Case Decision - 199019

On page 46 and 47, under section 6 in the DBAR, which deals with “Cultural/Historical Features” it is noted that a heritage field survey in 2010 concluded that developments in the area require mitigation measures provided by a specialist to be approved. For this specific bank stabilisation work, mitigation measures are proposed in the DBAR on page 60 and 61, in Table 4.1, with a basic chance finds procedure being outlined. SAHRA is not the commenting authority for mitigation measures that deal with tangible terrestrial heritage in this case. For potential impacts to MUCH resources, SAHRA will be satisfied with this chance finds procedure if an addition is made stating that heritage officers in the MUCH unit at the SAHRA must be contacted in the case of heritage material being discovered underwater, in line with section 35(3) of the NHRA. The contact number for this purpose is 021 462 8672.As per the Public Participation Report (PPR), no potential impacts to intangible cultural heritage (ICH) emerged during the public participation process. On page 31 of the DBAR, one of the reasons given for the proposed bank stabilisation work, is to make the area safer for users of this section of the river, such as bait collectors and fishers. The PPR does not provide any details regarding consultations with these river users. However, the proposed work appears to have a long-term positive effect on known ICH (bait collecting and fishing) by making access safer. The DBAR also mentions that the long-term impacts of this work on the river system will be positive by slowing down erosion which will aid in protecting properties and improve the overall health of the environment, possibly enabling better access as well as fishing and bait collecting conditions. As far as SAHRA is aware, there is ongoing research by Nelson Mandela University (NMU) into ICH in this area and there might be other elements of ICH which might be impacted in the short-term, including but not limited to access for peace and tranquility, as well as the collection of flora for medical purposes. As such, these river users, many of which are possibly accessing the river from other entry-points where the notice signs are not visible, must be consulted so that they can understand how these works will impact their ability to access the river in the short and long-term to practice their ICH. Once the river space users have been meaningfully consulted, as well as the small addition mentioned above is made to Table 4.1, SAHRA would have no objection to this proposed bank stabilisation works with the implemented mitigation measures.Please note that all updates and/or changes to the project, supporting documentation, correspondence, reports, or any other work relating to the project must be uploaded to the case on SAHRIS to provide SAHRA with the opportunity to comment. SAHRA does not accept emailed documents or hard-copy documents received via post.