Monday, March 28, 2011
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Saturday, March 26, 2011
What the Hermanus public think about the water crisis
” What is being done about auto-sprinklers on properties owned by out-of-town folk?”
”What to do with extra money from increased tariffs?”
“Why punish ratepayers when consumption down by 10% through restrictions?”
”How much longer can local businesses go on absorbing ludicrous increases after worst winter in 20 yrs, by OM who don’t care about sustainability of business?”
”How to improve productivity of a bloated OM and reduce costs? “
”The poor ratepayer has to pay for the blunders irrespective of whether the OM was “building monuments for themselves” or other questionable motives”
”Through bad planning and hope that November rain would raise dam levels nothing done to make sure that borehole water could be linked to main supply”
"The fault lies squarely on the past and present management of Hermanus for the uncontrolled and irresponsible property development in the past decades
”More developments which place more and more pressure on our water resources"
”Councillors so out of touch … believing ratepayers have infinite source of money”
”Hopefully the ratepayers will remember this situation when next they vote
Hermanus water supply
Comment by Audit & Performance Committee in Annual report 2009-2010
Water Management
In recent times, the provision of water has presented a serious threat to the O M & is a potential risk. According to information provided to the Committee, the water reticulation systems in certain areas (Betty’s Bay and Voëlklip) have deteriorated to the extent that water losses of up to 60 % are experienced.
The current water crisis in the Greater Hermanus Area
also indicates that the strategic plan regarding water provision in the Overstrand needs urgent attention by Council and senior management. Particularly in the light of unpredictable weather patterns, the Audit Committee is of the opinion that this matter must be dealt with as a top
priority
Japan could be 'worse than Chernobyl'
"It would be lethal within a fairly short period of time".
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Overstrand councilor and renowned painter unveils a satiric masterpiece
Monday, March 21, 2011
What does Bantamsklip have in common with Fukushima and Olkiluoto in Finland
We would like to quote from the current EIR Draft document: Volume 1. Main Report, concerning the present status of Bantamsklip and the other preferred nuclear sites.
"After due consideration, Eskom decided not to pursue an application for the construction of more than one nuclear power station in this EIA. However, in line with Eskom’s intention to pursue up to 20 000 MW of nuclear power generating capacity, an application for the second nuclear power station may be submitted by Eskom soon after the submission of the Final Environmental Impact Report for Nuclear-1. This application is therefore progressing as per the original application for authorization of a single site."
It should be understood then, that Eskom tried unsuccessfully to apply for approval to build on all three sites, Duynefontein, Bantamsklip and Thyspunt, within one EIA. Now, far from celebrating Bantamsklip’s new ‘least preferred option’ we find the situation far worse than previously expected, and I quote further from the same document;
"Eskom proposes to construct a Nuclear Power Station, referred to as Nuclear-1, consisting of a combination of units with a total capacity 4 000 MW and associated infrastructure for location at one of three potential sites. Similar power stations to Nuclear-1 are proposed for the remaining two sites in the future. The area of the footprint assessed in this EIA makes provision for the potential future expansion of the power station, to allow for a total capacity of approximately 10 000 MW."
So Eskom seeks approval, for a 10.000 MW site (previously 4.000 MW) Now our dilemma, in accessing the impacts, is that the actual plants have not been specified yet, but the output generation has, and given that the latest Areva (the preferred manufacturer's) European Pressurized Reactor (EPR) currently under construction in Finland at OLKILUOTO, has an output of 1.600 MWe
Four EPR's will produce in order of approx. 6.400 MWe of output power, of the 10.000 MW asked for - per site, if they used the latest Avera EPR's. Heaven forbid, trying to generate the full 10.000 MW presently applied for, again, per site.What will the impacts of these proposed nuclear plants (together) be, on the terrestrial and marine environment adjacent to Bantamsklip, from the emmissions and thermal discharges of near boiling water, biocides scouring (chlorine), sediment and spoil transfer, Strontium 90 emissions and sub aquatic noise.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
No nuclear at Bantamsklip - International petition launched
Friday, March 11, 2011
The Save Bantamsklip Association applies for UNESCO World Heritage Site consideration
COMMENTARY ARTICLE
30.10.11
By John Williams
Is Bantamsklip and Dyer Island worthy of a UNESCO World Heritage Site status?
The Save Bantamsklip Association committee has decided to motivate a submission to the South African World Heritage Advisory Committee for the recommendation of the Bantamsklip coastal plains and limestone hills of Groot Hagelkraal, together with the Dyer Island marine complex, to be considered worthy of a UNESCO World Heritage Site application. Its chairman, John Williams, says the association has been gathering information, which indicates that the Agulhas bioregion is founded, not only on the ancient human landscape of Middle Stone Age (Strandloper) Later Stone Age (San) and of the Chainoukwa Khoikhoi pastoral people, but on major centers of biodiversity and endemism.
On closer examination, the Agulhas bioregion hosts the greatest number of South African marine endemics found on the South African coast, including sparid reef fish, octocorals and algae and is a nursing ground for many endemic and pelagic fish species. The coastline is seen to constitute an overlap zone with the mixing area of two currents, the Agulhas and Benguela and in conservation planning terms, is widely recognized as an independent province and bioregion. The Agulhas Biozone (coastal and marine areas containing Bantamsklip and Dyer Island) scores high on the threatened coastal lists and is gaining recognition as a priority area, and in the case of Dyer Island, is a known, ‘irreplaceable category, within the Marine Protected Area (MPA) planning strategy and recommendation studies. Bantamsklip and Groot Hagelkraal are both a registered SA Nature Foundation Natural Heritage Site (No: 72) and a registered Historical Monument.
Mr Williams went on further to say that present research indicates that Groot Hagelkraal farm harbours over 800 plant species, including 22 Red Data species of Agulhas Plain endemics, of which six are entirely restricted to the farm itself. Most of the endemics are associated with limestone soils. Rare and endemic species are often clustered in so-called hot-spots. Such a concentration of endemic plants is without parallel, not only elsewhere in the Cape Floristic Region, but also in the world. According to Professor Cowling of Nelson Mandela University, the property ranks as the most extreme concentration of "point endemism" recorded anywhere in the world, and represents the foremost conservation priority in the Cape Floristic Region and is regarded as the world’s "hottest" of biodiversity hot spots.
Most of these discoveries have been due to the seminal work of Prof Richard Cowling.
Contact is being made with the South African World Heritage Advisory Committee.
For further information of this initiative and of the nuclear power station threat to Bantamsklip go to: www.savebantamsklip.org
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Stanford Conservation Trust and Mark Erwee rally community around Village Green heritage resource
Sunday, March 6, 2011
HERMANUS WATER CRISIS: THREAT OR OPPORTUNITY?
Is the Hermanus water crisis simply a money making opportunity for the Overstrand municipality?
Read on and see how the Overstrand residence are being fleeced by the bloated Overstrand municipality with a 176% increase in Water Infrastructure charges.
Is this proactive strategic planning or gross missmanagement?
The Auditor General notes that material losses, from water in the Overstrand Municipality amounted to R9 Million! The source of these losses were mainly unmetered connections in Hermanus, and broken and leaking pipes. Water (mis) management in Bettys Bay and Voelklip account for losses of up to 60%
The Audit Committee comments that water has become a major crisis in the Overstrand, a fact that The Hermanus Ratepayers Association pointed out to a scoffing Overstrand Council and Municipality in April 2005!
Of course, we have had a very dry summer, so what has the OM done? Because of the dangerously low level of De Bos Dam (28% as of 06.03.11) there is indeed a need to conserve water, but conserving water reduces Municipal income and putting up the price of water does not solve the water shortage problem. What it does though is to feed the exorbitantly high municipal operating cost!
According to the OM in December 2010 there was a 25% decrease in the water sold at the then rate of R7.385 per kilo litre that resulted in a loss of R34.040 per day! But then in January 2011 with the tariff hiked to R9.60 per kilo litre and despite a drop of 30% in the volume of water sold, hey presto, the revenue was R1.110m for January – an improvement from December – but still a loss of R14.800 per day – equivalent to R444.000 per month before restrictions were imposed.
Because the OM says ‘the tariff acts as a catalyst for water saving and simultaneously prevents a huge financial loss to the municipality’.
SO EXPECT FURTHER INCREASES with enforcement of Restriction Tariff 2 at R11.82/Kl so OM can balance its books at the ratepayers expense!
What we are being charged for water and why should be a major concern to voters in the next up coming election. We pay more than double what Mossel Bay does for their water despite Mossel Bay having an expensive (implied) desalination plant.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Hermanus urban renewal and aethetics - dont leave it in this municipalities hands!
Friday, March 4, 2011
Hermanus heritage and sense of place destroyed by signage pollution
You can download the Draft Signage Bylaw document (click on signage window in right column) and check it out. This bylaw 'shall come into operation on the date of publication thereof in the Provincial Gazette'
Anyone concerned with the sickening sight of Hermanus looking like a patchwork 'supermaket specials insert' should follow this process very carefully.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Hermanus lagoon health hazard for International yachting and windsurfing events
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
WHO'S DWELLING ON THE PAST?
Latest Noseweek article chips away further at the what is now being seen as nothing less than old NP/military networks in DA sheepskins, ruling the Overstrand. During the spat between Mike Stakmire and the new Hermanus Mayor Nicolett Botha Guthrie, she pointedly stated, in a telephone conversation, that 'I still have my security contacts'
Read the most recent background to the growing ground swell support for the Schulphoek community land.
Noseweek 137 March 2011
We’ve written about Schulphoek before – the appalling decision of the Overstrand Municipality in Hermanus to sell land adjacent to Zwelihle township to facilitation company Rabcav to develop an upmarket seaside estate that will deprive Zwelihle residents of access to the sea, while delivering on none of the promises made in the consultation process.
After numerous objections had been lodged, DA Western Cape Local Government MEC Anton Bredell “investigated” and concluded that the deal was kosher, as was the highly suspect underlying agreement between the municipality and Rabcav.
Betty’s Bay resident and DA supporter Mike Stakemire wrote to Bredell, with a copy to new Overstrand mayor Nicolette Botha-Guthrie. Stakemire recorded his “strongest objection” to the deal, questioned the giveaway price, the “embedded status” of Rabcav, the lack of a tender process, and the blocking of access to the sea.
Bredell didn’t respond, leaving it to greenhorn Botha-Guthrie to try her skills at shrugging off inconvenient questions. She chose the old tried and tested technique of her Nat predecessors:“Ek’s die baas, slimmer as jy, so fokof met jou vrae."
Stakemire reminded her that three high-powered lawyers (former Supreme Court of Appeal Judge Johan Conradie, Advocate Gys Hofmeyr and attorney Joe Brink) had written a legal opinion that concluded that the underlying agreement between the municipality and Rabcav was invalid (thus making the Schulphoek deal invalid), and asking whether Bredell had been shown this opinion.
Botha-Guthrie responded much as before: “The fact that you are a ratepayer of this Municipality obviously entitles you to have legitimate access to certain information... however I fail to see how you are an affected party.”
She went on to say a lot more: that the legal opinion was irrelevant because it related to a development other than Schulphoek and therefore could not possibly “have the effect of attacking the legitimacy of the Schulphoek contract”; that the municipality had obtained its own legal opinion that said the Rabcav agreement was binding; that “the documents” (still not specified) were “all” made available to the team appointed by MEC Bredell; that she has a “serious problem if we continue to dabble with events of the past whereas we are actively managing the future”; that Noseweek is not interested in the truth and has on occasions published “false and slanderous statements affecting the political and management structure of this municipality”; that her municipality is honourable and that “if you do not agree with this, this is a matter you have to live with and I trust you can now rest assured that the affairs of this Municipality are in safe and competent hands.”
Stakemire responded, pointing out that Botha-Guthrie had clearly not studied the legal opinion which concluded that the Rabcav agreement was “invalid and unenforceable”. He could also have pointed out that Judge Conradie expressly said the opinion could well be relevant to the Schulphoek deal. And that it’s outrageous for a municipality to prefer a one-page unreasoned opinion from a small-town attorney (for that, as far as we can tell, is what the municipality relied on) over the opinion of Judge Conradie and co. Or that her answer does not actually confirm that the opinion was given to Bredell.
Or that the “let’s-not-dwell-on-the-past-but-rather-look-forward” thing, like
patriotism, is so often the refuge of the scoundrel.