Jurgen Schirmacher

From: "Tatib Foundation" <info@tatib.co.za>To: "Patrick Holden (Estate Manager)" <em@dezalzeestate.com>Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2012 1:27 PMAttach: Letter to HOA 20120316.pdf; 20120420110317667.pdf; Leon Botes 20120417.pdf; f-

azinphos350wp.pdf; azinphos350wp.pdf; e-azinphos350wp.pdfSubject: Re: De Zalze

Page 1 of 7

4/23/2012

Dear Patrick Without Prejudice We are in receipt of your email below, dated 20 April 2012 and time stamped 11:52 PM, and comment as follows : 1. You refer to our letter dated 20 March . In this regard we have never sent you a letter or an email dated 20 March 2012. 2. On 15 March 21012 we received a strangely worded email from you [see attached] in which you asked us who we were representing and what mandate we had. 3. On 16 March 2012 we replied to your letter of 15 March [see attached] . In this regard we made it quite clear who we were and what our mandate is. As you never responded to this letter we assumed that we had answered your questions. We find it rather strange therefore, that in your most recent letter of 20 April 2012, you state that you have not yet received a response from us, with regards your letter of 15 March 2012, and that "for the sake of transparency on our side " we must furnish you with the information , that you requested on 15 March 2012. We have been very transparent with regards this complaint. Have you ? 4. The TATIB Foundation, of which I am acting chairman, has been approached by a large number of people, who we understand are DeZalze residents. 5. We had already been receiving complaints, from residents, as far back as late 2009 and early 2010, regarding the use of Azinphos and other potentially toxic agricultural chemicals [ pesticides / fungicides / herbicides] on and within the estate. In other

words this is not a problem that has only recently been brought to our intention. 6. The residents who have approached us, are all concerned about the use of potentially toxic agricultural chemicals on the estate, as they allege that during the spraying of the olive trees, citrus trees and vines, they are exposed to spray drift , and the residues of whatever has been sprayed. They have every right to be concerned about their health, and that of their children, as it is a well documented fact that exposure to agricultural chemicals does indeed pose a threat to human health. 7. Our mandate is to help the residents by giving them further information as to how to tackle this issue in a lawful manner with regards to Act 36 of 1947 and to also furnish them with more information as to the special warnings, precautions and side effects associated with the use of the agricultural chemicals that are being used on and within the estate. We were under the impression that we have made this very clear to you in our previous correspondence. 8. The TATIB Foundation has been assisting the residents of Somerset West, Stellenbosch, Franschhoek, Paarl, Grabouw, Caledon, Villiersdorp, and many other towns, with spray drift issues , for a number of years now. As part of our assistance, we have invested a large amount of time, and money, consulting with experts in the field, including attorneys and legal counsel, so as to put pressure on those responsible for unlawful spray drift. In this regard we have also engaged with representatives from not only local and district Municipalities, but also with Provincial Administration, The Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs, The "Green Scorpions" , Parliament, The Dept of Town Planning and even the Universities of Cape Town and Stellenbosch. 9. The residents who have approached us for help and assistance, are concerned that they will be bullied and victimised were their names to be mentioned within our corresponce, and it is for this reason that we have not named any of them in any of our correspondence to you, the HOA and or the owners of Kleine Zalze. As matters now stand, and from correspondence that we have received, it would appear that some of the residents may already have been on the receiving end of subtle threats and bullying as a result of their stance on this issue. 10. When we tackled the Riebeeck-Kasteel issue between 2005-2008/9 we too found ourselves on the receiving end of threats, intimidation and victimisation, due solely to our stance on the pesticide issue. Not only did we receive written and verbal threats and death threats, but we had rocks thrown onto the roof of our house in the middle of the night, telephonic death threats in the middle of the night, had our property damaged, a contract taken out on our lives and then finally, in my case, I was physically assaulted the result of which was that I was hospitalised for 3 days. All of this because we stood up against our being caught in clouds of unlawful spray drift. It would be irresponsible therefore, for us to furnish you with the names of those residents who have approached us for help. It has been brought to our attention, that most of the residents were aware of the situation even before the press became involved. 11. A few of the residents who have lodged complaints with us, have also furnished us with an informal "list" of what they say has been sprayed on and within the estate. We requested this information from them so as to enable us to run the active ingredients, of the agricultural chemicals, through several international toxicological organisations so as to establish the side effects , as a result of exposure, to these chemicals. Each and every agricultural chemical that is used in South Africa has to be registered under Act 36 of 1947. This means that a statutory Product Label and Material Safety Data Sheet have to accompany the agricultural chemical when it is sold and or dispatched to the end user. The statutory documents clearly list the special warnings, precautions, side effects and the correct application and disposal methods when using the product. This is so that human exposure can be to a minimum.

Page 2 of 7

4/23/2012

12. As these are "statutory documents" registered under Act 36 of 1947 these are legal documents which each and every citizen of South Africa has a legal and constitutional right to have access to. The PCO Regulations of 18/12/2009 and the latest Pesticide Management Policy, which were emailed to you on 08 & 13 March 2012, make clear reference to this and the fact that the public has the right to be informed. In this regard we once again request, as we hereby do, that you are to furnish us with the name and manufacturer, of each and every agricultural chemical that has been used, is currently used, and will be used in and on the estate [on the vineyards, lawns, golf course, olive trees, citrus trees, ornamental shrubs and trees etc] . Should you fail to furnish these details to us, then you will not look "transparent" at all, and this will force us and or the complaints whom we are assisting, to make a PAIA application against you, which as you know will then compell you to release the requested information. 13. Whilst we have not yet published a full "expose" on our "blogspot" we take note that there have already been a few comments by concerned residents. In this regard on 17 April 2012, in a reply to some of the comments, we certainly did make mention on our blogspot , that we had invited the HOA and Kleine Zalze to arrange an open meeting where all affected parties could discuss the matter with an aim to finding a solution to the problem. 14. On 08 March 2012 we first brought the current problem to your attention. By 13 March 2012 we had not received a response from you and so sent you another email requesting that you respond. You acknowledged receipt of our email of 08 March on 13 March but did not respond to its contents. On 15 March 2012 [see attached email] you stated that you were engaging with the contractor and other experts, so that you could address the issue once you had received "expert advice" . Again you did not address the contents, instead you tried to evade the issue by asking us who we were representing and what our mandate was. 15. The last correspondence that we received from you , besides your email of 20 April, was on 15 March 2012, and it is obvious to us, that you have no intention to address the issues that we have raised, in an open and transparent manner. 16. On 17 April 2012 we received further feedback from a few residents regarding recent spraying that had been done by Crown Landscaping, your appointed contractors. We investigated the matter and in this regard sent an email to Leon Botes [Crown Landscaping] on 17 & 20 April 2012. Crown Landscaping did not respond to our emails, but instead got you to respond, which you did on 20 April 2012 [see email attached] . So much for transparency!! 17. We find it rather strange that Crown Landscaping chose to not respond to our questions, but instead took the time to contact you and more than likely request that you then contact us, which you subsequently did. Are they hiding anything ? Or just hiding behind the HOA ? 18. In your letter of 20 April 2012 [see attached] you make mention that neither Leon Botes nor Crown Landscaping are registered Pest Control Officers. We all know that Leon Botes and or Crown Landscaping have been spraying the ornamental trees ,shrubs, gardens and gold greens of the estate for a number of years now and that they are the appointed "commercial contractors" for the estate. We also know, and have proof of this, that Leon Botes and or Crown Landscaping have, in the past, sprayed the highly toxic organophospate WWII nerve toxin "Azinphos" on the ornamental trees and shrubs in and around the estate. We also have details, albeit sketchy, of what Crown Landscaping is currently spraying in and around the estate, and we can assure you that one has to, by law, be a registered Pesticide Control Officer in order to apply these agricultural chemicals as if used incorrectly they will pose a very real threat to human health and safety.

Page 3 of 7

4/23/2012

19. By spraying these agricultural chemicals without being a registered PCO, Leon Botes and or Crown Landscaping are , in our opinion, also in contravention of section 7 [2] [a][ii] of Act 36 of 1947 and of course the PCO Regulations of 18/12/2009. This of course also means that their statutory "public liability" insurance will not cover them in the event of a claim made against them. 20. In your 3rd paragraph of your letter of 20 April 2012, you confirm that Leon Botes and Crown Landscaping are not registered PCO's. You go on to say that all spraying [presumably from now on] will be done by a registered Pesticide Control Officer [under ACT 36 of 1947] . In other words you admit, albeit indirectly, that the previous spraying on and within the estate has not been done by a registered PCO, which in effect means that you have been spraying in an unlawful manner. Had Leon Botes and or Crown Landscaping been registered PCO's they would have realised how dangerous, if not criminally negligent it was, to have sprayed Azinphos in and around the estate where the residents and their children would come into contact with its deadly residues. For your information, I have attached the Product Label and Material Safety Data Sheets that clearly show how toxic this particular organophosphate pesticide really is. Please take note that the World Health Organisation and National Department of Agriculture has given Azinphos a Class 1B Highly Hazardous classification. You then state, that in the future, you will also post the statutory notices and fully comply with the requirements of Act 36 of 1947. In other words you imply that you have in fact not been fully compliant with the requirements of Act 36 of 1947 to date ? 21. In the final paragraph of your email of 20 April 2012 [see below ] you state that our blogspot states that we had invited Kleine Zalze and the HOA to arrange an open meeting with all affected parties, and that the HOA had never received such an invitation from ourselves. In this regard we draw to your attention the email that was sent to both you and Kleine Zalze on 13 March 2012 which clearly states : " We would like to set up a meeting at which all affected parties should attend,including representatives from National, Provincial and Municipal Government, the media and of course a residential representative. I shall attend via SkypeConference call as I am currently abroad, but I would like one or two of our founding members to attend, and possibly also our legal representative, AngelaAndrews of the LRC Cape Town, and possibly also representatives from Cullinan & Associates who are the top firm of environmental attorneys in South Africa " In this regard, we have made it very clear to both you and Kleine Zalze that we would like to call a public meeting where all affected parties can attend. It is our intention to also invite various Municipal & Provincial Officials , and the media if necessary, so that the meeting can be conducted in an open and transparent manner. A number of residents have informed us, that they too, have asked for an open meeting but that to date you have dismissed their requests. In your letter of 15 April 2012, you indicate that you will address the matter "internally" after receiving expert advice. This is a clear indication that you would prefer to address this matter "internally" rather than discuss and resolve this issue in an open and transparent manner. When we have asked you for details as to what has been sprayed, you have attempted to evade the question by asking us for the names of the residents whom we represent and then what our mandate is. In other words you answer our question with another question of your own. We have been waiting now, since March 2012, for you to come back to us with your findings and also to give us an indication as to when and where the open meeting can take place.

Page 4 of 7

4/23/2012

In light of all of the above, and as a gesture of "transparency and proper governance " and we require the following from you, via return email :-

� The name and contact details of the "experts" that you have "engaged with" and their findings if any. � The name of the "experimental organic substance" that was allegedly applied by Stellenbosch

Municipality on 16 April 2012. � The name and contact details of the Municipal officials that were responsible for the "experimental spraying

" that took place on 16 April 2012. � The product name and manufacturer details of all agricultural chemicals that have been used, are currently

used, and shall be used on the vineyards, greens, gardens, public spaces, ornamental trees, shrubs and plants within and on the estate. If you are able to also supply copies of the Product Labels and MSDS's of these chemicals if would be appreciated.

� The steps that you shall be taking to prevent spray drift of agricultural chemicals out of the areas being treated and into the public spaces, homes and gardens of the residents.

� The name and contact details of the registered Pesticide Control Officers that will, from now on, be responsible for and in attendance of, all further use of any and all agricultural chemicals within the estate, as complied to do so under Act 36 of 1947.

� A date on which a public meeting can be held, and of course its venue within the estate.

We ask that you email the abovementioned information to us within 10 days from receipt hereof, failing which we reserve our rights to make a PAIA application against yourselves which will compell you, under the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000, to furnish us, and the residents, with the information to which we all have a legal right, as enshrined in the Constitution of South Africa. Kindly acknowledge receipt of this email via return email. All our rights, and those of the residents whom we are assisting, remain fully reserved at all times. regards Jurgen Schirmacher Chairman : The TATIB Foundation

----- Original Message ----- From: Patrick Holden (Estate Manager) To: Tatib Foundation Cc: Ebenpotgieter1@gmail.com Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 11:52 PM Subject: RE: De Zalze Dear Jurgen,

Your letter dated 20 March refers.

You state in your letter that you and the “complainants” (for who you obviously act), are entitled to

information.

We wish to point out that we have to date not received any reply to our letter dated 15 March, in which we

asked you, who you were acting for and what your mandate was . For the sake of transparency on your side,

please furnish us with this information.

We note with regret your continued threats of legal action, whilst we have made every effort to accommodate

Page 5 of 7

4/23/2012

you and whoever your instructing complainants may be, in an honest effort to find the best solutions for the

Estate and all its Residents, to this particular matter.

As soon as you advise us of who the complainants are, for whom you act in this matter, we shall favour you

with a further response.

We would like to also add, that we note in your Tatib blogspot that you are advising the public that you had

invited the De Zalze Winelands Golf Estate HOA to arrange an open meeting, with all affected parties, (to the

spray drift)with the aim of finding a solution to the problem. We as the HOA never received such an invitation

from yourselves, and request a copy thereof.

Regards,

Patrick Holden

From: Tatib Foundation [mailto:tatibfoundation@gmail.com]

Sent: 20 April 2012 12:27 PM To: Patrick Holden (Estate Manager)

Cc: jyvn@absamail.co.za; Ebenpotgieter1@gmail.com; leon@crownlands.co.za Subject: Re: De Zalze

Importance: High

Hi Patrick, Thank you for your prompt response. We take note of the fact that Crown are not registered PCO's and as such that the spraying that they have been doing has been done without a registered PCO being present and thus unlawful under Act 36 of 1947. The 3rd paragraph, of your letter dated 19 April 2012 seems to state that from now on, there will indeed be a registered PCO present at all times when Crown does any spraying on the Estate. Kindly confirm that this is what you meant - that there were no PCO's in the past, but in the future there will be. Kindly confirm the name and registration details of the PCO that will from now on be present during the spraying. If you indeed do pride yourselves on "proper governance and transparency" , as stated in the final sentence of your letter, you will have no problem furnishing TATIB with the names and details of all agricultural remedies [ pesticides / fungicides / herbicides ] that you have been spraying, not only on the vines, but also on the ornamental trees , shrubs and other areas of the estate. If you fail to furnish us with this information, to which we and the complainants have a legal right, you will sending out a message that you do not wish to be "transparent", which will then leave us no alternative but to serve you with a PAIA application, which under the

Page 6 of 7

4/23/2012

Promotion of Access to Public Information Act 2 of 2000, will compell you, under law, to supply us with the information that we have requested. Last year TATIB served Stellenbosch Municipality with a PAIA application, which compelled them under law, to give us the information that we require. Dont make us do the same to you . Kindly furnish us with Crown's registered address /domicile where our attorneys may serve papers and also the contact details and names of the directors of Crown as we have been unable to find their details by doing a google search. regards

Jurgen Schirmacher

----- Original Message ----- From: Patrick Holden (Estate Manager) To: jurgen@schirmacherdesign.com Cc: jyvn@absamail.co.za ; Eben Potgieter (Ebenpotgieter1@gmail.com) ; leon@crownlands.co.za Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 7:38 PM Subject: De Zalze

Dear Jurgen,

Please find the attached.

Regards,

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 7071 (20120420) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

Page 7 of 7

4/23/2012