Table 3-2 Ranking matrix to provide an Environmental Significance

Ecological Specialist Report – September2012

Coastal & Environmental Services 18 Mooi-Mgeni Transfer Scheme

Table 3-2 Ranking matrix to provide an Environmental Significance Environmental Significance Positive Negative

LOW An acceptable impact for which mitigation is desirable but not essential. The impact by itself is insufficient even in combination with other low impacts to prevent development. These impacts will result in either positive or negative medium to short term effects on the social and/or natural environment.

4-7 4-7

MODERATE An important impact which requires mitigation. The impact is insufficient by itself to prevent the implementation of the project but which, in conjunction with other impacts may prevent its implementation. These impacts will usually result in either positive or negative medium to long term effect on the social and/or natural environment.

8-11 8-11

HIGH A serious impact which, if not mitigated, may prevent the implementation of the project. These impacts would e considered by society as constituting a major and usually long term change to the natural and/or social environment and result in severe negative or beneficial effects.

12-15 12-15

VERY HIGH A very serious impact which may be sufficient by itself to prevent the implementation of the project. The impact may result in permanent change. Very often these impacts are unmitigable and usually result in very severe effects or very beneficial effects.

16-20 16-20

Example of an environmental significance statement 3.1. Impact 1: Impact of noise on human health Cause and Comment The noise associated with Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) has the potential to impact on human health. A recommendation for the movement of large vehicles at night may impact on the sleep patterns of local communities. Mitigation and Management There are standard mitigation measures to ensure that vehicle noise is kept within acceptable limits. Vehicles should be kept in good repair; they should use standard exhaust and silencing equipment. Drivers should stick to designated speed limits. Roads should be kept in good condition. Significance Statement

RA

TIN

G

Temporal Scale Spatial Scale Severity of

Impact Risk or

Likelihood Total

Without Mitigation

Short term 1 Localised 1 Moderate 2 Definite 4 8

With Mitigation

Short term 1 Localised 1 Slight 1 Unlikely 1 4

Overall Significance without mitigation MODERATE

Overall Significance with mitigation LOW



4. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

Topography 4.1. The eastern part of study area is considered to have gentle to moderate hills, whereas the western part is considered to be mountainous, leading towards the Drakensberg (uMngeni IDP, 2002). The project area is considered to have a gentle topography, with slightly undulating slopes between Nottingham Road and Rosetta (Plate 4-1). The site area consists of many small streams which can become dangerous during flood events. The main rivers include the Mooi and Little Mooi Rivers which are popular for trout fishing (MMTS-2, 2002). The area has a number of dams which receive high volumes of tourists as well as recreational users. For example, 1997 statistics indicate 65 600 visitors for Hazelmere dam, 25 000 visitors for Inanda dam and 151 000 visitors for Midmar Dam (MMTS-2 2002). The Umngeni and Karkloof rivers flow also have the popular Howick and Karkloof waterfalls on the eastern side of uMngeni.

Plate 4-1: The topography of the study site. A: The north-western portion of the site where

construction of the Spring Grove Dam wall is underway. B: Undulating hills on either side of the R103. C: Steep southern aspect slope below the Gowrie Golf Course. D: Gentle slope near the southern boundary of the Gowrie Golf Course

Geology and soils 4.2. The geology of the area is considered to be sedimentary rocks of the Beaufort and Ecca subgroups of the Karoo Super Group (DWAF 2009). Three different formations comprise uMngeni.



The western part is sandstone of the Tarkastad formation, the centre is predominantly mudstones and sandstone of the Estcourt formation and the east is predominantly shale of the Volkrust and Pietermaritzburg formations (Udidi 2009). Lions River, underlain by the Volksrust and Pietermaritzburg formation is comprised of highly weathered red orange, yellow brown and light blue grey soft rock shale (Drennan, Maude and Partners 2009). Moist silty clay soils with high silt content are characteristic of this formation (Drennan, Maude and Partners 2009). Rosetta is underlain by the Estcourt formation which is comprised of highly weathered soft rock siltstone and sandstone with moist, silty or sand clay soils (average of 28% clay) (Drennan, Maude and Partners, 2009). The Nottingham Road to Rosetta area has permanent wetlands with the most significant being the valley bottom wetland in the Crane Sanctuary (Drennan, Maude and Partners 2009).The depth to bedrock for both formations ranges from 1 m to 3 m. Overall, soils are acidic with a pH range of 3.8 to 5.94 in the project area (Drennan, Maude and Partners, 2009). The region is considered to have high agricultural potential, although fertilizer is required as nutrient levels are low due to leaching (from being in a high rainfall area). Soil in the eastern part is suggested to be well suited for intensive farming but there are problems with phosphorous fixation as well as aluminium toxicity (uMngeni IDP, 2002). Soil erosion originating from poorly-sited tracks/roads has resulted in numerous incised trenches (dongas) across the area (Drennan, Maude and Partners, 2009).

Climate 4.3. The climate of uMngeni is largely dependent on altitude. uMngeni is a summer rainfall area with lower lying areas receiving on average 800 mm rainfall a year, increasing to 1280 mm for higher lying areas (Udidi, 2009). The south-easterly slopes are wetter than north westerly slopes due to moist air entering from the south east (Udidi, 2009). The western areas have a colder winter average temperature of 14°C compared to the slightly warmer eastern part (17°C) due to snowfalls in the west (Udidi, 2009). Altitude also affects temperature as indicated by Table 4-1, with Bishopstowe at an altitude of 838 m above sea level having a mean maximum temperature of 23.9°C and mean minimum temperature of 11.2°C, whereas Nottingham Road at 600 m higher in altitude has a mean maximum temperature of 21.3°C and a much lower mean minimum temperature of 6.1°C. Table 4-1: Temperature variability with change in altitude in uMngeni (source: uMngeni IDP 2002)

Altitude (m) above sea level Mean max temp °C

Mean min temp °C

Bishopstowe 838 23.9 11.2

Cedara 1067 22.5 9.9

Nottingham Road 1438 21.3 6.1

Vegetation of the study area 4.4. Regional Vegetation Ezemvelo-KZN Wildlife has mapped the vegetation of the area in more detail (Figure 4-2), but the vegetation types are the same as the Mucina and Rutherford (2006) descriptions (Figure 4-3). According to these descriptions the proposed pipeline will pass predominantly through Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland (which is listed as Least Threatened). However, it will also affect Mooi River Highland Grassland (which lies to the north and west of the proposed pipeline), as well as Midlands Mistbelt Grassland (which lies to the south and east of the proposed pipeline):



Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland vegetation type occurs in the KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape provinces. The area is moderately rolling and mountainous, incised with gorges containing dry vegetation types and forest. The majority is dominated by forb-rich grassland (a grassland with a large amount of non-grass species) dominated primarily by Themeda triandra and Tristachya leucothrix. This vegetation type is classified as Least threatened by Mucina and Rutherford (2006), with a conservation target of 23% and 2-3% statutorily conserved. Over 20% has been transformed for cultivation, plantations and urban sprawl. Mooi River Highland Grassland is restricted to the KwaZulu-Natal Province. It comprises gently rolling landscapes dominated by grassland, in which Themeda triandra, Heteropogon contortus and Tristachya leucothrix are dominant. This vegetation type is listed as Vulnerable, with a conservation target of 23%. Only a very small piece of it is statutorily conserved and the majority (almost 60%) has been transformed for cultivation or plantations. Midlands Mistbelt Grassland vegetation type occurs in the KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape provinces. This area is a hilly and rolling landscape, characterised by an east facing scarp formed by dolerite intrusions. This vegetation type is dominated by forb-rich, tall, sour Themeda triandra grasslands that have been transformed by the invasion of Aristida junciformis subsp. junciformis. This vegetation type is classified as Endangered (one of the most threatened vegetation types in KwaZulu-Natal) by Mucina and Rutherford (2006), with a conservation status of 23% and only 0.5% statutorily conserved. More than 50% has already been transformed for plantations, cultivated land or by urban sprawl. Vegetation types in the study area The results of the vegetation assessment have determined the existence of four vegetation types within the study site, namely:

Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland,

Eastern Mistbelt Forest,

Wetlands

Transformed vegetation (Figure 4-4). An investigation of the site determined that the majority of the site is covered by cultivated lands or forestry plantations (Plate 4-2). As a result, there is very little natural vegetation on the site. Sites of natural vegetation are restricted to the Bill Barnes Crane and Oribi Nature Reserve and on a few farms that have not been utilised or only sparsely grazed where pockets of Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland occur. Wetland and riparian vegetation and two very small sections of Eastern Mistbelt Forest on the southern slopes to the north east of Zenzani Village and below the Gowrie Golf Course (Plate 4-2) were also noted. There are also several invasive species recorded on site, particularly Black Wattle (Acacia mearnsii), Bugweed (Solanum mauritianum), and American Bramble (Rubus cuneifolius, Plate 4-3).



Figure 4-1: KZN Wildlife Vegetation Map of the study area and surrounds



Figure 4-2: Mucina and Rutherford Vegetation Map of the study area and surrounds.



Plate 4-2: Vegetation types found on site. A: Grassland dominated by Themeda triandra

(Background) with Phragmites australis dominating the wetland in the foreground. B: Indigenous Eastern Misbelt Forest on a southern aspect. C: Cultivated land and D: Pine plantation Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland This vegetation is restricted to the Bill Barnes Crane and Oribi Nature Reserve and on a few farms which have not been transformed to pastures or plantations. The dominant species which occur are Themeda triandra and Tristachya leucothrix, Eragrostis curvula, Eragrostis plana, Heteropogon contortus and interspersed in areas with herbaceous species like Helichrysum auronitens. It is limited in its distribution, and is likely that it would have covered the majority of the site, should there have been no agricultural activities. Invasive species, predominantly a hybrid of the American Bramble (Rubus cuneifolius), occur within this vegetation type. It is imperative that any remaining areas of this vegetation type are not cleared for agriculture. This vegetation only occurs in three localities on site (Figure 4.3).

Ecological Specialist Report – September 2012


Figure 4-3: Vegetation map of the study area



Eastern Mistbelt Forest Eastern Mistbelt Forests are small (<1 ha) to large (>1500 ha) forests. They occur in an extensive band at middle altitudes (850-1600 m above sea level) often on steep eastern to western slopes of the mountains or escarpments from the Kokstad to the midlands of KwaZulu-Natal. The habitat is characterized by heavy summer mist. The forests are dominated by Xymalos monospora, Podocarpus henkelii, P latifolius, P. falcatus, Celtis africana, Kiggelaria africana and Ocotea bullata in the canopy. Understorey species vary in importance and include tree/shrub species such as Eugenia zuluensis, Trichocladus ellipticus, Maytenus mossambicensis and Peddiea africana, and a range of fern species often at high density. There are a number of deciduous and semi-deciduous species such as Celtis africana, Calodendrum capense, Ptaeroxylon obliquum, Kiggelaria africana and Zanthoxylum davyi. The forests are generally moist. Historically they were surrounded by grassland, but in many areas are now surrounded by commercial timber plantations, as is the case for the study site (Von Maltitz et al. 2003). Only two small pockets of Eastern Mistbelt Forest occur on steep, southern aspects slopes of the site (Figure 4.3). They contain tree species like Podocarpus falcatus, Ilex mitis var. mitis and Rhamnus prinoides. Most of this vegetation type on site has been cleared for commercial pine plantations and it is imperative that the remaining extent of the Eastern Mistbelt Forest pockets be conserved. Wetland vegetation Wetland vegetation is common across the site (Figure 4.3) but is generally disturbed by agricultural activities and heavily invaded in areas by species like Bugweed (Solanum mauritianum), Black Wattle (Acacia mearnsii) and many other ruderal grass species. Dominant species identified within the wetland vegetation were Typha capensis, Phragmites australis, Juncus kraussii, several Cyperus spp. and Ficinia cinnamomea, although some of these species can themselves be considered invasive in wetland systems and can be indicative of disturbance. Transformed Vegetation The mistbelt area in the KwaZulu Natal Midlands once had a large grassland component, which is now almost entirely transformed by agriculture and commercial timber, which also dominates the study area (Figure 4.3). The majority of the site is covered by cultivated lands and forestry plantations. The cultivated areas either consist of annual and /or perennial pastures such as rye grass (Lolium spp.), Eragrostis curvula and Eragrostis plana and crops such as maize. The plantations consist almost entirely of pine (Pinus pinaster). Plant species Invasive and problematic species The area is heavily invaded by alien invasive species (Plate 4-3), although the number of species is quite low. The vast majority of the invaded area is covered by Bugweed (Solanum mauritianum), Black Wattle (Acacia mearnsii), Pearl Acacia (Acacia podalyriifolia), various Bluegum (Euculyptus) species and the American Bramble (Rubus cuneifolius).This is a severe problem on site as the indigenous vegetation, and particularly possible species of special concern, could be crowded out by these species. These invaders are required to be removed by law, as they are each Category 1: Declared Weeds or Category 2: Declared Invaders (The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 (Act 43 of 1983). The most recent legislation makes the following recommendations regarding Category 1 plants: Combating of category 1 plants (section 15A) Category 1 plants may not occur on any land or inland water surface other than in biological control reserves.



A land user shall control any category 1 plants that occur on any land or inland water surface in contravention of the provisions of sub-regulation (1) by means of the methods prescribed in regulation 15E. No person shall, except in or for purposes of a biological control reserve –

establish, plant, maintain, multiply or propagate category 1 plants;

import or sell propagating material of category 1 plants or any category 1 plants;

acquire propagating material of category 1 plants or any category 1 plants. The executive officer may, on good cause shown in writing by the land user, grant written exemption from compliance with the requirements of sub-regulation (1) on such conditions as the executive officer may determine in each case.

Plate 4-3: Invasive aliens found on site. A: Bugweed (Solanum mauritianum) (Category 1). B: Hybrid

American Bramble (Rubus cuneifolius) (Category 1) that has been treated with a herbicide. C: Black wattle (Acacia mearnsii) (Category 2). Combating of category 2 plants (Section 15B) Category 2 plants may not occur on any land or inland water surface other than a demarcated area or a biological control reserve. The executive officer may on application in writing demarcate an area as an area where category 2 plants may occur, be established and be maintained. An area in respect of which a water use license for stream flow reduction activities has been issued in terms of section 36 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) shall be deemed to be a demarcated area.



The executive officer shall demarcate an area for the occurrence, establishment and maintenance of category 2 plants only if –

the category 2 plants in the area are cultivated under controlled circumstances; and

the land user concerned has been authorised to use water in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998); and

the category 2 plants or products of category 2 plants in the area are demonstrated to primarily serve a commercial purpose, use as a woodlot, shelter belt, building material, animal fodder, soil stabilisation, medicinal or other beneficial function that the executive officer may approve; and

all reasonable steps are taken to curtail the spreading of propagating material of the category 2 plants outside the demarcated areas.

When an area is demarcated for the occurrence, establishment and maintenance of category 2 plants the executive officer may impose such additional conditions as may reasonably be deemed necessary to keep the category 2 plants in the area in check. No person shall sell propagating material of category 2 plants or any category 2 plants to another person unless such other person is a land user of a demarcated area or of a biological control reserve. No person shall acquire propagating material of category 2 plants or any category 2 plants unless such material or such plants are intended for use in a demarcated area or in a biological control reserve. Propagating material of category 2 plants or category 2 plants shall only be imported or sold in accordance with the provisions of the Plant Improvement Act, 1976 (Act No. 53 of 1976), the Agricultural Pests Act, 1983 (Act No. 36 of 1983) and the environment conservation regulations. A land user shall control any category 2 plants that occur on any land or inland water surface in contravention of the provisions of sub-regulation (1) by means of the methods prescribed in regulation 15E. Unless authorised thereto in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998), no land user shall allow category 2 plants to occur within 30 meters of the 1:50 year flood line of a river, stream, spring, natural channel in which water flows regularly or intermittently, lake, dam or wetland. The executive officer may, on good cause shown in writing by the land user, grant written exemption from compliance with one or more of the requirements of sub-regulations (1), (3), (5), (6), (8) and (9) on such conditions as the executive officer may determine in each case. Plant species of Special Concern The majority of the site is comprised of cultivated land, a golf course and scattered areas of plantations and some grassland primarily restricted to the Bill Barnes Crane and Oribi Nature Reserve. It is unlikely that a high number of species of special concern will be found in the area if it is more carefully surveyed. It is also important to note at this point that the vegetation types found in this area are sensitive. Mucina and Rutherford (2006) list several species that occur within Mooi River Highland Grassland, Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland and Midlands Mistbelt Grassland. Of these, 11 are on the IUCN red data list (Table 4-2).



Table 4-2: Species endemic to the vegetation types (Mooi River Highland Grassland, Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland and Midlands Mistbelt Grassland) found in the study area and surrounds.

Vegetation Type Species IUCN

Mooi River Highland Grassland

Geranium ornithopodiodes EN

Salvia repens Rare

Drakensberg Foothill Moist Grassland

Hesperantha ingeliensis Rare

Cheilanthes deltoidea VU

Nerine bowdenii Rare

Protea roupelliae CR

Encephalartos ghellinckii VU

Schizochilus bulbinella Rare

Stachys rivularis DD

Brachystelma molaventi VU

Dioscorea brownii VU

Midlands Mistbelt Grassland NONE

Fauna 4.5. Habitats There is a lack of pristine terrestrial habitats in the general study area, and hence the terrestrial fauna has been severely impacted upon by human activity. Vegetation clearing for cultivation is the primary impact on the natural habitats of the region. Birds The region (quarter degree grid cell: 2929BD) in which the study site is placed, has a bird list consisting of 244 bird species (SABAP 2) (Appendix 1). The forests in the area consist of an Important Bird Area (SA071 KwaZulu-Natal Mistbelt Forests). These forests consist of a series of patches occurring mainly on southern slopes where evaporation is less and the effect of fire is reduced. The forests hold many important bird species, including the largest remaining population of the threatened Cape Parrot Poicephalus robustus robustus. The forest floor and edge dwelling Rednecked Francolin Francolinus afer and Cinnamon Dove Aplopelia larvata are common. Bird parties are frequent and typical forest birds include Trumpeter Hornbill Bycanistes bucinator, Crowned Hornbill Tockus alboterminatus, Narina Trogon Apaloderma narina, Orange Thrush Zoothera gurneyi, Bush Blackcap Lioptilus nigricapillus, Knysna Lourie Tauraco corythaix, Olive Woodpecker Mesopicos griseocephalus, Grey Cuckooshrike Coracina caesia, Chorister Robin Cossypha dichroa, Starred Robin Pogonocichla stellata, Yellowthroated Warbler Seicercus ruficapillus, Bluemantled Flycatcher Trochocercus cyanomelas, Olive Bush Shrike Telophorus olivaceus, Swee Waxbill Estrilda melanotis and Forest Canary Serinus scotops. Forest predators include Forest Buzzard Buteo trizonatus, Crowned Eagle Stephanoaetus coronatus and Black Sparrowhawk Accipiter melanoleucus, and at night the Wood Owl Strix woodfordii. The quiet forest river streams hold habitat for Halfcollared Kingfisher Alcedo semitorquata and Longtailed Wagtail Motacilla clara. Birds listed by Birdlife Africa as occurring in the area, that are on the IUCN red data list are listed in Table 4-3. It should be noted that Grey Crowned (Balearica regulorum), Blue (Anthropoides paradiseus) and Wattled (Bugeranus carunculatus) Cranes have been recorded on the site, with a breeding pair of each of the latter two resident in the Bill Barnes Oribi and Crane Reserve. It is highly likely that Crowned Cranes also nest in the area.



Table 4-3: Red Data list birds which may occur in the area

Scientific name Common name IUCN

Ciconia nigra Black Stork NT

Ciconia episcopus Wooly-necked Stork NT

Geronticus calvus Southern Bald (Bald) Ibis VU

Sagittarius serpentaris Secretary Bird NT

Gypaetus barbatus Bearded Vulture EN

Gyps coprotheres Cape Vulture (Griffon) VU

Polemaetus bellicosus Martial Eagle VU

Stephanoaetus coronatus African Crowned (Crowned) Eagle NT

Circus ranivorus African Marsh-Harrier VU

Falco cherrug Lanner Falcon NT

Bugeranus carunculatus Wattled Crane CR

Anthropoides paradiseus Blue Crane VU

Balearica regulorum Grey Crowned- (Crowned) Crane VU

Neotisdenhami Denham’s (Stanley’s) Bustard VU

Vanellusmelanopterus Black-winged Lapwing (Plover) NT

Tytocapensis African Grass-Owl VU

Alcedosemitorquata Half-collared Kingfisher NT

Bucorvusleadbeateri Southern Ground-Hornbill VU

Lioptilusnigricapillus Bush Blackcap NT

Zootheragurneyi Orange Ground-Thrush NT

Schoenicolabrevirostris Broad-tailed Warbler NT

Mycteria ibis Yellow-billed Stork NT

Plegadisfalcinellus Glossy Bald (Bald) Ibis VU

Circus maurus Black Harrier NT

Rostratulabenghalensis Greater Painted-snipe NT

Reptiles There are 350 species of reptile in South Africa (Branch, 1998), of which 39 species may occur within the study area. These comprise 14 lizards, 24 snakes, andone freshwater terrapin. Reptiles likely to occur in the study area with IUCN categorisation (Least Concern (LC) and not threatened (NT) are given in Table 4-4. Table 4-4: Reptiles recorded from the study area and surrounds

Family Scientific name Common name IUCN

Lizards

Agamidae Acanthocercus atricollis Blue Headed Tree Agama LC

Agama armata Tropical Spiny Agama

Chamaeleonidae Bradypodion thamnobates Natal Midlands Dwarf Chameleon

NT

Cordylidae

Cordylus vittifer Transvaal girdled lizard

Pseudocordylus melanotus Drakensberg Crag Lizard

Chamaesaura anguina Cape grass lizard

Gekkonidae Afroedura pondolia Pondo Rock Gecko

Hemidactylus mabouia Tropical House Gecko

Gerrhosauridae Gerrhosaurus flavigularis Yellow-throated Plated Lizard

Trachylepis depressa Eastern coastal skink

Trachylepis varia Variable Skink




Acontias gracilicauda Thin-tailed Legless Skink LC

Mabuya capensis The Cape Skink

Varanidae Varanus niloticus Nile Monitor

Varanus albigularis Rock Monitor

Snakes

Atractaspididae Aparallactus capensis Cape centipede-eater LC

Colubridae

Crotaphopeltis hotamboeia Red-lipped snake

Dasypeltis inornata Southern brown egg-eater

Dasypeltis scabra Rhombic egg-eater LC

Duberria lutrix common slug-eater LC

Lamprophis capensis Brown house snake

Lamprophis inornatus Olive House Snake LC

Lycodonomorphus laevissimus dusky-bellied water snake

Lycodonomorphus rufulus Common Brown Water Snake

Philothamnus hoplogaster Green water snake

Philothamnusnatalensis subsp. Occidentalis

Western Natal Green Snake

Psammophis brevirostris Short-snouted whip snake

Psammophis crucifer Cross-Marked Grass Snake

Psammophis mossambicus Mozambique Sandsnake

Pseudas piscana mole snake

Psammophylax rhombeatus Rhombic Skaapsteker

Lycophidion capense Cape wolf snake LC

Philothamnus natalensis Natal green snake

Elapidae Hemachatus haemachatus Rinkhals LC

Homorocelaps lacteus Spotted Harlequin Snake

Leptotyphlopidae Leptotyphlops longicaudus long-tailed thread snake

Typhlopidae Typhlops bibronii Bibron’s blind snake

Viperidae Causus rhombeatus Common night adder

Bitis arietans Puff Adder

Testudines

Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa subrufa Marsh Terrapin

Amphibians Amphibians are an important and often neglected component of terrestrial vertebrate faunas. They are well represented in sub-Saharan Africa, from which approximately 600 species have been recorded (Frost 1985). Currently amphibians are of increasing scientific concern as global reports of declining amphibian populations continue to appear (Phillips 1994). Although there is no consensus on a single cause for this phenomenon, there is general agreement that the declines in many areas, even in pristine protected parks, are significant and do not represent simple cyclic events. Frogs have been aptly called bio-indicator species, whose abundance and diversity is a poignant reflection of the general health and well-being of aquatic ecosystems. They are important components of wetland systems, particularly ephemeral systems from which fish are either excluded or of minor importance. In these habitats, they are dominant predators of invertebrates, many of which may impact significantly on humans (e.g. as vectors of disease).



Thirty two amphibian species are likely to occur in the area, of which four are threatened and one is data deficient (see Table 4-5). The Long-toed Tree Frog (Leptopelis xenodactylus) (Endangered) is the most threatened amphibian species likely to occur on site. This species occurs in wetlands and marshes in the mistbelt grassland in southern KwaZulu-Natal. Table 4-5: Amphibians which may occur in the study area and surrounds


Bufonidae

Bufo gutturalis Guttural Toad LC

Bufo rangeri Raucous Toad LC

Schisma dermacarens African Split-skin Toad LC

Vandijkophrynus gariepensis Karoo Toad LC

Hyperoliidae

Hyperolius marmoratus Marbled Reed Frog LC

Afrixalus spinifrons Natal Leaf-folding Frog NT

Hyperolius marmoratus Painted Reed Frog LC

Kassina senegalensis Bubbling Kassina LC

Semnodactylus wealii Rattling Frog LC

Petropedetidae Cacosternum boettgeri Boettger’s Dainty Frog LC

Cacosternum nanum Bronze Dainty Frog LC

Pipidae Xenopus laevis Common Platanna LC

Pyxicephalidae

Strongylopus fasciatus Striped Stream Frog LC

Strongylopus grayii Clicking Stream Frog LC

Strongylopus wageri Plain Stream Frog NT

Tomopterna natalensis Natal Sand Frog LC

Tomopterna tandyi Tandy’s Sand Frog LC

Anhydrophryne hewitti Natal Chirping Frog LC

Cacosternum boettgeri Boettger’s Caco LC

Cacosternum nanum Bronze Caco LC

Cacosternum striatum Striped caco DD

Amieta angolensis Common River Frog LC

Amieta fuscigula Cape River Frog LC

Ranidae Strongylopus grayii Gray’s Stream Frog LC

Arthroleptidae Leptopelis xenodactylus Long-toed Tree Frog EN

Breviceptidae

Breviceps adspersus Bushveld Rain Frog LC

Breviceps bagginsi Bilbo’s Rain Frog VU

Breviceps verrucosus Plaintive Rain Frog LC

Heleophrynidae Hadromophryne natalensis Cascade Frog LC

Phrynobatrachidae Phrynobatrachus natalensis Snoring Puddle Frog LC

Ptychadenidae Ptychadena oxyrhynchus Sharp-nosed Grass Frog LC

Ptychadena porosissima Striped Grass Frog LC

Mammals The grassland biome of South Africa has suffered widespread modification by human development (Apps 2000). Large game makes up less than 15% of the mammal species in South Africa and a much smaller percentage in numbers and biomass. In developed and farming areas, such as the study site, this percentage is greatly reduced, with the vast majority of mammals present being small or medium- sized.



The grassland and forest habitat of the study site would have provided for a large number of mammal species such as Oribi, Common Reedbuck, Mountain Reedbuck, Grey Rhebuck, Bushbuck, Black Wildebeest, Grey Duiker and Blue Duiker. Although uncontrolled hunting in the past as well as and habitat transformation has led to a depletion of their numbers or even extirpation. At present only small mammals are expected to occur within the study area, these include bats (Chiroptera), insectivores (Insectivora), rodents (Rodentia), rabbits and hares (Lagmorpha), and small carnivores (Mustelidae and Viverridae). Primates such as Chacma baboon and Vervet monkey would also be expected to occur. Table 4-6 lists species that are likely to occur in the study area and surrounds, with their IUCN status. Table 4-6: Mammalian species likely to occur on the study site

Species name Common name IUCN

Myosorex varius Forest Shrew LC

Suncus lixus Greater Dwarf Shrew LC

Suncus infinitesimus Least Dwarf Shrew LC

Crocidura mariquensis Swamp Musk Shrew LC

Crocidura flavescens Greater Musk Shrew LC

Crocidura hirta Lesser Red Musk Shrew LC

Amblysomus hottentotus Hottentot Golden Mole LC

Otomys angoniensis AngoniVlei Rat LC

Lemniscomys rosalia Single-striped Mouse LC

Rhabdomys pumilio Striped Mouse LC

Dasymys incomtus Water Rat LC

Grammomys dolichurus Woodland Mouse LC

Mus domesticus House Mouse LC

Mus minutoides Pygmy Mouse LC

Mastomys natalensis Multimammate Mouse LC

Thallomys paedulcus Tree Mouse LC

Aethomys namaquensis Namaqua Rock Mouse LC

Aethomyschrysophilus Red Veld Rat LC

Rattus rattus House Rat LC

Mystromys albicaudatus White-tailed Mouse EN

Dendromus melanotis Grey Climbing Mouse LC

Dendromus mesomelas Brants’ Climbing Mouse LC

Dendromus mystcalis Chestnut Climbing Mouse

Steatomys pratensis Fat Mouse LC

Thryonomys swinderianus Greater Cane Rat LC

Graphiurus murinus Woodland Dormouse LC

Cryptomys hottentotus Common Mole-rat LC

Hystrix africaeustralis Porcupine

Lepus saxatilis Scrub Hare LC

Pronolagus crassicaudatus Natal Red Rock Rabbit LC

Procavia capensis Rock Dassie LC

Potamochoerus porcus Bushpig LC

Philantomba monticola Blue Duiker LC

Sylvicapra grimmia Common Duiker LC

Raphicerus campestris Steenbok LC

Tragelaphus scriptus Bushbuck LC

Redunca arundinum Common Reedbuck LC

Redunca fulvorufula Mountain Reedbuck LC



Species name Common name IUCN

Proteles cristatus Aarwolf LC

Felis lybica African Wildcat

Felis serval Serval

Canis mesomelas Black-backed Jackal LC

Aonyx capensis Cape Clawless Otter LC

Poecilogale albinucha Striped Weasel LC

Ictonyx striatus Striped Polecat LC

Genetta tigrina Large-spotted Genet LC

Herpestes ichneumon Large Grey Mongoose LC

Galerella sanguinea Slender Mongoose LC

Ichneumia aslbicauda White-tailed Mongoose

Atilax paludinosus Water Mongoose LC

Mungos mungo Banded Mongoose LC

Papio cynocephalus ursinus Chacma Baboon

Cercopithecus aethiops Vervet Monkey

Orycteropus afer Aardvark LC

Epomophorus crypturus Peters’ Epauletted Fruit Bat LC

Eidolon helvum Straw-coloured fruit bat NT

Rousettus aegyptiacus Egyptian Fruit Bat LC

Taphazous mauritianus Tomb Bat

Tadarida aegyptiaca Egyptian Free-tailed Bat LC

Miniopterus schreibersi Schreiber's long-fingered bat NT

Myotis tricolor Temminck's hairy bat LC

Pipistrellus nanus Banana Bat LC

Eptesicus capensis Cape serotine bat LC

Scotophilus dingani Yellow House Bat

Nycteris thebaica Common Slit-Faced Bat LC

Rhinolophus clivosus Geoffroy’s Horseshoe Bat LC

Hipposideros caffer Sundevall’s Leaf-nosed Bat LC

Chaerephon pumilus Little free-tailed bat LC

Mops condylurus Angolan free-tailed bat LC

Glauconycteris variegata Variegated butterfly bat LC

Scotoecus albofuscus Thomas’s house bat DD

Scotophilus viridis Green house bat NE



5. CONSERVATION PLANNING TOOLS Several conservation planning tools are available for the area. These tools allow for the determination of any sensitive and important areas from a vegetation and faunal point of view at the scoping stage of a development. They allow for the fine-tuning of plans and layouts with a view to reducing potential environmental impacts at the planning stage of the development. The tools used are outlined in Table 5-1 below. Table 5-1: Conservation and planning tools that need to be considered for the proposed project

Tool Motivation Relevancy Figure

Important Bird Area (IBA) Important Bird Areas are globally recognized areas essential for the protection of bird species. In order to be classified as an IBA, an area must contain Globally threatened species, restricted range species, biome restricted species or congregations of species.

Low relevance, the closest IBA is over 6kms away from the site.

Figure 5-1

Corridors This tool is designed to create corridors which link up fragmented landscapes. Ideally, these should be maintained as conserved areas.

High relevance. The pipeline traverses a corridor near Nottingham Road.

Figure 5-2

Protected Areas Expansion Strategy

The objective of the PAES is to form an overarching strategic framework for a protected area network that ‘conserves a comprehensive, representative and adequate sample of biodiversity and maintains key ecological processes across the landscape and seascape.’ The areas earmarked by this study should be protected.

High relevance. The pipeline traverses areas earmarked for protected areas expansion.

Figure 5-3

Protected Areas Protected areas are areas that are already conserved. Areas in close proximity to the proposed development may be affected by the development and thus must be taken into account.

High Relevance. The pipeline traverses The Bill Barnes Crane and Oribi Nature Reserve.

Figure 5-4

Terrestrial Systematic Conservation Plan

This planning tool developed by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife shows the priorities for conservation of areas, Priority 1 areas have the highest priority for conservation, with Priority 3 the lowest. The tool also identifies transformed areas.

Very relevant. The site occurs primarily in Priority 1 areas, which have high conservation importance.

Figure 5-4

Delineated wetland inventory

Wetlands are very important aspects of the ecosystem as they are process areas. Not only do they form habitat for both flora and fauna, they also perform vital ecosystem functions. It is for this reason that wetlands are always rated with a high sensitivity and should be conserved.

Very relevant. Some pipeline options traverse, or run very close to, a wetland.

Figure 5-5



Figure 5-1: Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in proximity to the proposed pipeline. Corridors Corridors are areas of vegetation that should ideally be conserved in their natural state in order to maintain linkages within a fragmented landscape. These corridors were developed by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife as a series of altitudinal and biogeographical corridors to “facilitate evolutionary, ecological and climate change processes and to create a linked landscape for the conservation of species on a fragmented landscape” (EKZNWWW 2010). Areas were assigned values based on how easy it would be for organisms to travel within them, for natural vegetation only. A larger weighting was given to drainage areas, spurs, ridges and mountain tops (EKZNWWW 2010). Corridors form a valuable structure in the landscape and should be maintained as natural areas to facilitate this function. Ecological corridors occur in the vicinity of the site, but the site itself does not



form part of such a corridor. It is important to take note of the proximity of the corridors, but they themselves are of little relevance to the study area.

Figure 5-2: Corridors in proximity to the proposed pipeline. Protected areas expansion strategy

A National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment was conducted in 2004, revealing a lack of protection for a representative sample of the country’s biodiversity, nor conserving adequate process areas. The Protected Areas Expansion Strategy allows for increased conservation of these aspects of the country in order to meet national biodiversity targets. The strategy outlines two methods of expanding the current National Protected Areas:

For public land, the declaration of available, under-utilised and strategic parcels of public land in concordance with the relevant legal requirements for disposal of such land;

For private land, contractual agreements with the affected landowners. Areas earmarked for expansion should not be developed as they could constitute National Parks in the future. Sections of the study site fall within the expansion strategy (Figure 5-3 below).



Figure 5-3: Protected Areas Expansion Strategy and its proximity to the proposed pipeline.



Terrestrial Systematic Conservation Plan The GIS based Terrestrial Systematic Conservation Plan or C-Plan developed by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife in conjunction with a diverse range of stakeholders in order to determine priority areas for conservation. The outcome was a “irreplaceability” conservation map of the province divided into grid cells of 2 by 2km or Quarter Degree Square (QDS) level, ranking the irreplaceability of each cell or square. Irreplaceability reflects the planning units’ ability to meet set ‘targets’ for selected biodiversity ‘features’. The irreplaceability value is scaled between 0 and 1. The degree of irreplaceability of each cell (planning unit) was calculated by using a weighted score of the potential for important or sensitivity species / habitats to occur or known to occur within each of the cells. The C-plan for the study site is outlined in Figure 5-4 below. Irreplaceability Values are currently grouped into three classes or Biodiversity Priority Areas (BPA’s) and summarised in Table 5-2 below: Irreplaceability value 0: Where a planning unit has an irreplaceability value of 0, all biodiversity features recorded here are conserved to the target amount, and there is unlikely to be a biodiversity concern with the development of the site. Irreplaceability value 1: These planning units are referred to as totally irreplaceable and the conservation of the features within them are critical to meet conservation targets. (EIA very definitely required and depending on the nature of the proposal unlikely to be granted). Irreplaceability value > 0 but < 1: Some of these planning units are required to meet biodiversity conservation targets. If the value is high (e.g. 0.9) then most units are required (few options available for alternative choices). If the value is low, then many options are available for meeting the biodiversity targets. (EIA required and depending on the nature of the proposed development, permission could be granted). Table 5-2: Biodiversity Priority Area (BPA) ranking and description

BPA Description

BPA 1 These planning units have an irreplaceability value of 1, which means there are no other localities available in order to meet conservation targets. Often, BPA 1 is assigned to niche habitats that need to be conserved. Development may be permitted in BPA 1, dependent on its nature and careful consideration on a case-by-case basis.

BPA 2 These planning units have a high irreplaceability score. There exist alternative areas for the meeting of conservation targets, but not many.

BPA 3 These planning units tend to have a low irreplaceability score.

A large portion of the area through which the pipeline traverses is classified as BPA 1, which also includes most of the Springgrove dam site. However, a pipeline will not have a major impact on the loss of biodiversity and habitat in the BPA 1 area. However, it will cause a cumulative impact due to habitat fragmentation.



*White areas are undefined

Figure 5-4: Terrestrial Systematic Conservation Plan and its relevance to the proposed pipeline.



Wetlands

Wetlands are process areas, and as such are high priority areas for conservation. No development should result in loss of this habitat. A generic recommendation usually made to protect wetlands is that a buffer be applied to them, within which no development should take place. It is generally agreed that this buffer width depends on the system being affected, although a blanket 30 – 50 m is usually allocated. However, in this scenario a large section of the proposed water transfer scheme will be sited within an existing servitude (Figure 5-5) that crosses several wetlands and in many instances, the laying of the MMTS-1 caused degradation to wetland structure and function.

Figure 5-5: Wetlands delineated according to Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife and their proximity to the proposed pipeline.


Coastal & Environmental Services Mooi-Mgeni Transfer Scheme 42

6. WETLAND DELINEATION

Approach 6.1.

For the purposes of this study, wetlands were identified and delineated according to the National Wetland Classification System (NWCS) which defines wetlands as any feature with the following characteristics: “an area of marsh, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed ten metres” (SANBI, 2009). The rationale was to include the many impoundments that have been created by damming sections of the wetlands into the WET HEALTH assessment.

Results 6.2.

Only wetlands that intersect the proposed pipeline routes as well as those affected by the existing Mearns Pipeline were delineated. A total of 11 wetlands could be thus directly affected by the proposed transfer infrastructure, covering a total area of 372.6312 ha (Table 6-1 and Figure 6-1 below). The wetlands were delineated and numbered in ascending order from north to south in the project area. Maps of individual, delineated wetlands are presented in Chapter 7. Table 6-1: Wetlands and their respective areas delineated within the project area.

The spatial extent and location of these 11 wetlands are presented in Figure 6.1 below. All these wetlands will be affected to some extent by the pipeline. Wetlands 1 and 4 are the largest systems, with wetland 4 having been impacted by the MMTS 1 pipeline.

Wetland Area (ha)

1 71.7082

2 21.553

3 21.5769

4 94.42681

5 54.5237

6 13.2868

7 12.5606

8 27.5291

9 15.6996

10 36.0547

11 3.7118



Figure 6-1: Wetlands and pipeline route alternatives within the project area



7. WETLAND HEALTH ASSESSMENT

Introduction 7.1.

Although identified and delineated, Wetland 3 was not included in the health assessment as the route that bisected it was discarded in the final options report. Agriculture and poor land use practices in general have had a substantial impact on wetlands in the project area, with none of the 10 wetlands assessed scoring B or better on any of the assessment criteria. Quaternary catchment boundaries were obtained from DAFF while ArcGIS® was used to delineate catchments for individual wetlands using 5m contour intervals.

Results 7.2.

All the wetlands in the project area were dominated by the valley bottom hydrogeomorphic unit. Wetlands 1 to 7 are subject to diffuse water movement and are classified as un-channelled. Wetlands 8, 9 & 10 were classified as channelled. Wetlands 1, 2, 3 & 4 fall within quaternary catchment V20D while the rest all occur in quaternary catchment U20B (DAFF, 2012). The Mean Annual Precipitation (MAP) and Potential Evapotranspiration data are 857mm & 1379mm for the former and 988mm and 1154mm for the latter (DAFF, 2012). The hydrological vulnerability factor used to assess the hydrological component for all wetlands was thus 0.9. Wetland 1 Wetland 1 is located closest to the Spring Grove Dam (Figure 6-1) and the dominant Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) unit is an un-channelled, Valley Bottom Wetland. Hydrology: Several activities in the catchment, including abstraction of water for irrigation and stands of alien trees, are causing a moderate to large reduction in water inputs in the wetland. Retention and distribution of water within the wetland have been affected largely by artificial drainage channels, excavation and infilling activities to create impoundments within the wetland (Plate 7-2) as well as abstraction from those impoundments and the presence of woody alien vegetation (Eucalyptus species) within the delineated wetland (Plates 7-1). Dams within the wetland and reduced water inputs from the catchment have dampened the effect of flood peaks and runoff on the wetland. The combined hydrology score was 7.5 corresponding to an E or seriously modified system according to ecological categories described in Table 2-6 with an anticipated trajectory of change of -1 (Table 7-1). Geomorphology: It was estimated that the length of the wetland system occupied by gullies (as a percentage of the length of the HGM unit) was approximately 21-40% with gully width contributing about 11-20% in relation to the width of the wetland area. This showed the extent of the erosional features in the wetland as 30%. The intensity of erosion gullies on the geomorphic integrity of the affected wetland areas was considered moderate to large. Depositional features covered approximately 11-25% of the wetland and the intensity of the impact was considered large to serious, although the confidence with which both these factors could be assessed was low due to the extensive modification which has occurred within the wetland to create impoundments, weirs, spillways, etc. The combined geomorphology score was 2.3 or an ecological category of C, moderately modified. The anticipated trajectory of change was scored at -1 (Table 7-1).


Coastal & Environmental Services Hluhluwe Wind Energy Project 45

Vegetation: The vegetation of the wetland has been highly transformed through various agricultural activities and associated practices(i.e. habitat disturbance in the process of establishing dams and associated infrastructure - pump houses, spillways, etc.), seasonal & perennial pastures within the wetland footprint, crop lands and commercial plantations. The vegetation was scored at 6.8 or an E indicating a seriously modified system with an anticipated trajectory of change of -1 (Table 7-1).

Figure 7-1: Wetland 1 with the alternative pipeline route options Overall impacts for wetland 1 are summarised in Table 7-1 below as well as an indication of the anticipated trajectory of change for each component. Table 7-1: WET-HEALTH Level 1 integrated summary for Wetland 1

Conservation Importance: The system is highly modified and although none were observed, it is likely to provide habitat for some Species of Special Concern. The conservation importance is therefore MEDIUM.

Hydrology Geomorphology Vegetation

Impact Score

Change Score

Impact Score

Change Score

Impact Score

Change Score

Area weighted impact scores

7.5 -1 2.3 -1 6.8 -1

PES Categories E ↓ C ↓ E ↓



Plate 7-1: Eucalyptus sp. within wetland 1

Plate 7-2: Infilling to create dam walls and siting of

pump house within wetland 1

Plate 7-3: Artificial barriers altering the structure & function of Wetland 1

Wetland 2 Wetland 2 lies to the east of wetland 1 (Figure 7-2) and was also identified as an un-channelled, valley bottom in terms of the dominant HGM unit. The assessment yielded very similar results to that of wetland 1. Hydrology: Several activities in the catchment, including abstraction of water for irrigation and stands of alien trees, are causing a moderate to large reduction in water inputs in the wetland. Retention and distribution of water within the wetland have been affected largely by artificial drainage channels, excavation and infilling activities to create impoundments within the wetland (Plate 6-4) as well as abstraction from those impoundments. Dams within the wetland and reduced water inputs from the catchment have dampened the effect of flood peaks and runoff on the wetland. The combined hydrology score was 7.5 corresponding to an E or seriously modified system according to ecological categories described in Table 2-6 (page 14) with an anticipated



trajectory of change of -1 (Table 7-2).

Figure 7-2: Wetland 2 with the alternative pipeline route options Geomorphology: It was estimated that the length of the wetland system occupied by gullies (as a percentage of the length of the HGM unit) was approximately 21-40% with a gully width of about 11-20% in relation to the width of the wetland area. This showed the extent of the erosional features in the wetland as 25%. The intensity of erosion gullies on the geomorphic integrity of the affected wetland areas was considered moderate. Depositional features covered approximately 11-25% of the wetland and the intensity of the impact was considered large to serious, although the confidence with which both these factors could be assessed was low due to the extensive modification within the wetland (impoundments, spillways, etc.). The combined geomorphology score was 2.1 or an ecological category of C, moderately modified. The anticipated trajectory of change was scored at -1 (Table 7-2). Vegetation: The vegetation of the wetland has been highly transformed through various agricultural activities and associated practices (habitat disturbance in the process of establishing dams and associated infrastructure). The vegetation was scored at 6.9 or an E indicating a seriously modified system with an anticipated trajectory of change of -1 (Table 7-2)

Documents

Table 3-2 Ranking matrix to provide an Environmental Significance