|
|
MCSA Magaliesberg Section Email:
info@mag.mcsa.org.za
|
|
[Home] [Access] [Membership] [Activities] [Conservation] [Programme] [Newsletter] [Photos] [Library] [Contact us] |
|
|
Search & Rescue
Constitution of the Magaliesberg Section
Forms
for meet leaders & patrollers
Download
Weather reports
Your sky |
Conservation [Conservation principles] [Ecological Manners for Mountaineers] [The Magaliesberg: Ensuring a Future] One of the objectives of the MCSA is to initiate and support actions towards protecting the natural beauty and wilderness character of mountains and to promote their effective conservation management. The MCSA is the oldest conservation body in SA. The main playground of climbers and hikers in Gauteng is the Magaliesberg and this unique area therefore lies close to the heart of the Magaliesberg Section. The MCSA has been instrumental in the proclamation in 1977 of the Magaliesberg Nature Area which changed in 1994 to the Magaliesberg Protected Natural Environment. The MCSA owns and manages some of the kloofs in the Magaliesberg. The public have access via a permit system. The MCSA hereby shares this scarce wilderness resource with everybody and try to see it that it remains a wilderness to some extent. The MCSA (Magaliesberg Section) is a founder member of the Magaliesberg Protection Association. The Magaliesberg Protection Association's objectives are to foster and encourage the preservation of the Magaliesberg and to advise the authorities and others on matters of policy and planning in so far as it affects the Magaliesberg. Any individual or voluntary organisation who support these aims can join the MPA. Joint Conservation and Access Committee: MCSA (Magaliesberg and Johannesburg Sections)
OCTOBER 1995 (First draft by Bob Scholes - 1994) Ecological Manners for Mountaineers
OCTOBER 1995 (First draft by Bob Scholes - 1994) The Magaliesberg Ensuring a Future This document has been endorsed by the Directorate of Nature Conservation of the Gauteng Provincial Administration, the Magaliesberg Protection Association, the Magaliesberg Management Advisory Committee, the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, the Directorate of Resource Cconservation of the Department of Agriculture. This document (printed in the form of a booklet in 1995) was commissioned by the Mountain Club of South Africa (MCSA). It is an expression of the Club's concern to ensure the sustainability of the Magaliesberg mountain range, both in its bio-diversity as a unique ecosystem and as an important resource for the people who interact with it. The natural wealth of the Magaliesberg has meant that over time, its significance for different interest groups and stakeholders has varied. Understanding the different, and sometimes conflicting, interests in the area, is vital in trying to come to grips with the problems which threaten its conservation. It is also important to understand the reasons for the conflict in the area in order to develop workable solutions for a harmonious and sustainable relationship between the mountain and the people using it. To address this conflict successfully, it is of paramount importance that people who are affected by new management policies regarding the range are involved in the decision-making process. In fact, it was a lack of consultation with people, particularly land owners, by Government departments in the past, that led to much of the conflict that existed in the area. This document is part of a process of consultation. It aims to inform interested people of developments that affect the mountain and explain the reasons why the various groups are interested in the area. It also discussed responses to evolving government legislation for the protection of the area. Since the Magaliesberg mountain range falls within a statutory protected natural environment, a brief overview of the current legal status of the area is presented, with reference to recent constitutional and institutional changes. At the back of the booklet is a contact list should you wish to find out more or become involved in efforts to preserve the mountain. Only if all interest groups approach the Magaliesberg with a clear understanding not merely of their own needs, but of the needs of other groupings and those of the mountain itself, can a relationship of sustainable development and utilisation be maintained. Only under such conditions will farmers, local communities, land owners and day-visitors all be able to enjoy the natural wealth of the range: its resources, beauty and magical charm. The Magaliesberg itself will then continue to sustain a healthy and diverse ecosystem for many years to come. Why save the Magaliesberg? Few people realise the full extent of the natural wealth of the Magaliesberg mountain range. Listed below are some of the unique features of the area which explain why people have been so attracted to it. Kloofs One of the most attractive features of the range are its kloofs. Water running through the kloofs is filtered through rock strata, emerging in beautiful, crystal clear streams often flowing into rock pools and waterfalls. The climate of the kloofs is moderated by their northerly orientation and sheltered position, conditions which foster luxuriant flora and dense vegetation. While creating an ‘enchanted forest' for hikers and nature lovers, the trees of the slopes and kloofs of the Magaliesberg provide food and shelter to large numbers of animals. Vegetation Over 130 species of trees flourish throughout the range. The Transvaal beech or Boekenhout and Common Sugarbush serve a crucial role in binding the loose soil in which they grow. Mountain vegetation, apart from providing beauty, nourishment and shelter, is often also used in the preparation of traditional remedies. The common Coral Tree, for example, found in hot, dry areas, is credited with magical and medicinal properties. Only one or two species of the tree are able to grow on the cliff-faces; the Transvaal Milkplum or Stamvrug and the Wild Fig being particularly well adapted. Trees growing at the foot of the range and inside kloofs are able to benefit from the generous supply of water at the confluence of streams. They tend to be both more plentiful and larger than their counterparts growing in the harsher conditions higher up on the range. Animal Life The slopes of the mountain are inhabited by a vast and varied community of animals. Numerous mammal species, including antelopes, make their home in the range. Particularly common is the Mountain Reed Buck. Antbears are fairly widespread and warthogs can sometimes be found near the foot of slopes. Nocturnal creatures including the aardwolf, various bat species, Cape porcupines, striped polecats and black-backed jackals emerge at night to hunt or forage on the slopes. Brown hyenas can also occasionally be seen living in close association with people scavenging off farms in the area. Rodents make their home in the vegetation and underbrush - the common molerat, scrub hare, dormouse, pouched mouse, veld rat and squirrel, amongst them. Kloofs form an ideal habitat for leopards and although sitings are rare, several still inhabit the Magaliesberg. Most frequently seen however, are troops of chacma baboons and vervet monkeys. Apart from these animals other species to be found on cliff-faces are rock dassies, klipspringers, not to mention the occasional rock climber! Over 300 species of bird can also be spotted in the area. The most intensively studied cliff-nesting species is the Cape vulture. There are presently three colonies of the vulture in the Magaliesberg but their numbers are declining due to the reduction of naturally available food and an unnaturally high mortality rate from poisoning or shooting by farmers who incorrectly believe, that the birds prey on livestock. Also particularly valuable to the cliffs of the Magaliesberg are the approximately 16 pairs of Black eagle resident in the area. History and Pre-History The history of human society is also preserved in the annals of the mountain range. Evidence of Homo Sapiens' earliest relatives has been found in and around the Magaliesberg area. The hominids, Australopithecus robustus and Australopithecus africanus, were able to co-exist in relative harmony, occupying different niches in the Magaliesberg area. These early humans left behind them the testimony of their evolution in the form of tools and weapons, fashioned from wood and stone. Artefacts discovered at Wonderboom reveal it as a major centre for the manufacture of tools. The history of human impact on the Magaliesberg is as old as the history of humankind. But it is the relationship between modern day humans and the mountain which is a matter of more urgent concern. While the activities of early Homo Sapiens posed no threat to the sustainability of the mountain's natural environment, modern human society makes far greater demands upon its resources. Threats to the Conservation of the Magaliesberg It is the value of the Magaliesberg's resource base and the uniqueness of its bio-diversity that attracts people to the Magaliesberg. However, the continued and at times indiscriminate use of these resources for agricultural, mining, township development or recreational purposes, poses the greatest threat to the conservation of the area. Utilising the natural resources of the Magaliesberg: seeing both sides The mountain is clearly a vital resource not only to plants, birds and animals, but to people as well. Farmers depend upon the land's agricultural capacity for their livelihood. Much of the development activity that occurs in the area also provides people with employment. For the general public, the Magaliesberg offers the opportunity to escape to the peace and sanctuary of the mountains, only a short drive away from the stresses of city life. The needs of different interest groups have however, not always coincided, and the region has seen its share of conflict. The history of the management of the area has shown that the solution is not simply to prohibit any utilisation of the mountain's resources, in order to preserve the area. Many people are dependent upon these resources for their livelihood and it would be unwise and unjust simply to deny them access to the mountain. It is clear that what is needed is a sustainable balance which will allow for both the conservation and utilisation of resources of the range, in such a way that utilisation does not result in degradation. Utilisation of any resource will of necessity result in changes to the resource base. Depletion and renewal of resources is part of any life cycle or ecosystem. If human utilisation of natural resources can be undertaken in accordance with natural patterns of consumption and renewal, and within the limitations of the mountain's own resources and carrying capacity, it too can be part of a sustainable system. The challenge for human consumers is to find a balance which will allow for the extraction of natural resources from the mountain without irreparable damage to its capacity to support either its own ecosystems, or to replenish itself. Only if this is achieved, will the mountain continue to provide for future generations of people dependent upon its resources and its aesthetic value. Activities which have an impact on the Magaliesberg Some of the activities carried out in the Magaliesberg which are a source of conflict to different interest groups, include the following:
Mining
Agriculture
It must be added that over the years, most of the farmers in the area have become increasingly conservation-conscious, with many choosing to commit themselves to nature conservation on their own mountain farms. Several farms have even been registered as private nature reserves.
Recreation
As far back as 1965, in response to increased interest in the Magaliesberg by developers and the general public, the Department of Planning and the Environment recommended the establishment of a nature reserve between Pretoria and Rustenburg. This recommendation created tension amongst land owners, since it signalled a threat of expropriation and was furthermore made with no consultation with landowners. In 1974, following an intensive awareness campaign initiated by James Clarke, the Mountain Club of South Africa compiled a comprehensive report which detailed the natural and historical resources of the region, and supported Clarke's call to halt all development of the area, pending a co-ordinated, government conservation strategy. This initiative led to the formation of the Magaliesberg Protection Association (MPA) in the following year. The objectives of the MPA were to encourage the preservation of the mountain and to advise the authorities on matters of policy and planning in regard to the Magaliesberg. The MPA was instrumental in having the Magaliesberg declared a "Natural Area" in 1977. The Proclamation of the Magaliesberg "Nature Area" in 1977 On the 12th of August 1977, an area comprising approximately 30 000 hectares within the Magaliesberg, was declared a Natural Area in terms of the Physical Planning Act 88 of 1967. This Act introduced the concept of "Nature Areas" or Protected Natural Environments as they are now called in South African law. The idea that property rights, commonly regarded as absolute in South African law, would be restricted in the interest of public enjoyment, was a source of bitter tensions between authorities and landowners in the Magaliesberg area. Conservation-conscious landowners were concerned with the way in which the Act ironically tended to value a Nature Area in terms of its benefits and enjoyment for the public, rather than in view of its function in preserving and protecting natural habitats. Much of the conflict which was to follow stemmed from the fact that although 88% of the land in question was privately owned, no consultation was undertaken with affected landowners regarding, either the boundaries of the declared Nature Area, or the effect of the declaration upon ownership rights. In fact, the first time most of the landowners learned that a Nature Area had been reserved was when the proclamation was published in the Government Gazette in August 1977. To landowners, the proclamation was tantamount to expropriation of their land. This lack of consultation set the stage for years of conflict which was to follow between authorities and landowners. Whilst officials delayed with the regulation and implementation of the declaration of the area, landowners joined together to form the Magaliesberg Landowners Association, hoping to prevent the expropriation of the area and to demand a reduction in the size of the Nature Area so as to exclude arable land. The notion of expropriation of private land for a provincially owned nature reserved was opposed by the association, who proposed that a management board be established. This would include representatives from state departments, landowners and environmental organisations. The immediate effect of the reservation of the Magaliesberg Nature area, was that no-one could use the land for any purpose other than what it was being used for before the proclamation. A permit had to be granted in order to change the land use. This provision became known as the "freezing of land use" provision and it was at the centre of much legal controversy which was to follow. The Physical Planning Act did not make any provision for the management or control of nature areas, except that a permit had to be obtained to change land use. It was not even clear from the Act, from whom such permit could be obtained; nor were there any guidelines given as to how a permit application should be made. Thus, despite the formulation of an ad hoc Management committee in 1980, there was no real management of the area between 1977 and 1982. This was principally because no statutory mechanism for the control and management of the area had been provided for, and the fact that there continued to be very little consultation between the land owners and the authorities, whom the land owners perceived to be unacceptably dictatorial. The Environment Conservation Act of 1982 In 1982, control and management of Nature Areas was transferred to the Department of Environment Affairs in terms of the Environment Conservation Act 100 of 1982. This Act made provision for the Minister to appoint a Management Committee to advise him/her on the management and development of Nature Areas. Since the devolution of power to the Provincial Administrations, the practice became that the Administrator of the province established the committees. A management committee for the Magaliesberg Nature area was appointed by the administrator of the Transvaal in 1982, and remained in operation until November 1985. Although the committee comprised representatives of the land owners, the Magaliesberg Protection Association and other interested parties, did not make it clear what the exact role, functions or powers of the committee were, its main function in practice was to consider permit applications for any development of subdivision of land in the protected area. Due to the antagonistic relationship that had developed between the authorities and the land owners, permits were leniently considered. As a consequence, very little restriction was placed on development within the area during the period of office of the committee. One of the major tasks assigned to the management committee was to investigate the contentious issue of the boundaries of the Nature Area. An area of urgent concern to certain land owners was the fact that sections of their arable land had been included in the Nature Area, which the land owners felt undermined their ability to utilise their land fully. They were thus in favour of a reduction in the size of the area. Certain conservationists, including the Magaliesberg Protection Association, on the one hand, believed that the Nature Area required a buffer zone to protect the mountain. Contrary to the land owners' position, the working group appointed by the management committee, reported that arable land within the buffer zone should not be excluded from the Nature Area. As could be expected, without the land owners' co-operation, the committee was ineffective, and when the term of office of the committee expired in November 1985, no new management committee was appointed. In July 1986, the Minister of the Environment met with various land owners to discuss further the problem of the boundaries of the Nature Area. The Minister agreed to reduce the overall size of the Nature Area. The surveying of the area and a process of consultation with land owners and other interested parties began in 1986 and took almost a decade to complete. It was largely co-ordinated by a second management committee which was appointed in April 1987, under the chairmanship of the director of the Nature and Environmental Conservation Directorate of the then Transvaal Provincial Administration (TPA). One of the powers which the 1982 Environment Conservation Act granted to the Minister, was the power to issue directions for the conservation of the area, which he did in October 1986. The directions prohibited the building of structures and the subdivision of land within the area without the consent of the Administrator, acting on the advice of the management committee. The Environment Conservation Act of 1989 The management of Protected Natural Environments, as they are now called, by management advisory committees was continued by the 1989 Environment Conservation Act. Although the declaration of a Protected Natural Environment and the establishment of a management advisory committee now fall under one Act, the role, functions and powers of the committees have still not been clarified. The 1989 Act departs significantly from the 1982 Act, in its insistence upon consultation with landowners when a Protected Natural Environment is to be declared: It therefore precludes the kind of unilateral and undemocratic pronouncements of earlier legislation. In addition, the Act clarifies the requirements for establishing and managing these areas. Protected Natural Environments are no longer seen purely in terms of their recreational value to the general public but rather in terms of the need to preserve biotic diversity in general. In terms of the 1989 Act, the declaration of Protected Natural Environments is a function of the Administrator of the province who is also responsible for the appointment of management advisory committees. In practice, these functions were exercised by the Nature Conservation Directorates of the provinces. Like its predecessor, the 1989 Act authorises the Administrator to pass directions for the conservation and management of the area. Such directions were published in May 1994 and are discussed in detail later in this booklet. Before discussing the new directions which apply in the Magaliesberg, it is important to understand the process that was followed before they were published in May 1994. The New Approach Clearly wishing to avoid the conflict that developed around the proclamation of the area in 1977, and the directions that were published in 1986, the Division of Nature and Environmental Conservation of the TPA decided to embark upon a process to consult with land owners about the proposed new boundaries of the area. this process began as early as 1986 but was only completed in 1994, due in part to the fact that during this time, administration of the area changed from the Department of Environment Affairs to the Directorate of Nature and Environmental Conservation of the TPA. The changing constitutional structure of South Africa also hindered progress, as did difficulties in resurveying the reduced size of the area to be incorporated. During this process of consultation, tensions which exist amongst the numerous competing and conflicting interest groups in the area began to emerge. Many of these were expressed at a facilitation meeting, initiated by the Mountain Club of South Africa and held in January 1993. The idea of the meeting flowed from the realisation that the successful conservation of the Magaliesberg requires a level of consensus amongst the various interested parties in the area. Consultation with all parties thus became central to the process of, and the demarcation of, the new boundaries for the area. The idea of the facilitation meeting was in accordance with moves in other countries to allow affected parties to participate directly in the regulatory process. The underlying belief is that once parties have engaged in the process they have a sense of ownership over the agreement. Negotiated rule making, as this process is called, seems to be an efficient way of achieving consensus. The Facilitation Process The first step in organising a facilitation meeting is to ascertain all the interest groups in the area and the major sources of conflict or tension. Many of the sources of tension in the Magaliesberg have already been discussed in this document. There has been conflict between land owners and the authorities for various reasons, such as inadequate consultation; between land owners and the public; and between recreational groups who already have access to the mountain and the general public. As has been shown, as long ago as 1977, conflict arose between land owners and the conservation authorities over the declaration of the area as a nature Area. Some land owners felt it was unnecessary to turn the area into a Nature Area as they were already conservation minded. Others believed that the declaration was essential for the preservation of the Magaliesberg's unique features. Other land owners wanted to develop their farms to establish resorts for people who wanted access to the mountain and objected to having their activities restricted by he authorities. Conflict also arose between recreational clubs, who are either land owners in the area, or those who have secure access to the area, and the general public. These recreational clubs have an interest in limiting access of the general public so that they can enjoy their activities in peace and quiet. A wide range of different organisations and stakeholders were invited to participate in the meetings. These included numerous land owners, the ward chairmen, the Magaliesberg Landowners Association, the Magaliesberg Protection Association, various Government departments including the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Environment Affairs, the Directorate of Nature and Environment Conservation of the TPA and the Magaliesberg Management Advisory Committee. A number of recreational groups with an interest in the conservation of the Magaliesberg, such as the Mountain Club of South Africa, the Johannesburg Hiking Club, the Wildlife Society and the Vulture Study Group, also attended. The following issues were discussed at the meeting:
Access
Representation
Nature Conservation
Education
The Current Legal Status of the Magaliesberg Protected Natural Environment In order to achieve the conservation objectives for the Magaliesberg mountain range, new directions for the protection of the area were published on May 4, 1994. These new directions, with supporting documents, were circulated to all landowners in the area. The intention of the directions is not to place a ban on all development, but rather to ensure that development is undertaken with the least negative impact upon the environment. While publishing these, the Directorate of Nature and Environmental Conservation of the TPA amended the boundaries of the protected area and, in accordance with the wishes of the farmers in the area, excluded arable land. The new boundary of the area can be seen on the map in the centre of the published booklet.
Building operations
Roads, canals and
reservoirs
Pipelines and
powerlines
Excavation and waste
dumps
Hiking trails and signs
Application Procedures
The application must be on a standard application form which is obtainable from the Departments. Development applications are currently considered by the Departments acting in consultation with inter alia the Magaliesberg Protection Association. The Management Advisory Committees have not been appointed yet (January 1998). The respective Departments are the administrative bodies responsible for considering development applications. At this stage, the process of granting approvals generally takes approximately 3-6 months. The Legal Implications of the Directions While the new directions might appear to place tight constraints upon landowners, they in fact offer protection from the activities of large bodies, such as water boards, ESCOM, the SABC and petrochemical concerns. These groups must now also obtain the consent of the Directorate of Nature Conservation before embarking upon projects which might negatively affect the natural beauty of the area. Moreover, as unique natural areas become more popular in South Africa, the inclusion of landowners' property within a protected natural environment will see an increase in property value. The directors can thus be seen as protecting landowners from the threat of degradation of their properties. Meanwhile, those landowners who wish to create resorts for recreational purposes, will be encouraged to do so in harmony with the natural environment, with building developments preferably outside the boundaries of the Protected Natural Environment. Although many land owners in the Magaliesberg feel that regulations such as these place restrictions on their ownership rights, it is important to understand that ownership is rarely unlimited in South African law. There are many statutes which limit the right of land owners to have a free hand on their land. Control of land use is not a phenomenon that arises exclusively in terms of Nature Area legislation. Various government departments also use this regulatory mechanism for other purposes and in the interests of conservation. Regulations published in terms of the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act of 1982, for example, place restrictions on the utilisation of agricultural land. In addition to these statutes, the common law also places some restrictions on land ownership. The law of nuisance has in fact served to restrain environmentally detrimental land use practices by land owners. The Administration of the Magaliesberg Protected Natural Environment In terms of the Constitution of the RSA 1996, the Republic was divided into nine provinces with the Magaliesberg falling between the Gauteng and North West Province. Unfortunately, provincial boundaries tend to be political and generally do not coincide with physical boundaries such as catchments or even mountain ranges. This makes the possibility of holistic management of natural resources such as water catchments or the Magaliesberg mountain range very difficult. The greater part of the MPNE falls within the North West Province and is currently managed by the Department of Tourism and Environmental Affairs of this province. The responsible officer in this Department is Ms Mandy Momberg (0142)97-3597/8. The (largely eastern) part falling within Gauteng is managed by the Directorate of Nature Conservation of the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, the responsible officer being Mrs Christa Grobler (012)201-3689. In terms of the Environment Conservation Act 73 of 1989, management committees for the MPNE can be established in both provinces. Although nominations have been called for and submitted for both management committees, at the time of writing (January 1998) neither have been established. It is hoped that, once they have been established, they will work together to formulate and implement a common set of policies for the entire Magaliesberg Protected Environment. Taking Care of the Magaliesberg It is hoped that the new directions and the developing administrative structures will prevent the Magaliesberg mountain range, situated within a fast developing region of the country, from becoming irreparably damaged by uncontrolled development and unsustainable utilisation of resources. But it is not only the responsibility of the law and government officials to protect the Magaliesberg. The successful conservation of the range depends largely on the support and participation of land owners and the general public who need to commit themselves to its conservation - both by observing the prescribed legal guidelines and by acquainting themselves with good conservation principles. Moreover, conflicts arising between different interest groups need to be addressed in such a way as to incorporate both the resource utilisation needs of the various interest groups and inhabitants, and the conservation requirements of the range as a protected Natural Area. The Directorates of Nature Conservation is able and willing to assist land owners in this regard in the planning of low impact development in the interests of conservation. Everyone who visits the Magaliesberg however, also has a responsibility to protect the range from degradation and to preserve the sensitive ecosystems of the area. Here are some guidelines that everyone should observe if they intend visiting the Magaliesberg mountain range: Fires: Fires are as a general rule discouraged in the Magaliesberg. If you do want to make a fire, ensure that it is in a place designated for braais. Under no circumstances should trees be cut down or used for firewood. Take special precautions when lighting camp fires and be sure to extinguish them properly. Litter: All litter from hikes and picnics, including orange peels and apple cores etc. should not be left behind. Paths: When hiking keep to the path. Walking off the path destroys plant cover and causes erosion. Watch out for first signs of soil erosion, when trails turn into gullies. Try and stop erosion by filling gullies with rocks and branches. Streams: Do not wash with soap in the pools and streams. Soap contains detergents and phosphates which not only pollute streams but also destroy other aquatic life in the streams. Wash pots and pans away from streams and do not throw the waste water back into he stream. Trespassing: Permission to walk on private property must always be granted by individual land owners. For this reason, people staying at resorts in the Magaliesberg must establish the precise boundaries of the resort to avoid trespassing on other landowners' property. Some resorts have established a system of permits to obtain the permission of neighbouring land owners for limited numbers of hikers to walk on their property. Landowners usually have no objection to organised clubs using their property so long as their activities are properly controlled, and permission has been granted. Permits to visit Mountain Club property must be gained from the Club itself. Fauna and Flora: No wild flowers, grasses or plants should be picked and removed from the area. Never disturb bird nests in any way whatsoever and do not feed wild animals such as monkeys. The toilet!: The mountain should certainly not be viewed as one vast ablution facility. Where possible, use existing toilet facilities. Do not go to the toilet anywhere near paths, picnic sites, climbing areas or water sources. If possible, dig a hole and cover the excrement and any toilet paper used once you have finished.
This document was prepared for the Mountain Club of South Africa by Environmental Options cc., edited by Peter Lazarus and published in booklet form in 1995. Copies of the booklet are available from the MCSA. The MCSA would like to thank the Goldfields Foundation and the Magaliesberg Protection Association for their generous support without which this project would not have been possible. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other Sections: |
[MCSA Home] [Amajuba] [Cape Town] [Eastern Province] [Free State] [Hottentotsholland] [Johannesburg] [KwaZulu-Natal] [Namibia] [Paarl-Wellington] [Stellenbosch] [Tygerberg] [Worcester] |
