Failure to effectively control veld fires :THE FORESTRY COMMISSION and ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY(EMA)
According to Statutory Instrument No. 7 of 2007 it is the responsibility of EMA to
control and manage veld fires. This Statutory Instrument states that all land users, owners
or designated authorities are supposed to put in place appropriate fire prevention
measures (pre suppression measures) on their land. Section 68 of the Forest Act stipulates
that land users must construct standard fireguards on boundaries in order to control veld
fires.
Forestry Commission and EMA were failing to effectively control veld fires as evidenced
by the prevalent occurrence of veld fires. For example in 2004 over 2, 8 million hectares
were burnt across the country and this rose to over 7 million hectares in 2005. National
veld fire statistics from 2006 to 2008 were not availed for audit.
In response the Forestry Commission stated that it manages and fights veld fires in
gazetted forests while EMA deals with fires outside protected forests. EMA stated
that according to the Forestry Act, the main responsibility for fire control rested
with Forestry Commission. Further, it was stated that EMA’s responsibility for veld
fires was prescribed in Statutory Instrument 7 of 2007 which states that it only
supports the Forestry Commission in this role.
From the two responses, it was clear that Forestry Commission and EMA are not in
agreement as to their roles in the responsibility of managing forest fires. Therefore
the two entities should clarify the matter to ensure that the management of fire is
effectively addressed.
My visit to 4 provinces revealed that EMA was failing to adequately enforce fire guard
laws. This was evidenced by failure to issue tickets for contravening the Forest Act
despite that a massive destruction of vegetation occurred throughout the provinces during
the period under review. It was established that the problem of veld fires had become an
annual event in all provinces continuing to destroy large tracts of land, human life,
property, animals and other natural resources thereby disturbing the ecosystem.
EMA attributed their failure to enforce fireguards laws to lack of vehicles to enable
them to offer adequate extension services to resettled farmers including monitoring
and enforcement when fires occur. It was however pointed out that the Agency had
since purchased twenty one vehicles which were to be allocated to each province. In
addition EMA stated that the resettled farmers lacked resources and equipment to
construct fire guards.
24
From documentary review and interviews, I established that causes of veld fires were all
from anthropogenic2
activities which included;
deliberate lighting of fires by arsonists ( arson related fires were a result of the
struggle for land),
careless throwing away of lit cigarettes stubs by the public, burning to clear vegetation so as to expose game and make it easy to catch when
hunting, and burning to clear land for cultivation.
The effects of veld fires include forest degradation, reduction in economic value of
timber with fire scars, soil erosion, loss of property and lives. It also contributes to the
depletion of the ozone layer.
In Manicaland province veld fires continued to destroy large tracts of land throughout the
province. A total of 136 702, 45 hectares were extensively destroyed by fire during the
period under review. Despite fires being a major environmental challenge, only 25 tickets
were issued for contravening Section 68 of the Forest Act in 2007 and 2008 and those
that were issued with tickets did not pay their fines. An amount of Z$26 101 740
(US$870.06) was still outstanding at the time of audit. Indications were that EMA failed
to recover these outstanding amounts. No record of tickets issued to those who
contravened Section 68 of the Forestry Act for the period 2004 to 2006 and 2009 were
availed for audit.
From documentary review I discovered that 23 farmers were issued with orders by EMA
for failing to construct fireguards in June 2009 in Mutasa district. No further follow up
was done by the district officer to see if the orders were obeyed. No prosecutions were
made for the period 2004 to 2008 although cumulatively Mutasa district lost about 6
443.2 hectares of vegetation through veld fires. EMA was not getting veld fire statistics
from the villagers therefore the figures were sometimes not accurate as they relied much
on veld fire reports by resettled farmers. Proper reporting procedures were not being
followed as most fires were not being reported since farmers complained that they were
not being reimbursed their bus fare when they traveled to make fire reports to EMA and
the police. Section 10 (1) (b) of the EMA Act states that EMA should develop and
implement incentives for the protection of the environment. The incentives might come
in the form of bus fare refunds to people who would have reported fire incidences.
Nyanga district officer failed to produce monthly progress reports on veld fires for the
period 2004 to 2005. However, from 2006 to 2009 the district lost about 13 463 hectares
of vegetation. From interviews and physical farm inspections, I established that resettled
farmers were not aware of the requirements to have fireguards around their properties.
For example in Nyashitu resettlement area, Fairview and Green valley farms, the resettled
farmers failed to construct fireguards around their properties.
Anthropogenic2
- human induced activities
25
Resettled farmers from Ziwa resettlement area in the same district did not construct
fireguards. Farmers were not aware of the standard width of the fireguard. I also visited
Ziwa monuments which is an archaeological storage site surrounded by resettlements.
The area witnessed three veld fires in 2009 resulting in 2 500 hectares being burnt
threatening the survival of flora and fauna. The natural beauty of the landscape was
destroyed on this tourist site. The site officer blamed EMA on the failure to prevent or
control veld fires as no awareness programmes were being done to the surrounding
communities.
Despite two huge fire outbreaks at Brittania farm in Nyanga district in 2009, EMA did
not visit the farm to ascertain the extent of damage in terms of hectarage burnt. The
nearby Tsvingwe mountain was all burnt of its vegetation. In 2007 two huts were burnt
and other two huts were also burnt in 2006 at the same farm. Farmers were not sure of the
size of a standard fireguard as evidenced by one farmer who prepared a fireguard which
was only two meters wide, hence fire could easily cross over. ( Presented in Parliament of Zimbabwe 2011- by M. Chiri (Mrs)
COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR-GENERAL
)
No comments:
Post a Comment