lapalala school development€¦ · km north of vaalwater and 80 km west of mokopane, lephalale...

LAPALALA SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT

BASELINE TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY STUDY AND BIODIVERSITY SENSITIVITY

ASSESSMENT

December 2016

Prepared for: Peter Velcich NuLeaf Planning and Environmental PostNet Suite 168 Private Bag X 844 Silverton 0127

Prepared by: Author: Reviewers:

ECOREX Consulting Ecologists CC PO Box 57 White River 1240 Duncan McKenzie Dr Rob Palmer (Nepid Consultants) Warren McCleland (Ecorex)

LAPALALA SCHOOL TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY STUDY & BIODIVERSITY VALUE ASSESSMENT (ECOREX)

Nov 2016

2 ECOREX Consulting Ecologists CC PO Box 57 White River 1240 (013) 750-1893 (083) 231-5632 [email protected]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................... 3

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................... 3

EIA REGULATIONS SPECIALISTS REPORT CHECKLIST .................................................................. 4

ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 5

TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 5

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 6

2. TERMS OF REFERENCE ................................................................................................................. 7

3. STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................................................ 8

4. METHODS ........................................................................................................................................... 10

4.1 FLORA ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 4.2 FAUNA ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 4.3 SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................................... 11 4.3 ASSUMPTIONS, LIMITATIONS AND KNOWLEDGE GAPS .............................................................................. 12

4.3.1 Seasonality ........................................................................................................................................ 12 4.3.2 Overlooked Species ......................................................................................................................... 12

5. BIODIVERSITY BASELINE DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 13

5.1 FLORA ........................................................................................................................................................ 13 5.1.1 National Vegetation Types .............................................................................................................. 13 5.1.2 Limpopo Province Biodiversity Conservation Assessment ........................................................ 13 5.1.3 Descriptions of Development Sites ............................................................................................... 14 5.1.4 Confirmed Conservation-Important Flora ..................................................................................... 18 5.1.5 Potentially Occurring Plant Species of Conservation Concern ................................................. 19

5.2 TERRESTRIAL FAUNA ................................................................................................................................. 20 5.2.1 Mammals ........................................................................................................................................... 20 5.2.2 Birds ................................................................................................................................................... 21 5.2.3 Reptiles .............................................................................................................................................. 22 5.2.3 Frogs .................................................................................................................................................. 22

6. SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................. 23

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 25

8. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 26

9. APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................... 28

APPENDIX 1. CHECKLIST OF FLORA RECORDED DURING FIELDWORK ............................................................ 28 APPENDIX 2. LOCALITIES OF CONFIRMED CONSERVATION-IMPORTANT PLANT SPECIES ................................ 31 APPENDIX 3. POTENTIALLY OCCURRING PLANT SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN................................ 32 APPENDIX 4. CHECKLIST OF FAUNA CONFIRMED DURING FIELDWORK ............................................................ 33 APPENDIX 5. POTENTIALLY OCCURRING FAUNA OF CONSERVATION CONCERN .............................................. 38 APPENDIX 6. DUNCAN MCKENZIE CV ............................................................................................................. 42 APPENDIX 7. SPECIALIST DECLARATION FORM ............................................................................................... 43 DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE ................................................................................................................... 44


Nov 2016


List of Tables Table 1. Sensitivity Drivers and Scores used to assess the sensitivity of the proposed development sites. ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Table 2. Plant species of conservation importance recorded during fieldwork ........................................ 18 Table 3. Sensitivity of South West sites to biodiversity / development conflict......................................... 23

List of Figures Figure 1. Location of proposed developments of the Lapalala Wilderness School ................................... 9 Figure 2. Selected photos from the proposed Staff Housing complex ....................................................... 15 Figure 3. Selected photos from the proposed School site ........................................................................... 16 Figure 4. Vegetation Associations within the two proposed development sites ....................................... 17 Figure 5. Photo of Elaeodendron transvaalense ........................................................................................... 19 Figure 6. Map of the Sensitivity categories of the two Sites ........................................................................ 24


Nov 2016


EIA REGULATIONS SPECIALISTS REPORT CHECKLIST

page 06

page 42

page 43

page 06

page 10

page 10

page 23

page 25

page 24

page 12

page 13

page 25

page 25

page 25

page 25

page 25

X n/a

X n/a

none

(ii) if the opinion is that the proposed activity or portions thereof should be authorised, any avoidance,

management and mitigation measures that should be included in the EMPr, and where applicable, the closure

plan;

(o) a description of any consultation process that was undertaken during the course of preparing the specialist

report;

(p) a summary and copies of any comments received during any consultation process and where applicable all

responses thereto; and

(q) any other information requested by the competent authority.

(j) a description of the findings and potential implications of such findings on the impact of the proposed activity,

including identified alternatives on the environment;

(k) any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr;

(l) any conditions for inclusion in the environmental authorisation;

(m) any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or environmental authorisation;

(n) a reasoned opinion-

(i) as to whether the proposed activity or portions thereof should be authorised; and

(i) a description of any assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge;

(1) A specialist report prepared in terms of the 2014 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations must contain-

(a) details of-

(i) the specialist who prepared the report; and

(ii) the expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae;

(b) a declaration that the specialist is independent in a form as may be specified by the competent authority;

(c) an indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report was prepared;

(d) the date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment;

(e) a description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or carrying out the specialised process;

(f) the specific identified sensitivity of the site related to the activity and its associated structures and infrastructure;

(g) an identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers;

(h) a map superimposing the activity including the associated structures and infrastructure on the environmental

sensitivities of the site including areas to be avoided, including buffers;


Nov 2016


ABBREVIATIONS LEMA Limpopo Environmental Management Act (No. 7 of 2003)

mamsl Metres Above Mean Sea Level

NEMBA ToPS National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act Threatened

or Protected Species (No. 10 of 2004)

NFA National Forest Act (No. 30 of 1998)

PRECIS National Herbarium Pretoria (PRE) Computerised Information

System

SABAP2 Southern African Bird Atlas Project 2

TERMINOLOGY Alien Introduced from elsewhere: neither endemic nor indigenous.

Biodiversity The structural, functional and compositional attributes of an area,

ranging from genes to landscapes.

Degraded An ecosystem that is a poor ecological state, usually through

impacts such as invasion by alien plants, severe overgrazing, poor

burning regimes, etc. These systems still contain a moderate

proportion of indigenous flora.

Geophyte Plants that produce their growth points from organs stored below

the ground, an adaption to survive frost, drought and / or fire.

Riparian Pertaining to the river bank.

Transformed Transformed ecosystems are no longer natural and contain little or

no indigenous flora. Examples include agricultural lands,

plantations, urban areas, etc.


Nov 2016


1. INTRODUCTION Lapalala Wilderness School, currently situated within the 45 000 ha Lapalala Wilderness

between Modimolle and Lephalale in west-central Limpopo Province, has been ear-marked

for relocation due to current proposed developments within the reserve. These include re-

introducing dangerous game and selling freehold title stands. The proposal is to move the

school, which has been running for more than 30 years, to a site immediately south of the

reserve outside the formally protected area. Two areas are planned for development: a staff

housing complex and the school itself.

ECOREX Consulting Ecologists CC was appointed by Peter Velcich of NuLeaf Planning &

Environmental to conduct the terrestrial ecology study for a Basic Assessment Report

(BAR), which would provide a basis for assessing potential impacts of the project on

terrestrial ecology and guide the design and location of additional planned infrastructure. The

study comprised flora and vertebrate fauna (mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs). The two key

deliverables were a baseline terrestrial ecology survey and an integrated Biodiversity Value

Assessment.

The Terrestrial Ecologist for this study was Duncan McKenzie, who has been involved in

over 70 Environmental Impact Assessments in South Africa and seven other countries in

Africa over the last nine years. A brief CV is included in Appendix 6 and a signed Declaration

of Independence in Appendix 7.


Nov 2016


2. TERMS OF REFERENCE

A. Conduct an assessment of the terrestrial vertebrate fauna and flora at each development

site, which will include the following:

o Brief description of vegetation associations at each site;

o Description of faunal assemblages within the vicinity of each site (mammals, birds,

reptiles and frogs);

o Emphasis will be placed on locating species of conservation importance (Red Data,

endemic, and / or protected).

B. Assessment of the Biodiversity Value of the vegetation units represented, which will

comprise:

o Assessment of conservation importance and functional importance of each

vegetation association.


Nov 2016


3. STUDY AREA

The proposed development is situated on Portion 1 and 2 of the farm Frischgewaagd 649

LR, approximately 4 km from the South Gate of Lapalala Wilderness and approximately 50

km north of Vaalwater and 80 km west of Mokopane, Lephalale Local Municipality, Limpopo

Province (Figure 1). The two proposed sites cover an area of 3.1 hectares.

The study area is within the quarter-degree grid 2328 CD at an elevation range between

1120 and 1170 mamsl. The topography of the staff quarters and school areas is generally

flat. The proposed school is situated in close proximity to the Lephalala River which drains

into the Limpopo River.


Nov 2016


Figure 1. Location of proposed developments of the Lapalala Wilderness School


Nov 2016


4. METHODS

The fieldwork component of this project was approached as a Rapid Biological Assessment,

with the aim being to balance a limited field time budget with the need for relative scientific

accuracy. Both of the proposed development sites were surveyed on foot using boundaries

supplied by NuLeaf.

4.1 Flora

Desktop Vegetation communities were identified prior to fieldwork using Google™ Earth imagery.

Red Data plant species listed for the quarter-degree grid 2328 CD, in which the study area is

situated in, and surrounding grids in the PRECIS database from the South African National

Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), was used to produce a list of the most likely threatened

species, which was searched for during fieldwork.

Fieldwork Fieldwork was conducted over one day in October 2016. Each of the two proposed

development sites was surveyed on foot using centre-point co-ordinates supplied by NuLeaf.

These were pre-loaded onto a Garmin 62s GPS and were used to delimit the area in which

to search for any conservation-important species of flora and fauna as listed under the

Limpopo Environmental Management Act (No. 7 of 2003), National Forests Act (No. 30 of

1998), National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004) Threatened

and Protected Species Lists (GG Notice 256, 2015) and the various national Red Data Lists.

The location of any species found was recorded using the GPS. Plants were listed according

to each of the vegetation communities identified during the desktop phase.

4.2 Fauna

Desktop

Lists of conservation-important mammals, birds, reptiles and frogs potentially occurring

within the project area were prepared using data from Friedmann & Daly (2004), the

Southern African Bird Atlas Project 2 http://sabap2.adu.org.za/, Taylor et al. (2015), Minter et

al. (2004), Bates et al. (2014) and from the Lapalala Management Plan (2016 update). The

above data were captured mostly at a quarter-degree spatial resolution, but were refined by

excluding species unlikely to occur within the study area, due to unsuitable habitat

http://sabap2.adu.org.za/


Nov 2016


characteristics (e.g. altitude and land-use). Potential occurrence of fauna in the study area

was predicted based on knowledge of known habitat requirements of each species.

Fieldwork

Birds were surveyed by slowly walking through each of the vegetation types at each

development site. Birds were identified audially and visually using Bushnell 10x42 binoculars

and habitat utilisation notes made for each species. Frequent stops were made in order to

observe species that could not be observed by walking through vegetation (e.g. skulking

undergrowth species). Mammals, reptiles and frogs were recorded incidentally as they were

encountered during the ground and aerial surveys through direct evidence (sightings) and

indirect evidence (spoor, dung). No nocturnal searches were performed.

4.3 Sensitivity Assessment

The overall ecological sensitivity of the two proposed development sites was assessed

against seven Sensitivity Drivers on a sensitivity matrix. A score between zero and five is

given for each of the Drivers with zero indicating an absent or not applicable impact and five

that of a very high or confirmed one. These scores are summed and the average calculated

and compared to the sensitivity values reflected in Table 1. Scores of four or higher indicate

options with a high sensitivity, those of three with moderate sensitivity and scores of below 2

with low sensitivity. These scores are indicative of the potential biodiversity / infrastructure

development conflict, with higher scores indicating potentially high conflict. Most favourable

sites are those with lower potential for conflict.

Table 1. Sensitivity Drivers and Scores used to assess the sensitivity of the proposed

development sites.

SENSITIVITY DRIVERS SCORES

Current Ecological State 0 = Absent / Not applicable

Potential to Support Biodiversity 1 = Very low / Negligable

Potential to Support Red-Listed Species 2 = Low

Potential for Negative Associated Impacts 3 = Moderate

Irreplaceability of Natural Habitat 4 = High

Relative Size of Impact Footprint 5 = Very High / Confirmed

Presence of Unique Habitat / Taxa


Nov 2016


4.3 Assumptions, Limitations and Knowledge Gaps

4.3.1 Seasonality

The assessment was based on a single field survey in early summer only, during a period of

sustained high temperatures and little recent rainfall. It is likely that many plants which flower

at other times of the year as well as plants that would normally have flowered after spring /

early summer rains are underrepresented. Due to the small size of each of the proposed

footprints within the study area this is not seen as a major limitation.

4.3.2 Overlooked Species

Certain plant species, particularly geophytes, will only flower in seasons when conditions are

optimal and may thus remain undetected, even over a survey that encompasses several

seasons. Other plant species may be overlooked because of very small size and / or

extreme rarity. A sampling strategy will always represent merely a subset of the true diversity

of the study area. However, the level of sampling effort for this study was appropriate for the

objectives of the study.


Nov 2016


5. BIODIVERSITY BASELINE DESCRIPTION

5.1 Flora

5.1.1 National Vegetation Types According to Mucina & Rutherford (2006), the study area is situated within the Waterberg

Mountain Bushveld vegetation type, which is in the Central Bushveld Bioregion of the

Savanna Biome. This vegetation type is described briefly below, based on the account in

Mucina & Rutherford (2006).

Waterberg Mountain Bushveld

Waterberg Mountain Bushveld is located in the foothills, escarpment and tablelands of the

Waterberg Mountains between Lephalale, Marken and Bela-Bela in the north-western region

of Limpopo Province, South Africa. Vegetation structure comprises low to mid-high woodland

that is dominated by deciduous, broad-leaved tree species, and has a grass-dominated

herbaceous layer. Soils are mostly sandstone, subordinate conglomerate, siltstones and

shale of the Kransberg Subgroup. Dominant canopy species within this vegetation type

include Burkea africana, Combretum apiculatum, Acacia caffra and Acacia robusta. Other

commonly recorded tree species include Heteropyxis natalensis, Combretum molle,

Pseudolachnostylis maprouneifolia and Terminalia sericea. Common shrubs include

Dichrostachys cinerea, Euclea crispa and Olea capensis. Waterberg Mountain Bushveld was

assessed by Mucina & Rutherford (2006) as Least Threatened because of a low level of

transformation (3%) and because 9% of the protection target of 24% is conserved in

Marakele National Park and Moepel Nature Reserve.

The study area is not situated in any floristic centres of endemism, which are areas that have

an unusually high number of plants unique to that area (Van Wyk & Smith, 2001) and is not

within any listed Threatened Ecosystem (Notice 1002 of Government Gazette 34809, 9

December 2011).

5.1.2 Limpopo Province Biodiversity Conservation Assessment

While the Terrestrial Ecosystem Status of the vegetation types in the study area is Not

Currently Threatened, the Limpopo Province Biodiversity Conservation Assessment

classifies most of the study area and general surroundings as a Critical Biodiversity Area 1


Nov 2016


(CBA1), although the area itself is not included in an officially recognised protected area

(Desmet et al., 2013). CBA1’s are described as Irreplaceable Sites that are required to

meet biodiversity pattern and/or ecological processes targets. The primary land

management objective for CBA1’s is to maintain them in a natural state with limited or no

biodiversity loss and to rehabilitate degraded areas to a natural or near natural state.

Compatible land uses for these areas include conservation activities such as eco-tourism

and extensive game farming (Desmet et al., 2013).

5.1.3 Descriptions of Development Sites Vegetation communities were identified at each site on the basis of distinctive vegetation

structure (grassland, woodland, thicket, etc.), floristic composition (dominant and diagnostic

species) and position in the landscape (mid-slopes, terrace, crest, etc.). The vegetation

communities at each of the two development sites are described briefly below. The total flora

species list is presented in Appendix 1.

5.1.3.1 Staff Housing Site

The proposed staff housing site is situated on the second terrace above the Lephalale River

and consists of untransformed woodland (Figure 4). One untransformed vegetation type is

located within the site (Figure 2):

i. Terminalia sericea – Combretum zeyheri Low Mid-Dense to Closed Woodland

This is the only vegetation community within the proposed staff housing complex. Vegetation

structure is Low Mid-Dense to Closed Woodland (sensu Edwards, 1983) with Terminalia

sericea and Combretum zeyheri being the dominant large trees in the canopy. Other

common trees include Combretum apiculatum subsp. apiculatum, Commiphora schimperi

and Peltophorum africanum. The shrubs Euclea natalensis subsp. angustifolia,

Dichrostachys cinerea subsp. africana and Ximenia americana var. microphylla are

dominant below the canopy. Grasses are represented by Aristida adscensionis, Eragrostis

sp. and Loudetia simplex. Herbs were mostly dormant at the time of the survey but Jatropha

zeyheri and Raphionacme velutina were visible.

Thirty-three species (56 % of the entire list) were recorded from the proposed staff housing

site (Appendix 1) although a wet season survey would significantly increase this total with

the addition of herbaceous species. One species of conservation concern was recorded,


Nov 2016


namely Elaeodendron transvaalense which is listed as Near Threatened and is protected

under the National Forests Act (No. 30 of 1998). One small plant was located (Figure 5).

Three individuals of another conservation-important species, Sclerocarya birrea subsp.

caffra, were located. This tree is also protected under the National Forests Act (No. 30 of

1998, Table 2).

Figure 2. Selected photos from the proposed Staff Housing complex

5.1.3.2 New Lapalala School Site

The site for the proposed new Lapalala School is on the first terrace above the Lephalale

River, c. 500 m north east of the proposed staff village (Figure 1). One vegetation community

is present within the development impact area:

i. Acacia karroo – Eragrostis curvula Short Mid-dense to Closed Woodland

This vegetation community occurs on old lands on sandy sediments and contains a low

diversity of plants. Vegetation structure is Short Mid-dense to Closed Woodland (sensu

Edwards, 1983, Figure 3). Dominant canopy trees include Acacia karroo and Olea europaea

subsp. africana while Terminalia sericea and Acacia nigrescens occurred in lower

abundance. Common shrubs found include Euclea crispa, Diospyros lycioides subsp.

lycioides and Dichrostachys cinerea subsp. africana. The grasses Eragrostis curvula and

Pogonarthria squarrosa were dominant on the ground layer. Herbs were not visible during

the survey.

Thirty-three species (56 % of the entire list) were recorded from the proposed school site

(Appendix 1) although a wet season survey would increase this total slightly with the addition


Nov 2016


of herbaceous species. One species of conservation concern was recorded: the tree

Elaeodendron transvaalense is listed as Near Threatened and is protected under the

National Forests Act (No. 30 of 1998) (Appendix 2). One large tree was located growing on a

termitarium and its locality is indicated in Figure 4. In addition, a single Boscia albitrunca

(protected under the National Forests Act No. 30 of 1998) and a few Spirostachys africana

(protected under the Limpopo Environmental Management Act No. 7 of 2003) were located

(Table 2).

Figure 3. Selected photos from the proposed School site


Nov 2016


Figure 4. Vegetation Associations within the two proposed development sites


Nov 2016


5.1.4 Confirmed Conservation-Important Flora

One plant species located within the boundaries of the two proposed development sites is

considered to be of conservation concern as defined by Raimondo et al. (2009)1, namely the

tree Elaeodendron transvaalense, which is listed as Near Threatened and is described in

more detail below:

i. Transvaal Saffron Elaeodendron transvaalense (Burtt Davy) R.H.Archer

Transvaal Saffron is a small to medium-sized evergreen tree occurring in northern and

eastern South Africa, and further afield through Namibia, Botswana, Zimbabwe,

Mozambique and Zambia. The species is heavily harvested in South Africa for traditional

medicine and some sub-populations have declined as a result; as such it has been assessed

as Near Threatened (Williams et al., 2008a). One large tree was located on a large

termitarium in the proposed school site (Figure 5).

Three trees confirmed during fieldwork are protected under the National Forests Act (No. 30

of 1998): Boscia albitrunca, Sclerocarya birrea subsp. caffra and Elaeodendron

transvaalense and one tree (Spirostachys africana) is protected under the Limpopo

Environmental Management Act (No. 7 of 2003, Table 2).

Table 2. Plant species of conservation importance recorded during fieldwork

Taxa Growth Form

Red

data

Pro

tecte

d

Sta

ff H

ou

sin

g

Sch

oo

l

Family Anacardiaceae

Sclerocarya birrea (A.Rich.) Hochst. subsp. caffra (Sond.) Kokwaro tree NFA r

Family Capparaceae

Boscia albitrunca (Burch.) Gilg & Gilg-Ben. tree NFA r

Family Celastraceae

Elaeodendron transvaalense (Burtt Davy) R.H.Archer tree NT NFA r

Family Euphorbiaceae

Spirostachys africana Sond. tree LEMA r

TOTAL 4 1 4 1 3

NT = Near Threatened r = rare

NFA = National Forests Act

LEMA = Limpopo Environmental Management Act

1 Raimondo et al. (2009) regard species of conservation concern to include those with a status of Declining, Near

Threatened and Data Deficient, and threatened species with a status of Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered.


Nov 2016


Figure 5. Photo of Elaeodendron transvaalense

5.1.5 Potentially Occurring Plant Species of Conservation Concern

An additional 17 plant species of conservation concern have been recorded from the quarter

degree grid 2328 CD and surrounding grids (Appendix 3), of which only one species has a

moderate chance of occurring, namely Drimia sanguinea, which is dealt with below. None of

these are considered to be threatened as defined by Raimondo et al. (2009).

Snake-root Drimia sanguinea (Schinz) Jessop

This is another species confined to southern Africa, occurring from western Free State and

Northern Cape through northern South Africa to Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe. Snake-

root is a well-known highly poisonous species which has resulted in large-scale mortality in

livestock in the past. It is also one of the most widely traded species in traditional medicine

markets and populations have declined by 20-25% as a result; the species has therefore

been assessed as Near Threatened (Williams et al., 2008b). This is a deciduous plant and

may have been dormant in the study area during fieldwork.


Nov 2016


5.2 Terrestrial Fauna

5.2.1 Mammals

The study area, although not situated within a formally protected area, is situated adjacent to

the 45 000 hectare Lapalala Wilderness reserve. A few large mammals were recorded within

the study area but based on limited observations it appears as if the area is primarily used

for cattle grazing. Located within the savanna biome, the study area potentially has high

mammal diversity although many of these would be small mammals such as rodents,

insectivores and bats. Most of the larger, threatened mammal species such as White

Rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum), Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) and Roan (Hippotragus

equinus) would have been extirpated many years ago and a few species are now only likely

as vagrants. Nine mammal species were recorded during fieldwork within the study area

during fieldwork (Appendix 4). Of these, one is considered to be threatened: Hippopotamus

(Hippopotamus amphibius), which has been assessed as Vulnerable. At least one

Hippopotamus was observed in the adjacent Lephalale River. One additional species is

classified as Near Threatened: Brown Hyaena (Parahyaena brunnea). Territorial pasting by

a hyaena was observed near the proposed School Site. This is a small greasy deposit

placed on grass stalks from a secretion from the anal gland that is used in olfactory

communication1. Four of the confirmed species are protected either under the National

Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004) Threatened and Protected

Species Lists (GG Notice 256, 2015) or the Limpopo Environmental Management Act (No. 7

of 2003, Appendix 4).

Thirty-five additional conservation-important mammals potentially occur within the general

vicinity of the proposed development footprints (Appendix 6). Of the 19 species with a

moderate or high likelihood of occurring within the study area, only two are considered to be

of conservation concern2, both of which are classified as Near Threatened (Appendix 6).

One of these is a carnivore, namely Honey Badger (Mellivora capensis), while one species is

a small bat (Rusty Bat, Pipistrellus rusticus). Both of these species could potentially occur

anywhere in natural habitat in the study area but due to the small size of each proposed

development footprint probably only as occasional visitors. The rest of the potentially

occurring species are either classified as Data Deficient, meaning that not enough data were

1 Estes, 1995 2 The same approach as Raimondo et al. (2009) has been followed here regarding species of conservation concern (i.e. those with a status of Declining, Near Threatened and Data Deficient, and threatened species with a status of Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered)


Nov 2016


available in order to assess their Red Data status1, or have a low likelihood of occurrence. It

is probable that at least a few Data-Deficient species do occur, particularly shrews in the

genera Crocidura and Suncus. Ten potentially occurring species with a moderate or higher

likelihood of occurrence are protected either under the Threatened and Protected Species

Lists (GG Notice 256, 2015) of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act

(No. 10 of 2004) or the Limpopo Environmental Management Act (No. 7 of 2003) (Appendix

6).

5.2.2 Birds

5.2.2.1 Species richness

Of the nine biomes in Southern Africa, the savannah biome supports the highest diversity of

bird species within the sub-region. The study area, situated within the quarter-degree grid

2328 CD, has only had 122 species recorded to date by the second Southern African Bird

Atlas Projects (SABAP2)2. This total does depend on the number of checklists submitted to

the project and the remoteness of the area has resulted in very few submissions to the

project. Fifty-three species were confirmed to occur in the study area during fieldwork

(Appendix 4), a reasonable total considering the dry conditions prevailing during fieldwork.

Further sampling in the wet season would produce moderately more species. Insufficient

time was spent within the two proposed development areas to sample birds using the

Mackinnon sampling method and therefore no assemblages will be described.

5.2.2.3 Species of Conservation Concern

Fifteen threatened3 or Near Threatened bird species potentially occur within the general

vicinity of the study area (Appendix 4). None of these were recorded during fieldwork. Two

of the potentially occurring species with a moderate or high likelihood of occurring in the

vicinity of Lapalala are threatened species, one of which is classified as Endangered and

one as Vulnerable (Appendix 6). Martial Eagle Polemaetus bellicosus (Endangered) and

Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus (Vulnerable) may occasionally forage over the study area

although no breeding habitat is present for either species. The remaining potentially

1 Friedman & Daly, 2004 2http://sabap1.adu.org.za/sabap_site_summary.php?autoSite=SABAP&QDGC=2328CDaccessed

24/11/2016 3 Threatened species are those with a status of Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable

http://sabap1.adu.org.za/sabap_site_summary.php?autoSite=SABAP&QDGC=2328CD


Nov 2016


occurring species are wetland or grassland species and little habitat is present within the

study area for them or they have very low reporting rate in the area or are unrecorded from

the area and therefore unlikely to occur.

5.2.3 Reptiles

Sixty-two species of reptiles have been recorded from the entire degree grid 2328, as listed

on the Reptile Atlas of Southern Africa website (http://vmus.adu.org.za/vm_sp_list.php), in

Bates et al. (2014). Three potentially occurring species are species of conservation concern:

Orange-throated Flat Lizard (Platysaurus monotropis) is classified as Endangered, Nile

Crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) is classified as Vulnerable and is listed as Vulnerable under

the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004) Threatened and

Protected Species Lists (GG Notice 256, 2015) and Southern African Python (Python

natalensis) is listed as Protected under the National Environmental Management:

Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004) Threatened and Protected Species Lists (GG Notice 256,

2015, Appendix 6). Nile Crocodile has a Low likelihood of occurring within the adjacent

Lephalale River due to disturbance. The flat lizard has a Low likelihood of occurrence due to

occurring further north than Lapalala and the python has a High likelihood of occurring

anywhere within the study area although due to the small size of the area, it is likely to only

occur irregularly. Only two reptile species were recorded during fieldwork (Appendix 4).

However, a dedicated reptile survey using pitfall traps and drift fences, as well as additional

nocturnal surveys, would be needed to adequately sample this fauna group.

5.2.3 Frogs

Twenty-two species of frogs have been recorded from the degree grid 2328

(http://vmus.adu.org.za/vm_sp_list.php) and in Minter et al, 2004. None are threatened or

protected. No frog species were recorded during fieldwork although additional nocturnal

surveys during the wet season would result in at least a few species.

http://vmus.adu.org.za/vm_sp_list.php

http://vmus.adu.org.za/vm_sp_list.php


Nov 2016


6. SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT

The ecological sensitivity of the two proposed development sites were assessed on a

sensitivity matrix as indicated in Table 33 below. The score for each site is indicative of the

potential biodiversity / infrastructure development conflict, with higher scores indicating

potentially high conflict. Most favourable sites are those with lower potential for conflict. The

sensitivity of each site is presented spatially in Figure 6.

Table 3. Sensitivity of South West sites to biodiversity / development conflict

SENSITIVITY DRIVERS

DEVELOPMENT SITES

Sta

ff H

ou

sin

g

Sch

oo

l

Current Ecological State 3 2

Potential to Support Biodiversity 3 2

Potential to Support Red-Listed Species 2 2

Potential for Negative Associated Impacts 2 3

Irreplaceability of Natural Habitat 2 1

Relative Size of Impact Footprint 1 1

Presence of Unique Habitat / Taxa 2 2

SCORE 15 13

AVERAGE 2 2

0 = Absent / Not applicable

1 = Very low / Negligible

2 = Low

3 = Moderate

4 = High

5 = Very High / Confirmed

Both sites in the study area were rated as having Low Sensitivity. These are sites where

considerable loss in biodiversity has occurred either through bush encroachment or bush

clearing, overgrazing or old agricultural lands. Species diversity is low although one Near

Threatened and four protected plant species were confirmed in the two sites. The potential

to support threatened fauna species is also low to moderate, despite the confirmed presence

of Brown Hyaena and Hippopotamus in adjacent areas.


Nov 2016


Figure 6. Map of the Sensitivity categories of the two Sites


Nov 2016


7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The terrestrial ecology of two potential development sites was assessed over a one-day

period in October 2016. The proposed sites are all situated within Waterberg Mountain

Bushveld which is not considered to be threatened. However, the Limpopo Province

Biodiversity Conservation Assessment classifies the study area and general surroundings as

a Critical Biodiversity Area 1 (CBA1), an area deemed to be Irreplaceable. No threatened

plant species were confirmed during fieldwork but one Near Threatened and four species

protected either under the Limpopo Environmental Management (Act No. 7 of 2003) or the

National Forests Act (No. 30 of 1998) were recorded. No threatened plant species

potentially occur. In total, 59 plant species were recorded from the two sites. One threatened

fauna species was recorded: Hippopotamus, although in the adjacent Lephalale River and

not from within the two sites. In addition, one Near Threatened species was also confirmed:

Brown Hyaena. Four confirmed species are protected either under the Limpopo

Environmental Management (Act No. 7 of 2003) or the National Environmental Management:

Biodiversity Act Threatened or Protected Species (No. 10 of 2004). Two threatened species

have a moderate or high likelihood of occurring within the study area: Martial Eagle

(Endangered) and Lanner Falcon (Vulnerable).

Based on this sensitivity assessment, the following recommendations can be made:

i. All infrastructure at the School Site to be situated outside of the riparian zone and

above the 1/100 year floodline of the Lephalale River.

ii. Prior to any construction at any of the sites, an experienced botanist should conduct

a walk-through of these sites during the wet season (Dec-Apr), marking each plant

species of conservation concern to be avoided or that may need to be relocated prior

to any site clearance activity taking place.

iii. All proposed roads to contain adequate stormwater drainage and erosion control

measures, especially in the area between the two proposed development sites where

the road is currently in a bad condition.

iv. Wherever possible, tall trees should be left unharmed, whether protected by law or

not.

Provided the recommendations suggested in this report are followed, there is no objection to

the proposed development in terms of the terrestrial ecosystems of the study area.


Nov 2016


8. REFERENCES

Bates, M.F., Branch, W.R., Bauer, A.M., Burger, M., Marais, J., Alexander, G.J. & de Villiers,

M.S. (eds), 2014. Atlas and Red Data List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho

and Swaziland. Suricata 1. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

DEAT. 2011. National List of Threatened Terrestrial Ecosystems in South Africa. National

Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004). Government Gazette.

Desmet, P. G., Holness, S., Skowno, A. & Egan, V.T. (2013). Limpopo Conservation Plan

v.2: Technical Report. Contract Number EDET/2216/2012. Report for Limpopo

Department of Economic Development, Environment & Tourism (LEDET) by

ECOSOL GIS.

Development, Environment & Tourism (LEDET) by ECOSOL GIS. Edwards, D. 1983. A

broad-scale structural classification of vegetation for practical purposes. Bothalia

14:705-712.

Estes, Richard D. 1995. The Behaviour Guide to African Mammals. Russel Friedman Books,

Halfway House.

Friedmann, Y. & Daly, B. (editors). 2004. Red Data Book of the Mammals of South Africa: A

Conservation Assessment. CBSG Southern Africa, Conservation Breeding Specialist

Group (SSC / IUCN), Endangered Wildlife Trust. South Africa.

Minter, L.R., Burger, M., Harrison, J.A., Braack, H.H., Bishop, P.J. & Kloepfer, D.2004. Atlas

and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. SI/MAB

Series No.9. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Mucina, L. and Rutherford, M.C. (eds) 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and

Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

O’Dea, N., Watson, J.E.M. & Whittaker, R.J. 2004. Rapid assessment in conservation

research: a critique of avifaunal assessment techniques illustrated by Ecuadorian

and Madagascan case study data. Diversity and Distributions 10:55-63.

Raimondo, D., Von Staden, L., Foden, W., Victor, J.E., Helme, N.A., Turner, R.C., Kamundi,

D.A. & Manyama, P.A. (eds) 2009. Red List of South African Plants 2009. Strelitzia

25. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

Taylor, M.R., Peacock, F., Wanless, R.W. (eds). 2015. The Eskom Red Data Book of Birds

of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Birdlife South Africa, Johannesburg.

Van Wyk, A. E. & Smith, G. F. 2001. Regions of floristic endemism in southern Africa: A

review with emphasis on succulents. Umdaus Press, Pretoria.


Nov 2016


Williams, V.L., Raimondo, D., Crouch, N.R., Cunningham, A.B., Scott-Shaw, C.R., Lötter, M.

& Ngwenya, A.M. 2008a. Elaeodendron transvaalense (Burtt Davy) R.H.Archer.

National Assessment: Red List of South African Plants version 2015.1. Accessed on

2016/11/23.

Williams, V.L., Raimondo, D., Crouch, N.R., Brueton, V.J., Cunningham, A.B., Scott-Shaw,

C.R., Lötter, M. & Ngwenya, A.M. 2008b. Drimia sanguinea (Schinz) Jessop.

National Assessment: Red List of South African Plants version 2015.1. Accessed on

2016/11/23.

LAPALALA SCHOOL TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY STUDY & BIODIVERSITY VALUE ASSESSMENT (ECOREX) Nov 2016


9. APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Checklist of Flora recorded during fieldwork

Taxa Growth Form

Red

data

Pro

tecte

d

Sta

ff H

ou

sin

g

Sch

oo

l

Family Anacardiaceae

Lannea discolor (Sond.) Engl. tree r

Ozoroa paniculosa (Sond.) R.& A.Fern. var. paniculosa tree r

Sclerocarya birrea (A.Rich.) Hochst. subsp. caffra (Sond.) Kokwaro tree NFA r

Searsia leptodictya (Diels) T.S.Yi, A.J.Mill. & J.Wen forma leptodictya tree r

Family Apocynaceae

Raphionacme velutina Schltr. herb r

Sarcostemma viminale (L.) R.Br. subsp. viminale succulent r

Family Asparagaceae

Asparagus buchananii Baker dwarf shrub r

Family Boraginaceae

Ehretia rigida (Thunb.) Druce subsp. nervifolia Retief & A.E.van Wyk shrub r

Family Burseraceae

Commiphora schimperi (O.Berg) Engl. tree r

Family Cactaceae

* Opuntia stricta Haw. succulent r r

Family Capparaceae

Boscia albitrunca (Burch.) Gilg & Gilg-Ben. tree NFA r

Family Celastraceae

Elaeodendron transvaalense (Burtt Davy) R.H.Archer tree NT NFA r

Maytenus albata (N.E.Br.) E.Schmidt bis & Jordaan tree r

Family Combretaceae

Combretum apiculatum Sond. subsp. apiculatum tree f



Combretum hereroense Schinz tree r

Combretum zeyheri Sond. tree f

Terminalia sericea Burch. ex DC. tree d u

Family Dracaenaceae

Sansevieria hyacinthoides succulent r

Family Ebenaceae

Diospyros lycioides Desf. subsp. lycioides shrub u

Euclea crispa (Thunb.) Gürke subsp. crispa tree u

Euclea linearis Zeyh. ex Hiern dwarf shrub r

Euclea natalensis A.DC. subsp. angustifolia F.White shrub r

Family Euphorbiaceae

Jatropha zeyheri Sond. herb r

Spirostachys africana Sond. tree LEMA r

Family Fabaceae

Acacia caffra (Thunb.) Willd. tree r

Acacia erubescens Welw. ex Oliv. tree

Acacia karroo Hayne tree d

Acacia nigrescens Oliv. tree u u

Acacia nilotica (L.) Willd. ex Delile subsp. kraussiana (Benth.) Brenan tree r

Acacia robusta Burch. subsp. clavigera (E.Mey.) Brenan tree r

Dichrostachys cinerea (L.) Wight & Arn. subsp. africana Brenan & Brummitt tree r u

Peltophorum africanum Sond. tree r u

Pterocarpus rotundifolius (Sond.) Druce subsp. rotundifolius tree r

Schotia brachypetala Sond. tree r

Family Malvaceae

Dombeya rotundifolia (Hochst.) Planch. var. rotundifolia tree r

Grewia bicolor Juss. var. bicolor shrub r

Grewia flava DC. shrub u

Grewia flavescens Juss. shrub r

Waltheria indica L. dwarf shrub r

Family Olacaceae

Ximenia americana L. var. microphylla Welw. ex Oliv. shrub r

Family Oleaceae

Olea europaea L. subsp. africana (Mill.) P.S.Green tree f

Family Pedaliaceae



Harpagophytum zeyheri Decne. subsp. zeyheri herb r

Family Poaceae

Aristida meridionalis Henrard grass u

Aristida adscensionis L. grass f

Eragrostis curvula (Schrad.) Nees grass f

Eragrostis sp. grass u

Heteropogon contortus (L.) Roem. & Schult. grass r r

Loudetia simplex (Nees) C.E.Hubb. grass u

Panicum maximum Jacq. grass u

Pogonarthria squarrosa (Roem. & Schult.) Pilg. grass r u

Family Portulacaceae

Talinum caffrum (Thunb.) Eckl. & Zeyh. herb r

Family Rhamnaceae

Ziziphus mucronata Willd. subsp. mucronata tree r

Family Rubiaceae

Pyrostria hystrix (Bremek.) Bridson shrub r

Family Sinopteridaceae

Pellaea calomelanos (Sw.) Link var. calomelanos fern r

Family Strychnaceae

Strychnos madagascariensis Poir. tree r

Family Velloziaceae

Xerophyta retinervis Baker dwarf shrub r

Family Verbenaceae

Lippia javanica (Burm.f.) Spreng. dwarf shrub r

Family Viscaceae

Viscum combreticola Engl. parasite r r

Family Vitaceae

Rhoicissus revoilii Planch. climber r

TOTAL 59 1 4 33 33

NT = Near Threatened d = dominant

NFA = National Forests Act f = frequent

LEMA = Limpopo Environmental Management Act u = uncommon

r = rare



Appendix 2. Localities of confirmed conservation-important plant species

Species Site No. Threat Status

Protected Status

Latitude Longitude

Sclerocarya birrea subsp. caffra Staff Housing 1 NFA -23.94208 28.36278



Elaeodendron transvaalense Staff Housing 1 NT NFA -23.93672 28.36407

Spirostachys africana School 1 LEMA -23.93642 28.36410

Boscia albitrunca School 1 NFA -23.93777 28.36483

Elaeodendron transvaalense School 1 NT NFA -23.93717 28.36420

Elaeodendron transvaalense School 1 NT NFA -23.93713 28.36398



Appendix 3. Potentially occurring plant species of conservation concern

Species Family Red Data

Status Habitat Likelihood Reason

Justicia minima Acanthaceae Rare Rocky riverbeds Low Unsuitable habitat

Boophone disticha Amaryllidaceae Declining Wide habitat tolerance Low All suitable habitat searched

Crinum macowanii Amaryllidaceae Declining Grassland Low Unsuitable habitat

Crinum stuhlmannii Amaryllidaceae Declining Savanna and grassland in sandy soils

Low Marginal distribution, unsuitable habitat

Brachystelma inconspicuum Apocynaceae Rare Open quartzitic grassland

Low Unsuitable habitat

Ilex mitis var. mitis Aquifoliaceae Declining Forest Low Unsuitable habitat

Elaeodendron transvaalensis Celastraceae Near

Threatened Woodland, often on rocky slopes

Confirmed

Euphorbia louwii Euphorbiaceae Rare Sandstone ridges Low Occurs to the north of the study area

Euphorbia waterbergensis Euphorbiaceae Rare Quartzitic ridges in bushveld

Low All suitable habitat searched

Acacia erioloba Fabaceae Declining Arid plains savanna Low Unsuitable habitat

Gunnera perpensa Gunneraceae Declining Wetlands Low Unsuitable habitat

Drimia altissima Hyacinthaceae Declining Rocky grassland Low All suitable habitat searched

Drimia sanguinea Hyacinthaceae Declining Rocky grassland and savanna

Moderate Some suitable habitat present

Eucomis autumnalis subsp. clavata

Hyacinthaceae Declining Wide habitat tolerance Low Marginal distribution, unsuitable habitat

Hypoxis hemerocallidea Hyacinthaceae Declining Wide habitat tolerance Low Some suitable habitat present

Ansellia africana Orchidaceae Declining Savanna Low All suitable habitat searched

Adenia gummifera var. gummifera

Passifloraceae Declining Forest and thicket Low Marginal distribution, unsuitable habitat

Freylinia tropica Scrophulareaceae Rare Streambanks Low Unsuitable habitat



Appendix 4. Checklist of fauna confirmed during fieldwork

Common Name Scientific Name Red Data

En

dem

ic

Pro

tecte

d:

Nati

on

al

Pro

tecte

d:

Pro

vin

cia

l

Bro

ad

-leav

ed

Wo

od

lan

d

Aca

cia

Wo

od

lan

d

Mammals

ORDER: PRIMATES

Family Cercopithecidae (Old World monkeys)

Vervet Monkey Chlorocebus pygerythrus x

ORDER: LAGOMORPHA

Family Leporidae (rabbits and hares)

Scrub Hare Lepus saxatilis x

ORDER: CARNIVORA

Family Hyaenidae (hyaenas)

Brown Hyaena Parahyaena brunnea NT NEMBA

(PR) LEMA

x

ORDER: TUBULIDENTATA

Family Orycteropodidae (Aardvark)

Aardvark Orycteropus afer NEMBA

(PR) LEMA

x

ORDER: PERRISODACTYLA

Family Equidae (horses)

Plains / Burchell's Zebra Equus quagga burchellii NEMBA

(PR)

x

ORDER: CETARTIODACTYLA

Family Hippopotamidae (hippopotamus)

Hippopotamus Hippopotamus amphibius VU* LEMA x

Family Bovidae (cattle & antilopes)

Kudu Tragelaphus strepsiceros x

Gemsbok Oryx gazella x



Waterbuck Kobus ellipsiprymnus x

Subtotal 9 2 0 3 3 2 7

Birds

ORDER: GALLIFORMES

Family Phasianidae (pheasants, fowl and allies)

Crested Francolin Dendroperdix sephaena x

ORDER: PELECANIFORMES

Family Threskiornithidae (ibises and spoonbills)

Hadeda Ibis Bostrychia hagedash x

Family Ardeidae (herons and bitterns)

Western Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis x

ORDER: ACCIPITRIFORMES

Family Accipitridae (kites, hawks and eagles)

Black-chested Snake Eagle Circaetus pectoralis x

ORDER: COLUMBIFORMES

Family Columbidae (pigeons and doves)

Red-eyed Dove Streptopelia semitorquata x

Laughing Dove Spilopelia senegalensis x

Emerald-spotted Wood Dove Turtur chalcospilos x x

ORDER: CUCULIFORMES

Family Cuculidae (cuckoos)

Diederik Cuckoo Chrysococcyx caprius x

Red-chested Cuckoo Cuculus solitarius x

ORDER: CAPRIMULGIFORMES

Family Caprimulgidae (nightjars)

Rufous-cheeked Nightjar Caprimulgus rufigena x

ORDER: APODIFORMES

Family Apodidae (swifts)

African Palm Swift Cypsiurus parvus x

ORDER: COLIIFORMES

Family Coliidae (mousebirds)

Red-faced Mousebird Urocolius indicus x x

ORDER: CORACIIFORMES

Family Coraciidae (rollers)

Purple Roller Coracias naevius x



Lilac-breasted Roller Coracias caudatus x

Family Alcedinidae (kingfishers)

Brown-hooded Kingfisher Halcyon albiventris x

Family Meropidae (bee-eaters)

European Bee-eater Merops apiaster x x

ORDER: BUCEROTIFORMES

Family Upupidae (hoopoes)

African Hoopoe Upupa africana x

ORDER: PICIFORMES

Family Lybiidae (African barbets)

Yellow-fronted Tinkerbird Pogoniulus chrysoconus x

Black-collared Barbet Lybius torquatus x

ORDER: PASSERIFORMES

Family Malaconotidae (bushshrikes)

Orange-breasted Bushshrike Chlorophoneus sulfureopectus x

Black-backed Puffback Dryoscopus cubla x x

Southern Boubou Laniarius ferrugineus x

Family Laniidae (shrikes)

Southern Fiscal Lanius collaris x

Family Oriolidae (figbirds and orioles)

Black-headed Oriole Oriolus larvatus x

Family Dicruridae (drongos)

Fork-tailed Drongo Dicrurus adsimilis x

Family Paridae (tits and chickadees)

Southern Black Tit Parus niger x

Family Alaudidae (larks)

Rufous-naped Lark Mirafra africana x

Family Pycnonotidae (bulbuls)

Dark-capped Bulbul Pycnonotus tricolor x x

Yellow-bellied Greenbul Chlorocichla flaviventris x

Family Hirundinidae (swallows and martins)

Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica over over

Lesser Striped Swallow Cecropis abyssinica over

Red-breasted Swallow Cecropis semirufa over

Family Macrosphenidae (crombecs and African warblers)



Long-billed Crombec Sylvietta rufescens x

Family Cisticolidae (cisticolas and allies)

Rattling Cisticola Cisticola chiniana x x

Neddicky Cisticola fulvicapilla x

Tawny-flanked Prinia Prinia subflava x

Bar-throated Apalis Apalis thoracica x

Grey-backed Camaroptera Camaroptera brevicaudata x

Family Zosteropidae (white-eyes)

Cape White-eye Zosterops virens x

Family Sturnidae (starlings)

Cape Glossy Starling Lamprotornis nitens x

Violet-backed Starling Cinnyricinclus leucogaster x

Family Turdidae (thrushes)

Kurrichane Thrush Turdus libonyanus x

Family Muscicapidae (chats and Old World flycatchers)

White-browed Scrub Robin Erythropygia leucophrys x x

Grey Tit-Flycatcher Myioparus plumbeus x

Cape Robin-Chat Cossypha caffra x

Family Nectariniidae (sunbirds)

Amethyst Sunbird Chalcomitra amethystina x

White-bellied Sunbird Cinnyris talatala x x

Family Passeridae (Old World sparrows)

Southern Grey-headed Sparrow Passer diffusus x

Family Ploceidae (weavers and widowbirds)

Southern Masked Weaver Ploceus velatus x

Red-headed Weaver Anaplectes rubriceps x

Family Motacillidae (wagtails and pipits)

Bushveld Pipit Anthus caffer x

Family Fringillidae (finches and canaries)

Yellow-fronted Canary Crithagra mozambica x x

Family Emberizidae (buntings and New World sparrows)

Golden-breasted Bunting Emberiza flaviventris x

Subtotal 53 0 0 0 0 30 33

Reptiles

Family Scincidae (skinks)



Variable Skink Trachylepis varia x

Family Lamprophiidae (African snakes) x

Short-snouted Grass Snake Psammophis brevirostris

Subtotal 2 0 0 0 0 0 2

NT = Near Threatened

VU = Vulnerable

NFA = National Forests Act

LEMA = Limpopo Environmental Management Act



Appendix 5. Potentially occurring fauna of conservation concern

Common Name Scientific Name

Red

Data

Pro

tecte

d

Habitat Likelihood Reason

Mammals

Cheetah Acinonyx jubatus VU NEMBA

(VU) Wide variety of habitats Low

May occasionally wander through

Cape Clawless Otter Aonyx capensis LEMA Rivers and streams Moderate Suitable habitat present adjacent to the study area

South African Hedgehog Atelerix frontalis NT LEMA Arid grassland and savanna Low Limited suitable habitat present

African Civet Civettictis civetta LEMA Wide variety of habitats High Suitable habitat present

Blue Wildebeest Connochaetes taurinus NEMBA

(PR) Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Reddish-grey Musk Shrew Crocidura cyanea DD Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Tiny Musk Shrew Crocidura fuscomurina DD Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Lesser Red Musk Shrew Crocidura hirta DD Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Peters’ Musk Shrew Crocidura silacea DD Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Spotted Hyaena Crocuta crocuta NT NEMBA

(PR) Wide variety of habitats Low Low density

Short-snouted Elephant-shrew Elephantulus brachyrhynchus DD Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Burchell's Zebra Equus quagga burchelli NEMBA

(PR) Wide variety of habitats Confirmed

Black-footed Cat Felis nigripes NEMBA

(PR) Open grassland and shrubland Low

Limited suitable habitat present

African Wild Cat Felis silvestris LEMA Wide variety of habitats High Suitable habitat present

Southern Lesser Galago Galago moholi LEMA Savanna High Suitable habitat present

Yellow-spotted Rock Hyrax Heterohyrax brucei LEMA Rocky woodland Low No suitable habitat present

Hippopotamus Hippopotamus amphibius VU LEMA Wetlands Confirmed

Botswana Long-eared Bat Laephotis botswanae VU Savanna, rocky outcrops Low No known roosts in South Africa

Single-striped Grass-Mouse Lemniscomys rosalia DD Woodland with tall grass Low Unsuitable habitat



Serval Leptailurus serval NT NEMBA

(PR) Grassland, wetlands Low


African Wild Dog Lycaon pictus EN NEMBA

(EN) Wide variety of habitats Low


Honey Badger Mellivora capensis NT LEMA Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Forest Shrew Myosorex varius DD Wide variety of habitats Low Edge of distribution range

Klipspringer Oreotragus oreotragus LEMA Rocky woodland Low No suitable habitat present

Aardvark Otycteropus afer NEMBA


Bat-eared Fox Otocyon megalotis LEMA Semi-desert, arid woodland and grassland

Low Unsuitable habitat present

Thick-tailed Greater Galago Otolemur crassicaudatus LEMA Moist woodland and forest Moderate Suitable habitat present

Leopard Panthera pardus NT NEMBA

(PR) Wide variety of habitats Low


Brown Hyaena Parahyaena brunnea NT NEMBA


Rusty Bat Pipistrellus rusticus NT Savanna, riparian forest, tree dwelling Moderate Suitable habitat present

African Weasel Poecilogale albinucha DD Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Jameson’s Red Rock Rabbit Pronolagus randensis LEMA Rocky slopes in savanna Low No suitable habitat present

Aardwolf Proteles cristatus LEMA Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Steenbok Raphicerus campestris LEMA Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Sharpe's Grysbok Raphicerus sharpei NT NEMBA

(PR) Broad-leaved Woodland Low No suitable habitat present

Mountain Reedbuck Redunca fulvorufula LEMA Grassland and open woodland on slopes

Moderate Limited suitable habitat present

Ground Pangolin Smutsia temminckii VU NEMBA

(VU) Wide variety of habitats Low Increasingly rare species

Bushveld Gerbil Tatera leucogaster DD Woodland, thicket Moderate Suitable habitat present

Cape Fox Vulpes chama NEMBA

(PR) Open grassland and shrubland Low


Subtotal 39 22 28

Birds

Tawny Eagle Aquila rapax EN NEMBA

(EN) Savanna Low

Unsuitable habitat and very rare in area



Verreauxs' Eagle Aquila verreauxii VU Mountains and surrounding vegetation Low Unsuitable habitat present

Abdim's Stork Ciconia abdimii NT Open arid woodland and grassland Low Unsuitable habitat present

Black Stork Ciconia nigra VU Forages in wetlands and breeds on cliffs

Low Unsuitable habitat present

European Roller Coracias garrulus NT Savanna Moderate Suitable habitat present

Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus VU Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

Red-footed Falcon Falco vespertinus NT Arid savanna and grasslands Low No suitable habitat present

White-backed Vulture Gyps africanus EN NEMBA

(EN) Savanna Low Low density

Cape Vulture Gyps coprotheres EN NEMBA

(EN) Mountains and surrounding vegetation Low Low density

Marabou Stork Leptoptilos crumeniferus NT Wetlands, savanna Low Limited suitable habitat present, disturbance

Denham’s Bustard Neotis denhami VU NEMBA

(VU) Grassland Low No suitable habitat present

Martial Eagle Polemaetus bellicosus EN NEMBA

(EN) Wide variety of habitats Moderate Suitable habitat present

African Finfoot Podica senegalensis VU Rivers with over-hanging vegetation

Low Limited suitable habitat present

Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius VU Open savanna and grassland Low No suitable habitat present

Lappet-faced Vulture Torgos tracheliotos EN NEMBA

(EN) Savanna Low Low density

Subtotal 15 15 6

Reptiles

Nile Crocodile Crocodylus niloticus VU NEMBA

(VU) Waterbodies Low Unsuiatble habitat present

Orange-throated Flat Lizard Platysaurus monotropis EN Sandstone outcrops Low Only known from a very small area to the NE of the study area

Southern African Python Python natalensis NEMBA

(PR) Wide variety of habitats, but usually near water or rocky outcrops

High Suitable habitat present

Subtotal 3 2 2

TOTAL 57 39 36



EN = Endangered

VU = Vulnerable

NT = Near-threatened

DD = Data Deficient

PR = Protected

NEMBA = National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act


Nov 2016


Appendix 6. Duncan McKenzie CV

Name: Duncan Robert McKenzie

Profession: Terrestrial Ecologist

Date of Birth: 9 Nov 1977

Name of Firm: ECOREX Consulting Ecologists cc

Position in Firm:Ecologist

Years with firm: 8

Nationality: South African

Qualifications :

N.Dip. [Nature Conservation]

N.Cert. [Nature Guiding]

UNISA, RSA

Drumbeat Academy, RSA

2007

2004

Membership in Professional Societies:

BirdLife South Africa

Animal Demography Unit, University of Cape Town

Botanical Society of South Africa

Languages :

Speaking Reading Writing

English (home): Excellent Excellent Excellent

Afrikaans: Good Good Good

isiZulu: Good Fair Fair

Spanish: Fair Fair Fair

Countries of Work Experience : Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland,

Zimbabwe (Guiding). South Africa, Mozambique, DRC, Mali, Lesotho, Tanzania, Swaziland, Sierra Leone

(Consulting Ecologist)

OVERVIEW OF EXPERIENCE

9 years’ experience in specialist species identification, conducting baseline surveys, data analysis and

report writing in various biomes in southern Africa, particularly savannah, forest and grassland biomes

2 years experience game reserve management (KwaZulu-Natal)

5 years’ experience (part time) of wetland delineation and management

2 years experience of plant propagation and use for rehabilitation

Specialist knowledge of identification of vascular plants

Specialist knowledge of identification of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians

SABAP2 Regional Co-ordinator: Mpumalanga

Member of the Kwa-Zulu-Natal Bird Rarities Committee

Employment Record:

2007 - present ECOREX Ecologist

2005 - 2006 Iglu (London, UK) Specialist Travel Agent

1997 - 2005 Duncan McKenzie Bird Tours Owner, Specialist Guide

2001 KZN Wildlife District Conservation Officer, Reserve

Manager

1999 - 2001 Institute of Natural Resources Part-time Horticulturalist and Rehabilitation

Officer

1997-2001 Mondi Wetlands Project Part-time Field Assistant and Regional Co-

ordinator

1996-1997 Natal Parks Board Ranger


Nov 2016


Appendix 7. Specialist Declaration Form

10.4 The Specialist Note: Duplicate this section where there is more than one specialist. I …Duncan McKenzie…, as the appointed specialist hereby declare/affirm the correctness of the information provided as part of the application, and that I:

in terms of the general requirement to be independent (tick which is applicable):

X other than fair remuneration for work performed/to be performed in terms of this application, have no business, financial, personal or other interest in the activity or application and that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity; or

am not independent, but another EAP that is independent and meets the general requirements set out in Regulation 13 has been appointed to review my work (Note: a declaration by the review specialist must be submitted);

have expertise in conducting specialist work as required, including knowledge of the Act, regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;

will ensure compliance with the EIA Regulations 2014;

will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the application;

will take into account, to the extent possible, the matters listed in regulation 18 of the regulations when preparing the application and any report, plan or document relating to the application;

will disclose to the proponent or applicant, registered interested and affected parties and the competent authority all material information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority or the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority (unless access to that information is protected by law, in which case I will indicate that such protected information exists and is only provided to the competent authority);

declare that all the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct;

am aware that it is an offence in terms of Regulation 48 to provide incorrect or misleading information and that a person convicted of such an offence is liable to the penalties as contemplated in section 49B(2) of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act 107 of 1998).

Signature of the specialist ECOREX Consulting Ecologists CC Name of company 05/12/2016 Date


Nov 2016


DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

We declare that we have been appointed as independent consulting ecologists with no

affiliation with or vested financial interests in the proponent, other than for work performed

under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010. We have no conflicting

interests in the undertaking of this activity and have no interests in secondary developments

resulting from the authorisation of this project. Remuneration for our services by the

proponent is not linked to approval by any decision-making authority responsible for

authorising this development. A specialist declaration form has been completed and included

in Appendix 3.

W.L.McCleland 05 December 2016

D.R. McKenzie 05 December 2016

lapalala school development€¦ · km north of vaalwater and 80 km west of mokopane, lephalale...

Documents