This conversation is running in circles without progressing an further. I agree with Friend1.0 comments regarding Boven: that area regrows so fast that paths disappear in one summer etc. But Cederberg isn't a high rainfall- fast growing neck of the woods, we just don't know enough about it to make a comment on regions of the Cederberg.
Continuing with the Boven comparison though the least damaging solution then would be to have a Rocklands rally in the already damaged areas, but I am still of the opinion that some areas need to be rested for periods of years. I have a huge respect for the Durban Climber's respect for the annual closure of Canyon due to nesting eagles: this works well because you are dealing with a small local community but this would be much harder to implement in Rocklands, as it would involve signage etc. I think it would be fun to have areas close for periods while others open, as it would provide a major motivations to climb the routes when you have a chance to, rather than when you want to. have big "Road Crew Opening" parties etc.
I suspect that if an EIA was conducted in Rocklands it would recommend the area be closed during the wet season to allow for the regrowth of endangered foliage. This wouldn't be a viable solution for foreigners, meaning many people will cheat the system. For this reason I think the multiple year closures and a heavy fine attached to these transgressions would be more viable. I don't get why people are apposed to a formal management system imposed on climbers by climbers to protect the areas we love- especially when we have so much bouldering in that area. this speaks of greed and lazyness
Sandbagging is a dirty game