“If you look at all these impacts around us, I don’t know if we as [fishing] communities have another generation to live out of this ocean”, Salvester Don, fisher and activist from Ebenhaeser
The “West Coast of Extraction” case was another key case during the Fisher People Tribunal. In the last decade, fishing communities in South Africa have actively advocated against the growing threat and impact of extractive developments on South Africa’s coastline, especially along the West Coast. The West Coast has already experienced decades of mining which included beach, surf-zone, and offshore mining for diamonds and heavy minerals like zircon and ilmenite.
Recently, under the Operation Phakisa programme, oil and gas exploration applications have been approved, despite opposition from local fishers and communities, who argue these developments cause harm rather than foster socio-economic growth. The Tribunal case provided evidence showing that extensive allocations for mining, oil, gas and green hydrogen (GH2) activities are leaving little ocean space for fishers and their right to food and livelihood.
Testimonies from fisher representatives in the Northern and Western Cape emphasised the threats posed by extractive developments to coastal communities. Walter Steenkamp, a fisher leader from Port Nolloth, testified about the impacts of diamond mining, and potential impacts of oil and gas exploration and green hydrogen projects on local livelihoods. He explained the harm caused by cofferdams, which are temporary seawalls built by excavating beach sand to access diamond-bearing gravel, on the coastline. Describing the environmental damage Steenkamp said, “Today the rocks lie around, the ocean cannot clean it, and the environmental assessment says you must use sand to build that walls, and they did not use sand to build that walls. They used heavy mineral stuff to build that walls.”
The fishing villages of Ebenhaeser, Papendorp and Doringbaai, situated in the Olifants estuary, face growing threats from mineral and sand mining companies like Mineral Sands Resources (MSR) and Trans Hex, which endanger their livelihoods and the marine environment. Fishers reported that historic mining and road construction near the estuary have damaged vegetation, caused erosion and scarred the landscape. Despite a report stating no drilling would occur within 200 meters of the high-water mark, heavy machinery has been seen on riverbanks. Salvester Donn, a fourth-generation fisher, shared, “Companies like MSR and others arrived, and we saw our community suffer… access was denied, pushing fishers 12 km from where the fish are caught”.
A growing concern in coastal communities is the way fossil fuel companies, drawing from the Searcher and Shell cases, have started exploiting local resistance strategies to gain access to these communities. Many fishing communities are witnessing increasing division and conflict, as these companies promise jobs and support for schools and community projects, playing on residents’ vulnerabilities and pressuring them to align with corporate agendas. Additionally, in his testimony, Steenkamp also emphasised that small-scale fishers feel their livelihoods are being disregarded by these oil and gas companies, citing a lack of meaningful consultation and failure to address their concerns when making decisions on these projects.
As part of the case, fishers have called for a cumulative impact assessment of extractive developments to be carefully considered in the context of the climate crisis before allowing fossil fuel companies to continue their operations off South Africa’s coast. They emphasise that extractive activities, which could harm the environment and restrict people’s access to food, should not be allowed. It was also highlighted that their preferential rights to access the ocean be enforced, as outlined in the Small-Scale Fisheries Policy. They advocate for a moratorium on new mining or extractive rights until it is clear that authorities understand and account for the industry’s impact on the environment, food security and the livelihoods of affected communities. Finally, they insist that extractive activities should not restrict their access to the ocean.