The proposed Regulations for the Protection and Management of Groundwater Resources, published in Government Notice No. 6935 of 10 December 2025, came under strong criticism at the Sandveld Potato Growers’ Association’s annual general meeting in Dwarskersbos, Western Cape, last week.
Association Chairperson Monique Vlok said the draft rules fail to account for the region’s harsh and highly specific production conditions.
“Potato production in the Sandveld is already under severe pressure due to rising input costs and a dry 2025 season,” she explained.
“Geopolitical tensions and their impact on fuel and other inputs are likely to push these costs even higher.”
Farmers in the region have improved water and energy efficiency per ton of potatoes produced, but those gains have required significant investment.
“These efficiencies came at a cost, increasing financial risk,” Vlok added.
Apprehension over proposed groundwater requirements
Producers have also spent decades monitoring groundwater. According to Vlok, the industry has used Groundwater and Earth Sciences’ services for more than 30 years to track groundwater levels and quality, supporting more sustainable use of borehole water.
“We wish the Department of Water and Sanitation [DWS] had consulted us directly before publishing one-size-fits-all regulations,” she said.
Speaking to Farmer’s Weekly, Vlok said one of her key concerns is the scale of new compliance requirements.
Under the proposed regulations, groundwater users would have to install and maintain water meters, record abstraction volumes, and upload data annually to the National Groundwater Archive (NGA). They would also be responsible for replacing stolen or damaged meters.
Boreholes would need to be yield-tested before use, with pump capacity aligned to borehole yield and all data submitted to the NGA. Existing users would have 12 months to upload pump specifications.
Water quality testing would also be tightened, requiring analysis by ISO 17025-accredited laboratories, with results submitted to national systems such as the NGA or Integrated Regulatory Information System (IRIS).
Some provisions were described as impractical. “The draft regulations propose a 5km buffer prohibiting drilling near critical biodiversity and freshwater ecosystems, a restriction that could be difficult to meet in parts of the Sandveld,” Vlok explained.
Municipalities would also be required to develop groundwater protection schemes within five years, including setting abstraction limits and defining protection zones.
“We are concerned that municipalities may impose abstraction limits or restrict new boreholes, which could have a devastating impact on production,” she said.
Non-compliance could carry heavy penalties, including fines and up to five years’ imprisonment for a first offence and up to 10 years for repeat offences.
Wider industry raises similar concerns
These concerns are not limited to the Sandveld.
Janse Rabie, legal and policy executive and head of natural resources at AgriSA, said the formal window for public comment on the proposed regulations has already closed but warned that the concerns raised by producers are widely shared across the sector.
He emphasised that AgriSA supports stronger groundwater governance in principle.
“Groundwater is a critical resource underpinning irrigation, livestock production, agro-processing, and rural household supply, and better monitoring and oversight are necessary, provided they are legally sound and practically implementable.”
However, in its submission to the DWS, AgriSA cautioned that the regulations must remain aligned with the National Water Act (No. 36 of 1998) and should not undermine recognised water use or impose disproportionate compliance requirements.
At the heart of the organisation’s concern is how the regulations might affect existing water rights.
Rabie noted that agricultural water use is inherently flexible, with farmers drawing on both surface and groundwater depending on rainfall, storage levels, and seasonal demand.
“That variability is part of responsible resource management. It should not be interpreted as a reduction or abandonment of lawful water use,” he said.
AgriSA has also warned that adding further compliance requirements to an already complex system could create further uncertainty, particularly as the verification of existing water use remains incomplete in many regions.
The organisation is calling for a phased, capacity-aligned rollout, arguing that a blanket 12-month compliance requirement would be difficult to meet, especially in rural areas.
It also stressed that compliance measures must be realistic. Requirements such as regular ISO-accredited water testing could impose significant costs, particularly on smaller operators, and would be better implemented through a differentiated, risk-based approach.
Similar concerns arise around spatial restrictions. While aquifer protection is widely supported, rigid buffer zones may be disproportionate in areas where hydrogeological risk is low.
Rabie added that the regulations could also have unintended consequences for borehole drilling contractors, who may face increased liability, administrative burdens, and compliance costs under the proposed framework.
“If these requirements are implemented, there need to be clear accreditation pathways, transitional arrangements, and clarity on where liability lies,” he said.
“Without that, you risk reducing the availability of drilling services or significantly increasing costs.”
AgriSA has also called for better alignment between the groundwater regulations and other pending frameworks, particularly those governing high-risk subsurface activities such as hydraulic fracturing.
