The Bulletin News

THE 23RD SAVANNA SCIENCE NETWORK MEETING CONCLUDED TODAY WITH A FORWARD-LOOKING CONSERVATION ON THE THEME “BREATHING LANDSCAPES”

The final day included reflections on how ecological processes across the savanna landscape interact to sustain biodiversity and ecosystem resilience. 

The discussions emphasized the importance of understanding the interconnected roles played by animals, vegetation, and water systems in maintaining the health of the savanna biome.

Three key conversations shaped the closing day’s programme.

The first discussion explored how herbivores both large and small contribute to shaping savanna landscapes. Participants highlighted how grazing and browsing species influence vegetation patterns, nutrient cycling, and habitat structure. From the smallest grazers to the largest browsers, herbivores play a critical role in maintaining ecological balance, ensuring that landscapes remain dynamic and productive.

The second discussion focused on the ecological role of elephants, particularly their influence as ecosystem engineers. Through their feeding behaviour, movement patterns and interaction with vegetation, elephants help open landscapes, create habitats for other species and influence the distribution of plant communities across the savanna.

The third discussion centred on freshwater systems, examining how rivers, wetlands and seasonal water sources sustain life across the landscape. Participants emphasised that freshwater ecosystems serve as lifelines for wildlife, while also shaping vegetation patterns and supporting biodiversity in the broader savanna environment.

Collectively, the discussions reinforced the concept of “breathing landscapes” living ecosystems that constantly change and respond to the interactions between wildlife, vegetation, water, and climate.

The meeting also reaffirmed the importance of collaborative science in informing conservation management within South African National Parks and across protected areas in southern Africa.

As the gathering concluded, participants reflected on the value of platforms such as the Savanna Science Network in strengthening the relationship between research and conservation practice. By bringing together diverse expertise and perspectives, the network continues to contribute to evidence-based decision making that supports resilient ecosystems and thriving wildlife populations.

The insights shared over the past four days will help inform ongoing research and management approaches in the Kruger National Park and other savanna landscapes across the world.

Sasol confirms that on Thursday, 5 March 2026, members of the Kinross Business Forum conducted a march to the Bokamoso Shaft, a new extension of the Syferfontein colliery under construction.

The group handed over a memorandum to Sasol management. The memorandum cited concerns related to recruitment, SMME support, CIDB compliance, the linkage system and training opportunities.

Sasol remains committed to fostering strong, meaningful, and solution‑focused engagement with local stakeholders

Here is the full memorandum:

BOKAMOSO – KINROSS FENCE LINE COMMUNITIES

PROGRAMME DIRECTOR / LEAD REPRESENTATIVE TO READ:

1. BACKGROUND

Sasol is widely recognised as a company that upholds a world-class governance and compliance framework. However, engagement with the Bokamoso Project Fenceline communities commenced only at a very late stage of the project, in October 2026. In light of the recent incidents and the manner in which Sasol has engaged with the communities, it appears that these engagements served largely as delaying tactics while the company continued to pursue its intention of excluding the primary beneficiaries, the Fenceline communities, thereby resulting in the current dispute.

• The Bokamoso Project commenced within our locality without structured inclusion of recognised stakeholder representatives.
• When the community reacted in frustration and halted operations, Sasol intervened and requested formal engagement.
• We responded responsibly.
• Seven delegates were appointed, including recognised Bokamoso stakeholder representatives.
• It was agreed that the project would remain stopped until outstanding matters were resolved.
• We honoured that agreement.

2. OUR GOOD FAITH

• When Sasol later issued a notice stating that the project would resume regardless and that any disruption would be prevented by all means necessary, tensions rose again.
• Community leadership persuaded residents not to return to the site.
• We chose dialogue over confrontation.
• We honoured peace.
• We honoured process.
• We honoured leadership.

But our good faith has not been met with tangible implementation.

3. OUR CORE CONCERNS

1. The Bokamoso Project commenced without inclusion of Kinross fence line communities, contrary to commitments made by Sasol. Contractors identified on site included TW Group (Trichard) and Comfort Loo (Gauteng).
2. Minimum requirements such as Grade 12 for general workers are exclusionary and insulting to the community, particularly given that similar requirements are not consistently applied within Sasol mining operations.
3. The Sasol Project Manager has consistently protected currently appointed subcontractors and did not afford Stefanutti Stocks an opportunity to respond, despite our recommendation. It is not even clear how the current subcontractors were appointed
4. The Site Manager from Stefanutti Stocks indicated that there is no contractual obligation to work with the local community, which is deeply concerning. However with extreme interventions we started seeing changes however, are we going to experience this throughout the entire project with all the contractors appointed?
5. Stefanutti Stocks is currently delivering projects successfully with communities in Morgenzon and Bethal. The exclusionary approach on the Bokamoso Project therefore raises serious questions regarding internal influence and alignment.
6. To date a detailed Scope of Work providing only a high-level overview, which undermines meaningful community participation and denying the community the opportunity to position themselves.
7. Fence line businesses are systematically excluded from information sharing, limiting preparedness and engagement.
8. Discrepancies were noted between two recruitment adverts for the CLO role, yet an appointment proceeded regardless.
9. Advertising local labour opportunities via social media attracts non-local applicants and undermines community inclusion.
10. We need to indicate that Fence line businesses cannot be restricted to equipment hire (yellow machines) but to execute work, and promote skills transfer, gaining of experience and growth.
11. Affected farm residents have expressed distress that work is taking place directly adjacent to their homes, yet none of their households or neighbours were considered for employment. This contradicts statements made during the meeting that local farm labour was utilised.

A. Direct Engagement With the Main Contractor

Fence Line businesses are denied direct engagement with Stefanutti Stocks.

• All engagement is filtered through Sasol.
• Transparency requires direct accountability between implementing contractors and affected communities.

B. Appointment of External Companies

External companies have been appointed while capable Fence Line companies remain excluded.

We were informed that currently subcontracted companies would be removed and replaced with qualifying Fence Line companies.

To date:

• No written transition plan has been tabled
• No exit strategy has been presented
• No timelines have been communicated

Without a formal plan, this promise remains unimplemented while the project progresses.

C. Delays and Red Tape

RFQs have been issued, and we acknowledge that step.

However:

• Repeated advertisements, Inconsistent CIDB grading requirements, Long delays in appointments, create uncertainty and weaken trust.

Five weeks later, no Fence Line contractor has been appointed as a primary beneficiary.

D. Payment Terms for SMMEs

• Emerging local businesses cannot survive on 60-day payment terms.
• Meaningful SMME development requires payment terms aligned to 14–30 days.
• Development without financial sustainability is not development.

E. Recruitment Transparency

• We were informed of strong local labour targets.
• Currently, only nine out of approximately forty-two general workers are from Kinross.
• We require transparency in recruitment processes.
• We require clarity on labour targets and implementation plans.

F. Absence of a Formal Fence-Line Inclusion Strategy

• There is no formally documented framework governing how main contractors must include Fence Line businesses.
• Rules are imposed on the community.

But there is no structured guideline protecting the community. –        This must change.

4. OUR DEMANDS

We therefore formally demand:

1. A written Local Participation Implementation Plan.
2. A documented subcontractor transition and exit strategy with timelines on current subcontracting with the existing contractor.
3. A structured framework for direct engagement between Fence Line businesses and the main contractor with real opportunities enabling the subcontractors growth, not supply of equipment only.
4. Alignment of SMME payment terms to sustainable timeframes stipulated with the main contractors.
5. Clear requirements on all opportunities that does not deny local SMME participation
6. Transparent labour recruitment statistics and clear targets with a more progressive inclusion of Fenceline community members.
7. Recruitment of Local Community people in advance of upcoming opportunities to have enough time for the processes.
8. Advertisement of labour must not be advertised on social media but through Fenceline community notice boards, forums and sent to the community leadership 
9. A structured Community Skills Development Plan within the Mining Projects environment.
10. Weekly written progress reports until full implementation.
11. Immediate removal of non-fenceline community sub-contracting companies (TW Group and Comfort Loo), and ensure compliance with B-BBEE commission, DMRE-SLP
12. All fenceline community companies must be prioritised as per promise made in October 2025.

5. OUR POSITION

• We do not oppose development.
• We do not oppose investment.
• We do not oppose Sasol.
• We oppose exclusion.
• We oppose inconsistency.
• We oppose unfulfilled commitments.
• The Bokamoso Project is happening in our community.
• Our people must benefit meaningfully. –           Not symbolically.

6. FINAL STATEMENT

We remain open to engagement. We remain open to structured resolution. But today we formally place on record that our patience is not weakness. Our unity is not aggression. It is accountability.

We request a written response within seven working days addressing each demand raised in this memorandum.

We thank you.

Submitted by:

Kinross Fence Line Communities

Bokamoso Stakeholder Representatives

Kinross Business Forum Leadership

The Democratic Alliance (DA) is demanding an intervention into the financial spiral that a number of our municipalities are in.

During the 2024/2025 audit of local municipalities, the Auditor General reiterated the financial crisis that several of our municipalities are in, as uncertainty was expressed about the ability of eight municipalities to continue to operate. This includes:

1. eMalahleni                                  5. Victor Khanye

2. Govan Mbeki                              6. Thaba Chweu

3. Lekwa                                           7. Mbombela

4. Msukaligwa                                8. Nkomazi

“In the cases of eMalahleni, Govan Mbeki, and Lekwa municipalities, which have been under the financial recovery approach for more than five years, it is clear that this approach is not working, as noted by the AG,” said James Masango- DA Mpumalanga Spokesperson on CoGHSTA, “With one of the core focuses being an improvement in revenue generation, the DA finds it extremely concerning that 74% of billed revenue is deemed irrecoverable.”

Because of this situation, the AG notes that 70% of municipalities in the province ended the year on a deficit of R4.8 billion and a significant portion of their next year’s budget will be used to pay the previous years’ expenses.

Keeping in mind that this financial crisis derailed service delivery in several municipalities, the DA calls on the MEC of CoGHSTA, Speedy Mashilo, to implement a detailed turnaround strategy with clear timelines and the related responsibilities.

“The DA remains committed to ensuring that all residents of Mpumalanga have access to basic services, and we will make all attempts to ensure that the lives of our residents are improved,” said James, “We will not relent until the provincial government comes up with practical and sustainable solutions to this crisis.”

The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Mpumalanga has lodged a formal written complaint with the Public Protector concerning unlawful mining activities on agricultural land in Victor Khanye Local Municipality, and related environmental statutory breaches, irregular property valuations, and systemic maladministration by municipal and provincial authorities.

The complaint presents credible evidence that multiple mining operations, including active collieries, are conducting extractive activities on properties zoned “Agriculture” or otherwise classified as rural or residential, without the required rezoning or consent-use approvals under applicable planning legislation.

The DA has requested the Public Protector to investigate the conduct of the following persons and institutions in relation to these unlawful mining activities:

• Speedy Mashilo, MEC for Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs (CoGHSTA);
• Khethiwe Moeketsi, MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs;
• Jesta Sidell, MEC for Economic Development;
• Senior officials of Victor Khanye Local Municipality, including Mayor Vusi Buda;
• The Mpumalanga Regional Office of the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE);
• Any other official or organ of state who may have failed to discharge constitutional obligations.

Key concerns set out in the complaint

“Despite formal DA correspondence dated 17 June 2025 notifying the MEC for CoGHSTA of the alleged contraventions, there was no acknowledgement or effective supervisory intervention,” said Tersia Marshall MPL DA Spokesperson for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs.

Prior correspondence from the Executive Mayor to the MEC dated 29 May 2025 confirms the Municipality was aware of widespread zoning contraventions but opted to issue fines rather than enforce cessation of unlawful land uses.

The Municipality’s response omitted critical information, including the duration of unlawful mining activities, when the Municipality first became aware of the contraventions, reasons for delayed or absent enforcement, and whether these irregularities span multiple financial years.

Allegations the DA requests the Public Protector to investigate

1. Maladministration and failure to enforce land-use schemes;
2. Abuse of power through deliberate non-enforcement of planning and environmental laws;
3. Undue delay in exercising oversight and correcting property valuations;
4. Improper dealing with public money and potential improper enrichment or receipt of undue advantage;
5. The lawfulness and rationality of decisions permitting mining activities to continue without appropriate rezoning or approvals.

The DA’s position is that Mpumalanga’s agricultural land is strategic national infrastructure for food security, rural livelihoods, and economic sustainability. Its erosion through unlawful or improperly regulated mining activity is not merely a planning failure but a governance crisis that undermines the rule of law and public confidence.

The Constitution requires all spheres of government to act lawfully, rationally, and in the public interest. Where supervisory authorities are aware of illegality and fail to act, constitutional accountability mechanisms must be invoked.

“We are committed to defending lawful governance, environmental compliance, and the proper administration of public funds. Accordingly, the DA has requested an urgent investigation by the Public Protector and appropriate remedial action in the public interest,” concludes Tersia Marshall.

For years councillors in Govan Mbeki Municipality (GMM) have had to explain to residents why basic services were failing. Sewage spills, electricity outages, interrupted water supply, uncollected refuse and pothole-damaged tyres became routine complaints. Councillors were inundated with calls: where is my water? when will my lights be back on? when will the refuse be collected? These are not partisan problems — the steady decline in municipal service delivery has affected everyone.

Then an unexpected but inevitable shock rearranged local politics. In the last local elections the ANC failed to win outright majorities in three Mpumalanga municipalities: Lekwa, Steve Tshwete and Govan Mbeki. In GMM that opened the door to coalition dynamics and, eventually, to the EFF taking a decisive role. Nationally the ANC also lost its single-party majority and now finds itself in a Government of National Unity.

That political squeeze appears to have produced a predictable response: intensified, highly visible “fixing” of certain infrastructure ahead of political events and to shore up traditional voters. What had been routine municipal responsibilities — road repairs, grass cutting, TLB digging and clean-ups — suddenly accelerated in parts of Secunda. A mayoral clean-up campaign called Ijima was publicised, and residents were asked to praise the mayor for improvements that should be part of everyday municipal operations.

Why the sudden focus? The answer is simple: political optics. The ANC will celebrate its 114th birthday this year, and the Mpumalanga provincial celebrations are being held at Lilian Ngoyi Stadium in Secunda this weekend. According to local sources, the event was initially planned for eMbalenhle but was reportedly moved after objections from the Taxi Association; the precise reasons remain unclear. Whatever the cause, the venue change concentrated attention — and municipal activity — on Secunda. A school athletics meeting scheduled at the stadium was abruptly cancelled. Road surfacing, graveling of the stadium parking lot and frantic grass-cutting followed. Streets like Walter Sisulu Road received new surfaces overnight.

Is this a coincidence? Many residents and opposition leaders — including the Democratic Alliance in Govan Mbeki — say it is not. They allege the ANC is using municipal channels, personnel and public resources to stage-manage improvements so that party leaders can be photographed in ANC regalia inspecting works, creating an impression that the ruling party is personally delivering services. The DA has demanded that Municipal Manager Elliot Maseko immediately stop the politicisation of service-delivery communications on official municipal platforms.

The DA’s public statement by Portia Mpatlanyane DA Councilor Govan Mbeki Local Municipality, raises three central concerns:

• Elected officials and municipal managers should not use government platforms and resources to promote a party brand. Recent coverage shows Executive Mayor Nhlakanipho Zuma and MMC for Civil Engineering Vusimuzi Mbokazi appearing in ANC regalia while inspecting road repairs under a banner labelled “Accelerating Road Infrastructure Rehabilitation in Secunda.”
• Road maintenance and similar work are statutory municipal responsibilities, not political favours. Citizens should not be misled by theatrical displays designed to attribute regular service delivery to a party’s goodwill.
• There are serious risks that public resources are being diverted to raise political visibility. Government funds and municipal capacity must never be used for party campaigning.

The DA reminded residents that the municipality’s Integrated Development Plan (IDP) sets service-delivery targets for wards, and that the Municipal Systems Act and local governance frameworks require impartial, needs-based delivery to all ratepayers, regardless of political affiliation. The DA pledged to continue oversight and to expose improper practices, arguing for a clear separation between ruling party activity and administration so that taxpayers’ money is protected.

What residents should watch for

• Transparency about who authorises and pays for the recent works in Secunda.
• Whether municipal communications channels are used to carry party-branded messages.
• If the improvements are sustained as part of regular service delivery or disappear after the birthday event.
• Evidence that municipal procurement and labour rules were followed, and that projects were included in the IDP and budget.

Conclusion The visible improvement in Secunda ahead of a major political event raises legitimate questions. If municipal resources, staff time or communication platforms are being used to stage-manage service delivery for partisan gain, that is a misuse of public assets and a breach of citizens’ trust. Govan Mbeki residents deserve steady, equitable services year-round — not short-term performative fixes timed for photo opportunities.

Municipal officials should publish clear, dated records showing the funding sources, procurement approvals and operational orders for the recent works. Political parties should refrain from using state platforms to enhance their brand. And opposition parties and civil society must keep up scrutiny so that taxpayers’ money serves the public interest, not party politics.