SANParks barking up the wrong tree

[Ming]

I gather there are proposals to ban dog walking on Table Mountain and Silvermine, and would like to register my strong objection to this. I am a professional ecologist and a very strong supporter of all that the National Parks has tried to do to establish a viable park around Table Mountain.

But this is one proposal too far and, frankly, out of touch with the needs of the area and probably not tenable anyway.

The park is a recreational area for a large city and has been used for decades for walking and hiking. Hundreds of people walk with their dogs over the mountains, and have done so for decades.

Many people I met last Sunday on Silvermine stated they would continue to walk their dogs there no matter what SANParks said.

I offer this only to show you that emotion is running extremely high over this proposal, which I believe goes against promises made by SANParks when it took over the area, and which gives no recognition of the companionship and protection (which SANParks cannot guarantee) offered by walking with dogs.

If the reason for this proposal (second-hand information to me) is the reintroduction of more buck, then I think it is inappropriate to force this on an urban recreational area and thereby reduce many present uses of the park.


I also think that stray dogs and poachers with hunting dogs will do far more damage to buck, if SANParks insists on introducing them, than would the kinds of dogs I see on mountain walks with their owners each weekend.

If the ban is for other purposes (eg dog droppings, or the occasional badly behaved dog) then a bit of lateral thinking should be able to sort those problems out without penalising the majority of dog owners.

Sadly, I have to say that I will not support the SANParks on this proposal, and ask you to kill it or look for a sensible compromise. Most dog walkers would probably accept a restriction that keeps them off the highest and most remote parts of the park.

Go well, SANParks, you are doing a good job, but please abandon this insensitive idea.

Dr Jackie King
University of Cape Town

[Ming]

While the rest of South Africa wrestles with crime, Aids and horrendous education statistics, down in the Cape we're obsessing about our "right" to walk our dogs on and around Table Mountain national park.

Newspaper columns and the talk shows have been full of fulminators on the plan to seriously restrict areas on Table Mountain where dogs can be walked.

Authorities have been quick to deploy the standard defusing tactics of "discussion document only … public comment welcomed" but the animal lobby is barking loudly and won't be silenced that easily.

They know what SANPARKS want ie. shoot the tahrs, take down the Silvermine pines and plant more fynbos.

For all the static on the topic, this actually affects remarkably few people. As someone who does walk on the mountain occasionally I am always bewildered by how empty the paths are, even the most accessible ones on a golden weekend morning.

For the majority of Capetonians the mountain is just a backdrop, not a playground enjoyed.

And DOGSs are trouble.(what a joke)

We, the dog owners, need to get honest about our pets before we get agitated on their behalf.

They "evacuate" everywhere (to borrow the euphemism from a puppy-training website that I visited this week in a desperate search for help in handling a nine-week old pavement special), they understandably scare many little kids and some adults, they chase wildlife and they're unbelievably intrusive in a barking, nipping, slobbering, jumping-up kind of way.

We may think they're cute and know they won't hurt anyone, but to those who've never experienced the delight of vets' bills they're a definite and unwelcome nuisance.

At this point the Canine Club members are about to write an angry letter to me about their well-trained animals and well-trained owners armed with plastic bags or pooper-scoopers but the reality that confronts the custodians and users of the park is that most dogs and owners (me included) are more riotous than regimented.

And, before I plead the case for dogs on the mountain, let me make one further important concession.

Thank heavens for the dedicated people at Table Mountain National Park and all the other SANParks across the nation (and, credit where it's due, the politicians who have made the policy decisions to support them).

They have the exceptionally difficult task of defending our natural heritage while ensuring that it gets used.


They're under pressure from the Greens on the left and the developers and tour operators on the right, and from the dog walkers, mountain bikers, BASE jumpers and 4x4 drivers in the middle.

Table Mountain chain is a massive wilderness area right in the heart of a sprawling and often unregulated city.

I can't think of a similarly stark juxtaposition anywhere in the world. And yet, by and large, it's in stunning shape.

The upper cableway station might have its critics but the cable car is worth many millions to the city and it's amazing how quickly you can get completely lost within a short radius of the building.

The top of the mountain isn't a web of concrete paths and kiosks. It remains a wonderful natural environment in spite of entertaining hundreds of thousands of people every year.

Kirstenbosch, currently in full spring glory, is a magnificent example of the best possible balance between commerce and nature.

Undoubtedly we have the ability sometimes to get these things more or less right. Which brings us back to the dogs. I have a strong suspicion the Parks people may be barking up the wrong tree here.

There is a sense that they have become almost reactionary, driven by a desire to turn back the clock and to "restore" the mountain to some notion of former pristine fynbos glory.

No alien trees, plants or animals and, ultimately, no humans except maybe the occasional group of wandering San people on a hunting expedition.

I understand it but don't agree with it.

I'm no expert on any of this but I do know nature is not static. It evolves like we do.

Surely some of the "aliens" have been around long enough to qualify for their passports.

And for the park to survive it needs users who become its defenders. That small vocal core of dog walkers on the mountain are the constituency who will fight for its preservation and support the causes that sustain it.

Don't turn us away or make us feel like criminals.

And thinking of criminals, until you can ensure we won't experience a decidedly unnatural mugging on the mountain I don't think you have the right to deny us the natural protection that a dog brings.

There has been no meaningful consultation with the people of Cape Town who walk and picnic in Tokai and Cecilia forests regarding the removal of alien pine and plein trees. Most of the shady walk ways are under foreigner species trees in the Tokai and Cecilia forests.

98% of the Table Mountain National Park is already without shade covered only by indigenous fynbos and is far too hot to walk in during summer. Now some fools from SANPARKS want to cut down the remaining 2% without asking us, the very people that pay their salaries, ratepayers.

SANPARKS other bright idea is to ban dogs from much more zones. I think that some fool has decided that Table Mountain National Park should become a barren game reserve. People love walking in the forest with their dogs, its similar to Hyde park or central park. Table mountain national park is not the Kruger Park.

This is not Dubai, our summers are getting hotter, we need every 100 year old tree we have. If you don't agree with the above then sign this petition http://www.coolforest.org.za/petition.htm