Biodiversity conservation of South Africa’s Wild Coast through the years : Exploring the tensions between western-style and local traditional conservation practices
Authors:   , De Villiers Deon 
Published: November 2021

The Transkei Wild Coast is a unique and diverse biophysical environment stretching some 280 kilometres between the Great Kei and Mtamvuna Rivers along South Africa’s eastern coastline. Its extensive indigenous forests were recognised for their biological and economic importance by the colonial government and granted protection from the late 1800s, with forced removal of indigenous people who resided within them. The state restricted and controlled the utilisation of the forest resources, particularly by Black people, through promulgation and enforcement of legislation. Similar conservation methods were employed for protection of the Wild Coast’s soils, grasslands and marine resources, usually without any consultation with local Black leadership or communities who relied upon these resources. Previous studies have focussed on the impacts of Western-style conservation legislation and the promulgation of protected areas on local people. These have suggested that local communities have been denied access to natural resources through a fences and fines approach, often accompanied by heavy-handed, strict law enforcement measures. Very little research has been conducted to document the actual reasons for and the history of conservation efforts along the Wild Coast. The aim of this study was to explore the history of natural resource management and conservation along the Wild Coast from a Western and African perspective, and to examine the conflicts that have arisen as a result thereof. The importance of utilisation of natural resources to sustain livelihoods and the conservation methods applied to protect these resources were examined, mainly by means of a literature review and face-to-face interviews with local traditional leaders and environmental managers. The successes, challenges and conflicts that resulted from conservation efforts were examined through detailed analysis of the conservation history of three case study areas: Dwesa-Cwebe, Hluleka and Mkambati nature reserves. The study concludes that traditional leaders, foresters and conservation managers have largely been ignored during previous research on management and conservation of the Wild Coast; however, they were very eager to express their views on this subject. The interviews revealed that traditional leaders and conservationists from each case study area want to protect the Wild Coast and its natural resources, albeit for different reasons. Conservationists recognise the importance of the region’s biodiversity and the need for protected areas, particularly where there is rich endemism such as at Mkambati and Dwesa-Cwebe. Traditional leaders recognise the potential for jobs for their people where protected areas preserve the aesthetic beauty of the coast and attract tourists. For them, employment opportunities are a priority, as is access to utilisation of natural resources to sustain livelihoods. The traditional customs and culture of the people living along the Wild Coast are also seen as being of critical importance. This has not been adequately considered by past conservation planners and managers, but traditional leaders express value in conserving the amaXhosa and amaMpondo way of life. Nowhere is this more evident than in relation to grazing land for cattle. Another significant finding is that the support shown by traditional leaders for conservation of the terrestrial environment is not necessarily mirrored when it comes to protection of marine resources. The Wild Coast has a rich variety of marine flora and fauna and a high percentage of endemic species. Local people have relied upon marine resources for sustenance, but conservationists acknowledge that access to these resources has historically been restricted without consultation with traditional leaders or local communities. It is concluded that these restrictions can be linked to many land claims on protected areas on the Wild Coast since 1994. While this study suggests that both traditional leaders and conservationists want to protect the Wild Coast and its natural resources, there is still mistrust based on a history of unjust forced removals from forests, restrictions on the use of natural resources through the manifestation of colonial and apartheid power, and broken promises relating to benefit sharing from proceeds of wildlife and tourism ventures, as well as those benefits linked to land claim settlement agreements in the post-apartheid era. The study concludes that, despite past conflicts relating to conservation management, the Wild Coast’s protected areas have widespread support amongst traditional leaders. There is agreement that co-management is the preferred option but the state has to assist in curbing lawlessness that threatens over-exploitation of natural resources. It is largely acknowledged by conservationists that local people should be permitted to sustainably use certain natural resources and that there have to be increased economic benefits from tourism. Although protected area managers cannot be expected to carry the responsibility of failed tourism models and economic ventures on nature reserves, this study found that they are often the only government officials available on the ground for traditional leaders and local communities to consult with. For co-management to be successful on the protected areas, regular communication about all matters pertaining to management is considered important. While it is accepted that traditional leaders no longer have the administrative powers that they historically possessed, the study found that they are still widely respected along the Wild Coast. It is therefore concluded that regular consultation between environmental managers and traditional leaders is essential for the future conservation of the Wild Coast.