16. We Fight them in the Air and on Land

. . . in the air

One day early in 2008, when Johan and I were drinking coffee in a Malmesbury coffee shop, he came upon an announcement of interest in the local newspaper. There was a presentation to be held at the Malmesbury library of a prospective aviation development to be built very close to us just outside the town limit. We were immediately concerned, envisaging noisy planes in our skies, and we set about informing friends in the area. On the appointed day a small group of us went to the meeting and were dismayed at what we learnt. The presentation described an estate of three hundred houses to be built near the turnoff to Joubertskloof just off the R302. Each house would have, besides a garage for a car, a hanger for a leisure plane. There was to be a long runway and a central building complex with a restaurant and other facilities, as well as additional hangars and fuel storage areas. Eventually, it was hoped, the estate could offer a border control point for entrance and exit to and from the country. We were horrified – estimation was of a hundred flights a day! We showed our dismay rather vociferously which was clearly not expected, and was certainly unwelcome.

The application process was at its early stages and six of us immediately got together to write strong opposition to it. Our objection was primarily on grounds of noise. We all knew from experience the effect of just one microlight shattering the peace. We realized this was going to be a long battle and we didn’t have funds to employ an environmental lawyer. However, we made an arrangement with one such lawyer, to assess our own proposed communications with province for a manageable fee.

Thus began a long and painstaking story. At every stage of the environmental process, we responded. Our opposition widened beyond that of noise to the disturbing visual effect of planes in the sky and disturbance of birdlife, particularly that of pelicans who fly in the area at specific times of the year. We strongly questioned the very dodgy economics of the project and disputed the notion that the complex would provide employment on any significant level. We queried the existence of the giant runway and opposed any possibility of a border point to come later. All of this was backed by fact with diagrams pertaining to flight paths and areas of impact. And every communication was looked at by our helpful lawyer, who made suggestions for changes to our arguments.

With the exception of a collaboration with P.S.I. (Paardeberg Sustainability Initiative) and the Paardeberg Conservation Organisation, we were pretty much on our own. No one in the town of Malmesbury took any interest in the development or its consequences. We also had no joy from the municipality who were in favour of the development – no doubt due to the increased rates that would accrue to the town fathers.
Finally after pushing the initiative back numerous times, the position was reached where the environmental assessment had run out of time, and an extension from Province had been applied for. It then just so happened that we read in the newspaper that the financier for the project had, quite apart from the aviation estate process, been arrested on charges of smuggling perlemoen (abalone). This finally made sense of the long runway and the border point. I immediately phoned province and informed the office of the minister of the environment of the impending case, and within a week the application for extended time was turned down. Although this final event had nothing to do with all of our preceding arguments, our opposition had stretched the process out to a point where the perlemoen case could hold sway. The whole saga was after many years at an end.

. . . and on the land

For some years we had been aware of sand mining in the Malmesbury area, but by two thousand and fifteen, when a farm close to us on the Joubertskloof road began mining sand, we came to see the threat that sand mining in the immediate area posed. Increasingly farmers sought the rapid high returns that mining sand could bring. Not only was the sand mining process disruptive of quiet country life but its effects on the soil and water permeation was negative.

All this came to a head when our neighbour Johan Smith proposed a sand mine right on our boundary. The mining would take the best part of a year and be very noisy and unsightly from every point on our farm. This would threaten our business which is founded on a peaceful beautiful environment. Further, huge sand removing trucks would clog up our narrow farm roads and make travel for ourselves and our guests a trial.

In order to fight this development we hired a lawyer and with his help, over the best part of a year, we mounted our opposition. We were finally successful and the department of mines did not grant a license to mine on Johan Smith’s farm. We were much relieved.

At the same time as we fought the sand mine on our border, a number of farmers were opposing sand mine developments on two farms on the other side of the Paardeberg. In response quite a large group of concerned farmers got together and employed the same lawyer that was fighting our particular case. Unfortunately objection to the sand mines was overturned and the case was lost. This was largely due to the fact that opposition to the mines from the department of Agriculture was not brought to bear on the issue, as it was claimed that their report had not come in timeously. Despite losing these cases it became clear to all that sand mining on the Paardeberg would draw powerful opposition, not least from the Department of Agriculture. No sand mining attempts on the mountain have occurred since this time.