(Photo: Provided/DA)
According to AfriForum, the Department of Water and Sanitation’s attempt to explain its proposed regulations on access to state dams did not eliminate uncertainty, but instead deepened it.
An important source of concern in the proposed regulations is that members of the public will need approval to gain access to dams that belong to or are managed by the state, such as the Vaal Dam. If this is not done, individuals may face criminal prosecution. Without the necessary approval, activities such as rowing and fishing, which have been legal for decades, will effectively be criminalized.
The regulations also threaten private property rights. Landowners along dams will be forced to meet expanded requirements and enter into agreements with the state to access water from their own properties. This practically amounts to a deprivation of property rights without proper justification.
AfriForum is particularly critical of the apparent motive behind the regulations. The framework indicates an attempt to commercialize access to dams by requiring lease agreements and payments for the use of water and adjacent land in favor of the state. This undermines the principle that water is a public resource. At the same time, the proposed system is administratively impractical. This introduces complex approval processes and compliance requirements that are unlikely to be implemented effectively, especially in a department that is already short of capacity.
The organization says the additional public participation meetings held recently did not address the core issues. Consequently, AfriForum formally submitted supplementary written comments with 60 questions arising from the department’s own submissions.
According to AfriForum, the scope of the questions indicates a deeper problem with the proposed regulatory framework.
“If the department’s explanation had been effective, it would have reduced uncertainty. Instead, it exposed how unclear and internally contradictory the proposed framework really is,” says Marais de Vaal, AfriForum’s advisor for environmental affairs.
(Photo: Provided/DA)
The organization argues that the uncertainty centers on three core aspects: whether access to state dams for recreation is a right or a permission, what is the legal basis of approvals and leases, and to what extent the state wants to exercise control over private land and existing rights of use.
“These are not abstract concerns. They come directly from the department’s own documents. When the regulations are read together with resource management plans and rental policies, they indicate a system where access is dependent on state permission and existing uses can be questioned,” says De Vaal.
AfriForum further believes that, despite the assurance that the regulations do not want to restrict access or criminalize recreational use, their legal consequences remain unclear and in some cases contradictory.
The organization also warns against dismissing criticism as exaggerated. “It is easy to label criticism as frightening, but the reality is that we are asking very basic legal questions. If the department cannot give clear answers, the problem lies with the regulations themselves,” says De Vaal.
AfriForum says it supports sensible regulation of water sources, but warns that a process characterized by ambiguity and shifting explanations can shatter public trust. The organization requested the department to respond in writing to the 60 questions and reconsider the regulations.
