Poverty, defined by Statistics South Africa as earning less than R300 a month, is a reality that many mountain communities struggle with.

Prof Geofrey Mukwada, Associate Professor in the Department of Geography on the UFS Qwaqwa Campus, also affiliated to the Afromontane Research Unit (ARU), published a number of articles on the mountain population in the Thabo Mofutsanyana District (the poorest district in the Free State province). In a research paper with postgraduate student Solomon Zondo, he specifically focuses on the value-chain analysis of the Witsieshoek conservation area and its environment. 

They looked at the inter-relationship between nature and the rural population and how the environment has changed as a result. For this largely poor community, the income generated from natural resources is an important source of livelihood. 

To earn a living, the community is pursuing several ways to generate an income. This has implications for both the mountain environment and the people in the area. 

Impacting the environment

Whether it is mining for sandstone, herding cattle or selling medicinal plants, all these activities have an ecological and socio-economic impact. 

A large percentage of the population in the Witsieshoek Community Conservation Area derives their income from livestock grazing. Cattle herding often leads to overgrazing – which results in soil erosion in the long term, preventing water from draining into the ground and depriving plants from much-needed moisture. Connected to the excessive removal of indigenous plants, is the spread of invasive species. As invasive trees and vegetation gulp up water, the severe impact of drought in the area is increasing.

Harvesting and selling medicinal plants to generate income for a sustainable livelihood also affect the surrounding environment. The mostly elderly ladies harvest and sell, among others, Arum lily and Pineapple lily for their medicinal properties and ornamental use. Harvesting these plants adds to the spread of invasive species, as they push away indigenous plants.

Small sandstone mining operations are another means to earn a living. Neither the customer, locally or outside the Witsieshoek area, nor the supplier, usually from Witsieshoek, is held accountable for the degradation of the environment. Careless mining not only results in a decline in ecosystem health, with scree from sandstone cutting littering the rangelands and the finer particles causing silt in rivers and dams (damaging any equipment used to extract water from rivers and dams); it also spoils pastures which locals depend on for their livelihood. 

Even with the 15% increase in tourism (2016), a living through the holiday industry is not always keeping the wolf from the door. According to Prof Mukwada, many literature sources have shown that tourism may fail to reduce poverty. During a study, respondents interviewed in the Clarens area indicated that they only receive wages during the busy months of the year (approximately 4–6 months). Many of the workers in Clarens and the Golden Gate Highlands National Park do not have easy access to chain stores, but only to small grocery stores where goods are much more expensive. Travelling to a town where they will pay less for groceries is costly, making it difficult to have the same standard of living as workers elsewhere.

“With the current situation, water insecurity is likely to worsen,” says Prof Mukwada.

Coming up with solutions

Is it possible to look for alternative livelihood sources? It is not easy to come up with simple solutions to the challenges. As Prof Mukwada explained, what might be a solution to one problem could have negative implications on another front. “One needs an integrated approach,” he says. 

In terms of tourism, one could consider training the locals in tourism-related skills, adequately equipping them with skills to increase their value. “Develop tourism that is inclusive and will benefit low-income earners who cannot invest in hotels and restaurants,” Prof Mukwada adds. 

And with a large number of people earning their income from herding, one can suggest that nearby, flatter land is made available to resettle communities, thus providing an alternative area for grazing. In flatter areas there is also less erosion. It is, however, key to determine whether the communities would be prepared to move to a new area.

Having a voice

He also believes that good relationships between industry, government, and the community are important to make a positive difference in the area. A platform is needed where the people’s limited voice will be heard in policy making. 

“The most effective way to find a solution is to listen to the people in the community. Give people the information and find out from them which of these options are possible within their local context. And do not prescribe. One needs to understand the community and its values,” he adds.

When there is understanding between the different role players and when the community has a voice, the park resources, if managed properly, have a chance to provide long-term sustainable benefits to the people of the area.