage with the people.
(I25)
Hulle gooi, daai man het vir my ges toe ek hom vra wat maak jy met dit vis wat jy nou by my gevat
het, toe s hy, hy gooi dit vir die vols, [onduidelik] die vols vreet ook maar vis, dan weet ek
[onduidelik] ek mag dit nie vang nie. (I30)
They are becoming more approachable but they had a bad reputation. If you please speak to people
in Sedgefield they would say oh well SANParks are a law onto themselves and do what they
feel like. (I36)
What happened after the 2003 storm is that our chairman was approached by SANParks, and
SANParks said dont fight as we will work together you work with us and we will sort these
things out. And he on our behalf said yes. And SANParks do nothing. They literally do
nothing. It is something that we have to talk about. () For that reason we get a good rating
on our estuary like this but the truth of the matter is that SANParks do zero, when I say zero I
mean zero, they actually dont do anything. They dont come round, they dont check. (I2)
() they were really not doing anything about it. Admit the Municipality wasnt able to or not willing to
do much about it. Parks Board who were the main reason for the flooding, because they didnt
act quickly enough at the right time, to open the mouth. It wasnt the first time that it happened
either. They werent doing something about it either so () thought well bugger that weve got
to do something, because if it happens again. The villages of Montage, which you know
about, the Island village, they may very well flood again. (I25)
So ja I dont want to say Im on the warpath with SANParks but I dont think theyre managing the area
well at all, to be honest. The poaching, the ja I mean the lack of you know even mowing the
paths of the trails and cleaning in front of the bird hides. Only if you ask does it get done. Its
not difficult to have a roster and say some of this needs mowing once every two months, in
winter once every 6 months. (I34)
Ek het hier ouens gevang met hierdie oysters. Ek het hulle n tape gegee met alles op en ges okay
hou hulle dop en dan as dit weer gebeur dan roep julle ons. Ek roep hulle en s nee ons is
besig met perlemoen ons kan nie jou help nie. Ons het die ouens gehad, red handed, daarso
waar hulle sit en die oesters uittel en geld oorgee en () (I35)
() there was a change of management and when we started it was tremendous, we had lots of
cooperation and then the new management appeared that it was going to be fantastic new
brooms and all that, but it wasnt. You could never ever get any commitment or decisions or
anything like that from them. (I17)

Internally, I mean the one day I was there for a meeting and all the Rangers are sitting there in the
little back office. No its too hot to go out. Hello thats your job. Some days its going to rain,
some days its going to snow. Thats your job, youve signed up for this thing. Get out. Theres
no and its also very difficult when you can see in that environment they are actually all mates.
(I34)
So they say they were going to do the things and they say no were going to have a dozer on
permanent standby but they never do it. A promise is one thing and () is one thing, but if
you dont actually back them up with action, sword action you know, reliable management
then the whole thing falls flat. That happened, it happened before. (I25)
Jy kry die mense saans, want ons vang sommer deur die nag of laat nag. Dan kry jy ons mense wat
steel. Dan bel jy vir Davie-hulle en vir Tinus-hulle en vertel hulle dan word vir jou ges onthou
jy mors nog foongeld en daai rekening moet jy ook nog betaal en daar word vir jou ges ek
kom nou en dan kom hulle nooit nie. (I16)
En die ding is, van daai mense wat daar gaan luister na daai vergaderings, is sommer van hulle wat
vis steel, sommer van hulle, maar hulle sit in ons vergaderings, ons wat eerlik, nou sit hulle.
(I30)
So hes coming to give us a chat and you know if they need help Ive got a boat, I can volunteer and
use that. I go out and help them net sometimes. I havent done recently because Ive hurt my
shoulder. Last year we went and we netted and we counted fish and analyze them and then
they went off and some girl was doing her masters at Rhodes. So I think she got it, which is
quite nice. So Im quite happy to get involved in that sort of stuff. Even if Im just sitting there
doing the pictures. Ill do the photography while theyre working. (I36)