Pulping the South:
Industrial Tree Plantations in the World Paper Economy
Ricardo Carrere and Larry Lohmann

Back to Book Index

Chapter 10

South Africa:
A Fibre Exporter with Few Forests

South Africa's native forests, which probably never occupied more than one per cent of the surface area of the country (Cooper 1990), shrank significantly following the arrival of European colonisers, mainly due to overexploitation in the 19th century. Today only between 200,000 (Bethlehem 1994) and 300,000 (Dudley 1992) hectares remain, and these continue to be degraded _ despite the fact that the majority are within protected areas _ as a result of poor land use strategies (Dudley 1992).

Though South Africa lacks extensive natural forests, the country has become a significant exporter of forest products from large plantations of pine and eucalyptus established as the result of a long process of state intervention. The first plantations date from 1890 (Bethlehem 1994), though eucalyptus had been introduced as early as 1807 (FAO 1981). Between 1890 and 1900, the majority of these plantations were small and were aimed at satisfying the needs of local communities.

Large plantations began to appear at the beginning of the 20th century, established mainly by the state and aimed at the production of timber for industry. Wood shortages resulting from supply difficulties during the First World War encouraged the government to embark upon more intense tree plantation programmes, initially to achieve self-sufficiency in timber. The post-war depression, along with unemployment in the poorer sections of white society and among soldiers returning from the battlefields, gave the government additional incentives to undertake large-scale afforestation (Bethlehem 1994). The main species used were exotic pines (particularly Pinus patula and P. radiata), eucalyptus (mainly E. globulus) and Australian acacias. By 1923 the country boasted 140,000 hectares of acacia, 65,000 of eucalyptus and 35,000 of pine (van der Zel 1990).

From 1920 to 1960, the state became the main national forester, with private industry occupying a secondary role (Bethlehem 1994). In the 1960s, however, the industry began to accelerate tree cultivation. At present the country has almost 1.5 million hectares of plantations almost equally divided between softwoods and hardwoods. Some 73.5 per cent of these are private property, of which 58 per cent belong to forestry companies. The three largest companies (Mondi; Sappi; and Hunt, Leuchars & Hepburn) own 35 per cent, 30 per cent and 20 per cent of the total area in private hands.

The state, meanwhile, owns 26.5 per cent of the planted area, which is covered mainly by pine (the government holds 44 per cent of total pine plantations) with a lower percentage of eucalyptus and other hardwoods. Private and state-owned plantations alike are concentrated in Transvaal (49 per cent), Natal (40.6 per cent) and the Cape (10.4 per cent) (Bethlehem 1994).

In the last few years, more hardwoods (particularly eucalyptus) have been planted than pines, in line with worldwide trends in market pulp (see Table 10.1). The percentage of eucalyptus in plantations accordingly climbed from 31 to 40 per cent between 1982 and 1992. The total area of eucalyptus as of 1989-90 was 538,000 hectares, mainly E. grandis. Annual yields in 1986-7 were estimated to be 19.3 cubic metres per hectare for E. grandis and 11.9 cubic metres per hectare for other species (Pandey 1992).

TABLE 10.1
New plantations in South Africa (hectares)

table under construction

Source: van der Zel 1990.

South African plantations are managed according to the final destiny of the timber. Some 38 per cent produce pulpwood, 35 per cent sawlogs and 22 per cent mining timber. However, given that there is a dwindling market for mining timber, a large proportion of these plantations may be turned over to wood chip production for export (Bethlehem 1994). Assuming that most plantations supplying the sawlog industry are in state hands, we can conclude that the majority of private industrial plantations are aimed at the pulpwood market, both national and foreign, and that it is largely private plantations which have converted the country into a significant pulp fibre exporter (Shell/WWF 1993).

During the 1980s, South Africa became a net exporter of forest products. Whereas in 1981 exports were worth 300 million rand and imports 400 million rand, in 1988 the figures were R1.5 billion and R650 million respectively (Edwards 1990). In that year forestry production came fourth in the list of national non-mineral exports (University of Natal 1990). In 1991, 56 per cent of total roundwood sold was pulpwood, and pulp and paper exports made up 40 per cent of the total demand for pulpwood (Bethlehem 1994).

The export of wood chips to Asian countries, especially Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, has grown markedly since it began in 1970. In 1993 1.2 million tons of chips were exported, over 97 per cent to Japan, and if the target export total of two million tons is reached by the end of the decade, the country will become one of the three leading world wood chip shippers (Bethlehem 1994, FAO 1994). In 1993, the country also exported 340,000 to 550,000 tonnes of pulp (FAO 1994, PPI 8.1995), overwhelmingly to the North, with Japan, Austria, the US and Italy being leading importers.

The South African industry publicises itself as having established itself through its own initiative and resources, with little or no state support (Edwards 1990). In truth, the state has not only played a pioneering role in establishing plantations and developing sawlog industries, but has also, for many decades, 'favoured the commercial forestry sector by assisting it with land use planning, training extension officers and providing financial support as well as research and development services' (Fakir 1994). The state, moreover, has already taken the first steps to privatize the remainder of the plantation sector (Bethlehem 1994). Making the most of this subsidized foundation, the industry is now expanding.

The two top South African companies, Sappi and Mondi, are also moving overseas. Sappi has bought Germany's Hannover Papier and the US's

S. D. Warren (the world's leading coated lignin-free paper manufacturer), as well as five paper mills in the UK. It also holds 49 per cent of the shares of the Usutu Pulpwood Company in Swaziland, whose pine plantations and kraft pulp mill cover more than 50,000 hectares (the UK's Commonwealth Development Corporation and the Swazi government control the rest) (Beer 1995, Shell/WWF 1993). Sappi has also entered into a joint venture with Mozambique's government and two local companies to develop a major eucalyptus plantation across the border (Pollett and Mander 1995). Mondi, meanwhile, holds interests in the UK and Portugal (PPI 7.1995).

A lack of firewood in a sea of trees

In an astonishing paradox, South Africa's supposedly 'successful' model of plantation development nevertheless fails to meet the needs of the third of the national population who depend on firewood as their main source of energy. It is estimated that around 12 million people living in rural areas use more than seven million cubic metres of wood per year (University of Natal 1990). In the face of increasingly serious shortages, rural people are being forced to collect firewood from native woods and scrublands, degrading what scarce patches of forest remain in the country.

Even communities hemmed in by enormous plantations often do not have enough wood to meet their basic energy needs. Company trees are protected by a forest police service, and while local people may be able to scrounge a few fallen branches, even this is illegal. In one community in Natal where Mondi planted tree farms in 1990, women and older daughters are forced, every two to three days, to walk kilometres across the valley and up hills to neighbouring farms to collect wood which they carry back to their homes balanced on their heads. 'Some of the hills are so steep my knees shiver as I climb them' said one woman. 'And on the way down, I feel my bones clicking with tiredness.' 'There is no wood left for cooking,' another villager stated. 'The tree people burnt our forests and now we walk very far to fetch wood for fires. But it's running out.' Added a third: 'It's a cold day today, but you see we have no fire. There just isn't enough wood any more' (Hornby 1994a). As Lael Bethlehem (1994), observes, 'This situation is unacceptable, both in terms of rural development and environmental protection. There is an urgent need for the development of sustainable forms of forestry which are able to provide fuel to rural people.'

More power to the powerful

Large forestry businesses have brought about substantial changes in power relations in rural areas and in control over land and other natural resources. Historically, 'commercial forestry has often been to the detriment of black people in rural areas, as plantations have generally involved forced removals' (ANC 1994). Today, vast tracts of farm holdings are reportedly being bought up by large timber firms for planting to commercial tree species at prices which are sometimes nearly double the market value of the land (Schulze 1990).

Such purchases are apparently motivated by corporations' plans to achieve control over scarce land, and to assure themselves of a constant supply of raw material (Dobson 1990). These plans have been made more urgent by the fall of apartheid. In the new South Africa, the previously repressed majority's claims on land may result in less land being available for plantations, so big companies are rushing to secure holdings and to plant them with trees as quickly as they can. This policy is pursued not only by the forestry industry but also by a growing number of landlords who by this means hope to increase the value of their land and thus make it more difficult for the government to expropriate it, since the constitution specifies that expropriations must be justly compensated (Fakir 1994). This, of course, reduces the amount of land the state can redistribute under its land reform programme and thus has a direct negative impact on the nation's rural poor.

Jobs, work and migration

Although figures vary, in general it can be stated that the timber business generates less employment per unit of land than the agricultural sector. For example, according to Fourie's (1990) surveys, agriculture employs one worker per 20-25 hectares of land, while the timber sector requires only one every 35 hectares. Sugar cane producers, meanwhile, claim to employ one worker every five hectares, while insisting that forestry provides only one job per 18 hectares of plantation, and accuse large forestry businesses of creating 'socioeconomic deserts' (Hudson 1990).

The advance of the timber business also brings about changes in welfare and community life. For every 150-200 hectares dedicated to sugar cane, for example, there exists, according to the Cane Growers' Association, a family farm employing some 40 people, providing them with housing, schooling, medical care and retirement benefits. Such units form the basis of coherent functioning rural communities, as they support commerce, villages and towns, educational establishments, security, medical care and other social services. Timber companies, on the other hand, consolidate a number of estates under one manager, reducing employment opportunities by 70 percent. This leads to migration to cities, which in turn hastens the disintegration of rural communities and reduces the number and quality of services offered to those who remain in the area (Hudson 1990, Fourie 1990).

Subsistence farmers, too, experience a decline in the quality of life following the planting of large forest monocrops. In the most common scenario, people living on a farm offer their labour to a white landowner in exchange for the right to plant their own crops and keep livestock. Even though many such farmers are descendants of people who had occupied the land before the colonisers arrived, they have no legal title to it. When landowners sell out to timber companies, such farmers' circumstances change dramatically. The companies buy the land to plant trees and, in the face of strong resistance, try to oust families who have lived there for generations. In some cases the firms and the local people come to an agreement, but dispossession is still one of the most difficult social problems created by forestry development (Hornby 1994b). Land disputes are likely to be exacerbated when dispossessed victims of apartheid attempt to reoccupy land now covered by timber plantations (Bethlehem 1994).

Working conditions on plantations are far from adequate. First, the sector is marked by a low level of unionization, and many businesses still refuse to deal with worker organisations. Most plantations are 'located in conservative rural areas, where a racist and authoritarian culture often prevails. On state forests in particular, a coercive management style is common' (Zikalala 1992, cited in Bethlehem 1994). Second, plantations are dispersed widely across the country, creating great organisational difficulties for existing unions.

Large companies, moreover, have lately reduced permanent staff and encouraged the development of small subcontracting businesses to carry out tasks from planting to harvesting. This is claimed to be the result of a 'desire to see the establishment of a strong and viable informal sector serving the industry, and to move away from the concept of "paternalism" towards labour' (Edwards 1990). In reality, however, large firms are trying to lower labour costs in an industry in which levels of mechanisation are very low and in which 45-50 per cent of the cost of timber production prior to transportation consists of wages. It is estimated that around 30 per cent of forestry tasks are currently carried out by subcontractors, with this figure rising to 60 per cent at harvest time (Bethlehem 1994).

In addition to drawing wages far lower than those of regular company employees, contract workers receive fewer housing, education and pension benefits. In one case, workers were dismissed by a company and hired by subcontractors at 33 per cent lower pay for 20 per cent longer hours. Elsewhere, salary cuts of up to 75 per cent have been reported. Contract work is also more seasonal and less secure than standard employment (Bethlehem 1994).

Yet even for permanent employees of the large plantation companies, working conditions and levels of pay _ with a few exceptions _ leave much to be desired. Salaries are low, with an average working day stretching to nine strenuous hours. Companies provide workers with housing in either family units or single-sex accommodation, where conditions have been described as 'appalling' (Zikalala 1992, cited in Bethlehem 1994). Women are given the worst-paid tasks, many of which _ such as bark stripping, planting and weeding _ are extremely wearing and are associated with a wide variety of health problems (Bethlehem 1994). Spraying paraquat _ a notorious herbicide manufactured by the UK-based firm Zeneca Agrochemicals and banned in many countries _ is regarded as 'lighter work' and is mostly left to younger women employees (EJNF 1995).

Some observers expect that the forest industry will use the 'agri-villages' which are to be financed by the government's new land reform programme as subsidized dumping grounds for redundant labour. Thus, just as under apartheid, bantustans absorbed surplus labour from agriculture as it became more commercialized and capitalized, so agri-villages may become rural slums created, in part, by the expansion of the plantation sector (Hallowes 1995).

Changes in rural lifestyles

Large-scale planting of pulpwood trees in South Africa has also had other far-reaching effects on rural livelihood and lifestyle:

* Pastoralists have been deprived of vast areas of grasslands, including the Kwazulu area (University of Natal 1990).

* It has become more difficult for farmers, too, to raise livestock for meat and milk or for sale, and to thatch houses, following the conversion of grasslands into plantations.

* Reeds needed for making mats or cords used for roofing or trays have disappeared after plantations have caused small watercourses to dry up.

* When workers are expelled from farms, they can no longer plant crops or raise chickens, and poverty and malnutrition increases. 'We cry because our children have no clothes and no shoes,' said one villager. '[L]ife has been difficult since the trees came' (Hornby 1994a).

* People have been forced against their will to live in a new and threatening environment. In the most forested zones, nearly all roads pass through plantations at some point. This unfamiliar landscape inspires fear of 'wild animals' such as snakes, wild pigs, lions and other unknowns (Hornby 1994a).

* Fire has increasingly threatened the lives and livelihoods of rural inhabitants (Dobson 1990).

Water: a scarce and disputed resource

While the director of South Africa's Forest Owners Association, like his counterparts elsewhere, has declared that he does not wish to become embroiled in the 'emotive' issues of environmental conservation (Edwards 1990), the effects plantations have on water and biodiversity are of growing concern to many South Africans. The country's large-scale tree monocrops have recently been dubbed 'biological deserts' and a 'green cancer' (Dobson 1990, Edwards 1990).

The area of greatest environmental concern has traditionally been water. In South Africa, unlike most other countries, both opponents and supporters of timber plantations accept that plantations have a big impact on water resources. This consensus is due largely to the fact that, as a result of the relative aridity of the country, which receives an average rainfall of only 444 millimetres per year (van der Zel 1990), a great deal of scientific work has been carried out on the subject. Studies were initiated as far back as 1923, and the first catchment experiments were started in 1940 to monitor how Pinus radiata plantations affected hydrological systems. These experiments _ and others started in 1945, 1955 and 1970 in other catchments _ have gained South African catchment hydrology a world reputation.

One finding of particular importance is that, in South Africa, large-scale industrial plantations consume a greater amount of water than shorter vegetation types such as scrub, herbs and grasses (Le Roux 1990). In one case, pine trees were found to consume 1,080 millimetres of water and grasslands 850 (van der Zel 1985, cited in Le Roux 1990). In 1982, van der Zel proved that in one area of grasslands with 1,000 millimetres of annual rainfall and a runoff of 200, afforestation reduced runoff by half. A six-hectare tree plantation in this area, therefore, would reduce runoff to an extent equivalent to the water required by one hectare of irrigated wheat (Le Roux 1990).

Groundwater as well as surface water is affected. Trees tend to extract water from deeper layers within the soil than do grasses, then dispersing it through evapotranspiration (Fourie 1990). Streams and wetlands fed by grasslands can thus be endangered by plantations.

South African research on catchment hydrology under tree crops led eventually to the enactment of the 1972 Afforestation Permit System (van der Zel 1990). This system established limits on the area to be afforested in each catchment area, based on accumulated data showing how plantations had already modified the local hydrology. Each catchment and sub-catchment area was categorised, with each class being allowed a certain percentage of forest cover. In Category I, no planting is allowed. In Category II (where water scarcity problems already exist), only a limited area is allowed to be planted, and the planted area must not cause mean annual runoff to decline by more that five per cent. The rest of the country falls into Category III, where plantations must not cause annual runoff to decline by more than ten per cent (van der Zel 1990). This system seeks to spread the impacts of runoff reduction more homogeneously across several sub-catchment areas.

Yet even with this system in place, water problems remain, and many water users _ particularly in agriculture _ are demanding improve-ments. The Natal Agricultural Union, for example, is calling for modifications to the current permit system, claiming that 'large scale afforestation of river basins is having a detrimental effect on the hydrological cycle of many of Natal's rivers and it is creating hardships for riparian farmers downstream' (Fourie 1990). The director of the Wildlife Society of South Africa states that streams which once carried perennial water before afforestation have been converted into dry watercourses or streams with erratic flow.

. . . Downstream users have been adversely affected by such programmes. Life-forms dependent upon these streams have disappeared (Cooper 1990).

Other critics point out that the 1972 data on which the Afforestation Permit System was based are no longer valid. New species are being planted, and new varieties and clones with far faster rates of growth and water use have also been developed (Bethlehem 1994). In addition, commentators have recommended that the system be more finely tuned to each individual catchment area. This would involve barring tree crops which reduce runoff by more than ten per cent not only from catchment areas as wholes, but from subdivisions within them as well (Fourie 1990). The system is also being asked to take into account the impacts of afforestation on biodiversity, scenic beauty, soils, and so on. It is claimed that in many cases the current rules are being broken because of a lack of effective controls _ especially by the state's own companies (Bethlehem 1994).

Biodiversity in danger

Industrial pulpwood plantations affect biodiversity in South Africa in many ways. Localised impacts are generated by the trees themselves. Generalised effects result from plantation management and dispersal of seeds from plantation trees. Studies in Natal show that 236 bird, 97 reptile, 57 amphibian, 55 mammal and 13 fish species will be affected, to a greater or lesser degree, by future plantation development. Among these are several endangered species: 24 birds, ten mammals, six reptiles, two fishes and an amphibian (Porter 1990). None of these impacts have been taken into account in current regulations, which consider only the hydrological effects of plantations.

One of the most widespread threats plantations pose to biodiversity relates to the way they alter the relationship between fire and the natural landscape. First, fires in extensive plantation blocks are nearly impossible to control once they have started. Such fires not only kill off species which have adapted themselves to life in plantations, but also affect the organic layer of the soil, its microfauna, the infiltration and runoff of water, and so on. In attempts to prevent these fires, commercial foresters set controlled fires annually in the firebreak zones, generally located in botanically sensitive areas which are home to endangered native species (Porter 1990).

Since the law prohibits controlled burning between July and October due to the risk of fires getting out of control, preventive burning of natural vegetation is done in the wetter spring and summer months. These controlled fires have adverse effects on both native flora and native fauna, especially as they coincide with the plant growth season and the period of greatest reproductive activity among invertebrate, bird and rodent species. Such fires destroy animals' food supplies (leaves, grasses, flowers, seeds, nectar, pollen, and so on), niches where they live and breed, and cover that provides a refuge from predators (Porter 1990).

Agrochemicals used on plantations also have a severe effect on biodiversity. Included are a wide range of weed-killers such as Garlon (triclopyr, manufactured by Dow Chemicals), Tordon (picrotam, also a Dow product), Gramoxone (produced by ICI) and Roundup (glyphosate from Monsanto), which are generally applied in the first three years of a plantation cycle and again at the time of final felling. Insecticides, meanwhile, are used to combat wattle bag worm, pine woolly aphid, and leaf-cutting ants, which attack the acacias and pines. Rounding out the cocktail of industrial poisons used on pulpwood plantations are rodent control products such as Storm, Finale and Rattex. Plantation managers often also hunt grey duikers and bushbucks and set traps for porcupines and Samango monkeys, which are an endangered species (Porter 1990).

Apart from the above impacts, large industrial plantations affect biodiversity in ecosystems such as grasslands, wetlands and native forests.

Grasslands

Grasslands support a wide variety of native flora and constitute the sole habitat of numerous animal species. They are home to the blue swallow, the most endangered national bird species, whose breeding areas coincide with many of the main plantation zones. Other species such as the Oribi antelope, the Stanley bustard, the blue crane, the bald ibis and many other threatened animals also depend on the large areas of natural grasslands which are disappearing under plantations (Cooper 1990).

Plantations also affect a great number of other less charismatic species, which are nonetheless just as important in grassland ecosystems. Grasshoppers, for instance, are important as indicator species, as they have very specific habitat requirements. Studies in Natal revealed that exotic pine plantations had effects on communities of 26 regional grasshopper species, even in areas relatively far from the treeline (Sanways and Moore 1991, cited in Barnett and Juniper 1992).

Several grassland plant species are also in danger of disappearing, including some used locally for straw roofing and medicine. Given that pulpwood plantations have been established without the necessary baseline studies having been done, many species may have already become extinct without anyone having become aware of the fact (Bainbridge 1990).

Wetlands

By reducing runoff and groundwater supplies through water consumption higher than that of the natural grasslands, plantations also indirectly affect wetlands. Especially in the dry season or in periods of prolonged drought, species which depend on an aquatic medium for their survival can be deprived of water and disappear (Porter 1990, Cooper 1990).

Among the species affected is the wattled crane, which requires large areas of wetland to nest and extensive neighbouring grasslands for the raising of its young. The plantations _ which simultaneously take over the grasslands and dessicate wetlands _ have been responsible for the disappearance of several nesting sites of this species, increasing the threat of its extinction. Other aquatic flora and fauna are affected when debris from felling washes into watercourses, releasing toxic organic compounds like tannin. In other cases, felled trees and waste from felling block watercourses, driving out species which cannot adapt (Porter 1990).

Native forests

South Africa's scarce existing indigenous forests are being damaged by pulpwood plantations in several ways. Most importantly, exotic trees are being planted right up to the margins of native forests. This results in the destruction of the ecotone (the area where grasslands and forests meet), which is an important habitat for both woodland and grassland fauna. Plantation trees may also shade out trees on the edge of native forests (Cooper 1990), and when commercial plantations adjoining forests are logged, many felled trees fall onto the forest, causing extensive harm. Finally, plantations often result in non-plantation areas' being invaded by exotic species. Patula pine, black wattle and accompanying species, for example, are capable of replacing entire native ecosystems (Bainbridge 1990, Porter 1990).

Soil degradation

The impact of plantations on soils has thus far received little attention in South Africa. Current legislation appears to be based on the assumption that plantations improve the soil: unlike planters of agricultural crops, planters of forest crops are exempted from having to obtain permission from the appropriate state department before ploughing previously uncultivated land (Le Roux 1990). Nevertheless, notable soil losses have been observed during the period between initial planting and canopy formation. These losses have become more serious over recent years as planters have begun to act on studies which conclude that the more intensively soils are prepared prior to planting, the faster trees will grow. The resulting increase in erosion has eventually led to the promulgation of conservation rules for the planting period. However, these guidelines still fall far short of dealing with the whole problem and only apply to slopes of over 20 per cent (Le Roux 1990).

Erosion is also caused by roads within plantations and by extraction methods. As a result, soil is lost both when a plantation is established and when it is harvested. To this is added the damage caused by disking and clean cultivation of even the most fragile soils in firebreaks _ a practice which is required by insurance companies (Le Roux 1990, Porter 1990).

Conclusions

South Africa offers an excellent example of a type of forest development which prioritises the interests of the powerful without taking into account the needs of the majority, meanwhile degrading the environment. Large sectors of the South African population need land, firewood and water to survive. What does afforestation offer which can satisfy these basic needs? Large timber monocrops occupy vast tracts of land and expel the rural population, who thereby lose access to the resources they subsist upon. Forced removals and rural-urban migration are one consequence.

The example of firewood shows perhaps more clearly than any other that forest development policy in South Africa does not even consider satisfying the needs of the majority. As noted above, a third of the South African population use wood as their primary source of energy. Common sense would seem to indicate that the satisfaction of this need should be the key element of any tree-planting policy. However, after years of intense afforestation, with 1.5 million hectares of land now given over to plantations, people have less wood available than before the process began.

For a country which must concern itself with water scarcity, it would also seem that water conservation should be an absolute priority. While the state has in fact taken hydrology into consideration, timber plantations, which generate such little value per hectare while consuming such vast quantities of water, do not seem, in the eyes of many South African observers, the most intelligent choice from a national point of view. Even if it is assumed that monospecific crops of exotic trees are necessary, there are still two possible options: large scale afforestation or the incorporation of tree planting into farming. Unfortunately, it is the first _ which generates worse social, economic and environmental damage _ which is still predominant.

However, there is still hope. The African National Congress's forestry policy clearly states that

The potential benefits in terms of fuelwood supplies, watershed management and the prevention of soil erosion, as well as other industries tree-planting could stimulate, have been overlooked. Forestry research has failed to focus on tree varieties which could be used for the purpose of social forestry . . . The ANC believes forestry can play an essential role in rural development through social forestry programmes. The design and implementation of these would be devised in collaboration with rural communities, and would seek to satisfy social, economic and environmental needs (ANC 1994).