FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM NETWORK:

CLASSIFICATION OF WATER RESOURCES

Date: 16 September 2013 Venue: Pretoria National Botanical Gardens

Time: 09:00

PRESENTATION CONTENTS Overview of the Classification Process (7-Steps)

Why Classifying?

Study areas and status

Classification and NFEPAs

Consideration of NFEPAs in classification

Challenges

WHY ARE WE CLASSIFYING: LEGAL MANDATE The classification of South Africa’s water resources is required by the

National Water Act (NWA) (No. 36 of 1998) (Chapter 3 regarding the protection of water resources)

Class

Reserve

Resource Quality Objectives

Regulation 810 published in Government Gazette No. 33541 dated 17 September 2010 defined the water resource management classes and a procedure (Water Resource Classification System – WRCS) to determine a Class.

According to the NWA, once this WRCS has been gazetted all significant

water resources must be classified.

Classification

Resource Quality

Objectives

The Reserve

STUDY PROCESS: OVERVIEW OF THE CLASSIFICATION PROCESS

Assessment of WMA

Divided into catchment areas (IUAs) based on socio-economic/ land use characteristics/ water resources(IUAs) Data assessed Status quo understood

Value and condition of

water resources

Goods and

services assessed

Economic

Framework for decision

making developed

Ecological requirements

of water resources

understood and quantified

How much

water does the ecology

require for different

protection levels

Models set up with ecological requirements

and water requirements

Set and test a

sustainable ecological protection

level scenario for water resources

In accordance with the classification guidelines: 7 step process applies

Set other scenarios

(future states) and evaluate

within the integrated

water resource management

context of WMA

Understand the

implications of different

protection levels

Stak

eh

old

er

Enga

gem

en

t

1 2 3 4 5 6

Stakeholder engagement

THREE MANAGEMENT CLASSES

Classes Description of use Ecological Category

Description of

resource

Class I Minimally used A-B Minimally altered

Class II Moderately used C Moderately altered

Class III Heavily used D Heavily altered

Ecological Category (EC) - means the assigned ecological condition to a water resource in terms of the deviation of its biophysical components from a pre-development condition.

THE NEED FOR CLASSIFICATION

The Catchments are highly utilised and regulated

Water resources are becoming more stressed due to an accelerated rate of development and the scarcity of water resources.

Water Quality deterioration – due to Agricultural and mining runoff (AMD)

There is an urgency to ensure that water resources in the catchment areas are able to sustain their level of uses and be maintained at their desired states into the future.

THE PURPOSE OF WATER RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION

Ensure long term sustainable use of the water resources

Quality and quantity

Provide regulatory certainty

Facilitate decision making

Provide framework in which goals (resource quality objectives) can be set to measure regulatory performance and compliance

Water Quality

Water Quantity

River and wetland habitat and biota

OUTCOMES OF THE CLASSIFICATION PROCESS

A Class represents the state water resources need to be in, to make sufficient water of an appropriate quality available to satisfy the socio-economic needs of the country;

The process sets a Class for each IUA that describes:

The extent of use; and

The level of protection afforded to each water resource

Defines a catchment configuration of ecological categories for each IUA

Percentage of A/B categories identified in each IUA

STUDY AREAS AND STATUS Studie

s no.

Study Areas Status

1 Olifants/Doorn WMA Technical process concluded

(Recommended Management Classes

2 Vaal WMA Technical process concluded

(Recommended Management Classes

3 Olifants WMA Technical process concluded

(Recommended Management Classes

4 Crocodile/West Marico, Mokolo and

Matlabas catchments

Draft Scenario Report & MC Report

5 Mvoti to Umzimkulu WMA Draft Resource Units & EWR sites report

6 Letaba catchment Concluded Status Quo assessment

7 Inkomati WMA Currently on the Status Quo

CLASSIFICATION OF WATER RESOURCES

AND NFEPAs

INFORMATION SUPPORTING ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

Preliminary Reserve Determination

Updated PES/EIS data

NFEPA

Stakeholder contribution in terms of conservation priorities

CONSIDERATION OF NFEPAs IN CLASSIFICATION Step Description How NFEPAs were considered

Step 1: Delineate the units of analysis

(IUAs) and describe the status

quo of the water resources

•Identification of “significant” water resources

•Identification of nodes/EWR sites to represent ecologically

important areas

•Homogenizing the delineated IUAs

Step 2: Link the socio-economic and

ecological value and condition of

the water resources

• Economic contribution of water ecosystems (Ecosystem

services)

•Flow of water in the economy

• Decision support to evaluate consequences of degradation

towards the economy and social well-being

Step 3: Quantify the ecological water

requirements and changes in

non-water quality ecosystem

goods, services and attributes

•Distribution of nodes – assessed against NFEPA & PES/EIS

•Relate a node to a specific NFEPA

•Node modelled to check the achievability of NFEPA

•Where NFEPA did not correlate, PES was considered

•Modelling conducted to get the required flow/water

quality at each node

CONSIDERATION OF NFEPAs IN CLASSIFICATION (2) Step Description How NFEPAs were considered

Step 4: Determine an ecologically sustainable

base configuration (ESBC) scenarios

•Entails identification of minimum level of

protection considering:

• NFEPA minimum is A/B

• PES/ Preliminary Reserve Requirements

• D – minimum level of protection (guidelines)

Step 5: Evaluate scenarios within the integrated

water resource management process

•Any improvement in ecological category is

considered

• Achievability is tested against options

identified in the Reconciliation Strategy

Step 6: Evaluate the scenarios with stakeholders;

and

• implications of scenario’s (flow, water quality,

conservation imperatives)

Step 7: Gazette and implement the class

configuration.

• Proposed template to include:

- IUA class

- EC configuration

CHALLENGES

No supporting data provided to justify NFEPAs - Bulshoek dam (E10K) in the Olifants/Doorn WMA, PES = E

A farm dam in the Karoo in the Olifants/Doorn WMA was mapped as NFEPA

Difficulty in refinement of the catchment configuration scenario as a result of interpretation of 60% of natural flow of a tributary to reach mainstem - difficult to implement (RQOs)

Raw data such as the fish information not available - Barbus anoplus (BANO) is provided as a reason for the NFEPA (it is not present in Mtamvuna River in Mvoti system)

CHALLENGES (2)

Discrepancies between NFEPA wetland coverage in comparison with Google earth and other sources – (Crocodile West Marico, Mokolo and Matlabas catchments) There was no ground-truthing of the FEPA maps in comparison to the updated PES/EIS

There was limited broader stakeholder involvement /engagement conducted in the determination of NFEPAs