olifants river water resources … perspective final.pdf · olifants river water resources...

DEPARTMENT OF WATER AFFAIRS AND FORESTRY

DIRECTORATE OPTIONS ANALYSIS

REPORT NO.: P WMA 04/B50/00/3204

OLIFANTS RIVER WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

(ORWRDP)

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (12/12/20/553)

INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT

STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE Final

June 2005

Compiled for: ACER (Africa) Environmental Management Consultants/ CSIR Environmentek PO Box 503 Mtunzini 3867

Compiled by: Environmental Assessment Technologies CC P.O. Box 74564 Lynnwood Ridge 0040

Olifants River Water Resources Development Project Environmental Assessment

Strategic Perspective

i

REPORT DETAILS Project name: Olifants River Water Resources Development

Project

Report Title: Environmental Impact Assessment: Infrastructure Development Specialist Study: Strategic Perspective

Authors: JS Ballot

Departmental report reference no.: P WMA 04/B50/00/3204

PSP project reference no.: ORWRDP Strategic Perspective Specialist Study

Status of report: Final

First issue: April 2005

Final issue: June 2005

Environmental Assessment Technologies Approved for PSP by:

JS Ballot Study Leader

Date

INDEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT Accepted by the Independent Environmental Consultant by:

Dr PJ Ashton EIA Co-Leader

Date Dr R-D Heinsohn EIA Co-Leader

Date

PROJECT CO-ORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT TEAM Accepted by the PCMT by:

MS Basson Project Co-ordinator and Manager

Date

DEPARTMENT WATER AFFAIRS AND FORESTRY Accepted for DWAF by:

OJS van den Berg Manager: Options Analysis (North)

Date LS Mabuda Senior Manager: Options Analysis

Date



ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Olifants River Water Resources Development Project (ORWRDP) consists of two phases. Phase 1 is currently underway. Its main component is the raising of the Flag Boshielo Dam. Phase 2 will consist of a major dam at De Hoop and the construction of other infrastructure such as pipelines, specifically within the Middle Olifants region. The ORWRDP is not a project which exists in isolation. It is part of a bigger development scenario that is being played out in the north eastern part of South Africa, particularly the north western parts of Mpumalanga and the south eastern parts of Limpopo. What this Strategic Perspective study has essentially done is to try to answer the key questions around the substantial influence and effect that the ORWRP will have on the greater environment around it and conversely what effect the environment will have on the development. This has been done by using the following assessment framework. • Understanding the relevant elements in the existing environment. • Establishing the strategic intent of the development or projects undertaken. • Understanding the boundaries and issues involved in the assessment. • Analysis of trends and forces that shape and direct development. • Strategic assessment • Recommendations and mitigation General Government policy as well Provincial Growth Government Strategies, see the role of mining as a future platform for development and further economic growth on a regional basis. In the light of this and seen together with the current situation of industry and development in the Middle Olifants area, it would appear that the strategic intent of the ORWRDP must be: • To enable and underpin further mining development in a large area of the middle

Olifants region particularly the Steelpoort Valley. • To attract further/continued investment in secondary development such as roads,

housing and municipal services. • To provide the means for augmenting bulk water supplies to urban, mining and/or

industrial sectors in Polokwane and Mokopane at a later date. • Delivery of basic water services to many more people in the Nebo plateau and

Sekhukhuneland region in the future by other agencies. In terms of the important questions identified during the formal EIA scoping process, the fact that the study must of necessity set wide boundaries, together with the strategic context of the ORWRDP, the main issue that this strategic perspective must address is:

To what extent or in what way will the ORWRDP contribute to, support or detract from the sustainable development and use of the water and all the other resources of value in the the Olifants WMA?

During the analysis process the following important resources of value were used to better understand the different environmental effects that can be expected from the ORWRDP. 1 The physical infrastructure of the ORWRDP. 2 The water resources of the Olifants WMA. 3 Water quality in the Olifants River. 4 The coal mining areas of the Upper Olifants Region. 5 The mineral resources of the Middle Olifants region. 6 The mining areas of the Lower Olifants.



iii

7 The Kruger National Park and adjacent conservation areas. 8 The large ecotourism areas like the Highlands Meander and Panorama ecotourism

routes in Mpumalanga and the Kruger to Canyons Biosphere Reserve area in the Central Lowveld.

9 The rural human population of the Greater Sekhukhune District. What was found from the analysis and assessment was that there are three cumulative impacts that are of greatest significance when considering the place or part that the ORWRP has in the greater development picture in the Middle Olifants region. 1 Reduced water quantities and quality for all the water resources of the Olifants River

System. (High negative cumulative impact under existing/current conditions) 2 It will bring some development and social upliftment in Sekhukhune Region. (Low

positive cumulative impact under existing/current conditions). 3 The degree of negative risk that the Mpumalanga Panorama, Highlands Meander and

Kruger to Canyons ecotourism areas are exposed to mainly as a result of the effect of developments on the water resources of the Olifants River (high negative cumulative impact under existing current conditions).

The cumulative effects are not caused primarily by the impacts of the ORWRDP itself. They come from indirect effects caused by secondary development. The main problem, particularly in terms of the water resources is the development of mining. All of these impacts can be mitigated (-ve) or enhanced (+ve) through appropriate management action. The interventions that have been recommended in all cases require cooperation between different spheres of government, along with different sectors of civil society. In terms of the water resources in general, it is important is that institutional, legal and administrative structures are put in place to manage the water resources of the Olifants River System on a catchment wide basis. This must happen sooner rather than later. The main functions of such institutional arrangements must be to: • Oversee water allocations and water use in an equitable way for the whole Olifants

System. • Monitor and regulate the consumptive use of water. • Monitor and regulate non consumptive uses such as waste discharge and disposal. • Enforcement of pollution control regulations. • Facilitate cooperation and integration of water resource use and protection on a

catchment wide basis. In terms of water resources and mining, it is important that collective action is taken. 1 The full reality of the cumulative effects that will occur and the possible direct impact

that this will have on the water resources of the region must be fully understood and the responsibility for managing the impacts must be accepted, by those that advocate and promote mining development.

2 Genuine commitment and effective cooperation between DWAF, DME and the mining companies involved will be necessary to ensure that the water resources are used sustainably and properly protected.

3 From the start, not at the end of the mining cycle, the regulators and all the mines involved must work together and take action on a collective basis in a "cluster" arrangement, to manage the impacts on the water resources of the region, rather than



iv

on an individual basis as is currently the case in typical EMPR and EMP authorisation processes.

4 This must also be seen as part of and aligned with the overall management of the whole Olifants River System, as advocated above.

In terms of water resources and the ecotourism areas, what must be realised is that they originate or are situated in some prime natural areas. Within these areas there are already some large cluster developments and it is planned to develop more e.g. agriculture and mining. Existing developments all rely on water from the Olifants River System. The new ones will be made possible or will be supported by water provided from the ORWRDP. There will be a knock on effect in terms of the natural resources particularly water that underpins the economic activity that takes place in these areas. There must be a proper understanding of the need and importance of supplying good water quality from the Olifants River system to the aquatic ecosystems in the Kruger National Park. The minimum flows should not just be adequate to meet the requirements of the Reserve, but should also take into account what the external costs are and what value is lost, if adequate water supplies are not made available to the ecotourism sector in the Kruger National Park. In terms of enhancing economic growth and development in the Sekhukhune Region, what must be understood, is that in the absence of an approach of purposeful long term diversification and expansion of the local economy in the Middle Olifants, the desired growth will probably not take place. The Greater Sekhukhune Region is unlikely to benefit from the mining development unless there is a concerted effort to counteract the establishment and operation of a local economy built almost solely around an extractive industry and based on the exploitation of the region's natural resources (minerals and water). To do this once again action must be taken from a very early stage of the mining development cycle. Those representing all relevant spheres of government together with the mines involved, must work together. Action must be taken on a collective basis in a "cluster" arrangement, to ensure that economic growth is diversified and managed over as broad a front and as widely as possible. Action by mines on an individual basis will not have the same impact as collective and coordinated effort on the part of all concerned. Provincial Growth and Development Strategies and LDPs, together with instruments such as the Mining Charter, mines' social plans, EMP's, water use licenses and the like, must be used collectively and in a harmonized way, to coordinate and implement these actions.



v

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................. v Glossary of Terms ........................................................................................................................... vii Definitions ......................................................................................................................... viii 1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1

1.1 Terms of Reference..........................................................................................................2 1.2 Assumptions and Limitations ............................................................................................2 1.3 Approach and Literature Reviewed...................................................................................3

2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION..................................................................................................4

2.1 The Olifants River Basin ...................................................................................................6 2.1.1 Ecotourism .............................................................................................................6 2.1.2 Mining.....................................................................................................................8 2.1.3 The Water Resources of the Olifants River...........................................................12

3 APPROACH USED IN THIS ASSESSMENT..............................................................................17

3.1 Strategic assessment processes ....................................................................................17 4 STRATEGIC CONTEXT OF THE ORWRP.................................................................................19

4.1 Background ....................................................................................................................19 4.2 Policies, Plans and Programmes ....................................................................................19

4.2.1 Limpopo Provincial Growth and Development Strategy........................................21 4.2.2 Mpumalanga Provincial Growth and Development Strategy .................................22 4.2.3 Local Development Plans .....................................................................................22 4.2.4 National Policy......................................................................................................24

4.3 Strategic Intent of the ORWRDP ....................................................................................26 5 BOUNDARIES AND ISSUES .....................................................................................................27

5.1 Area under consideration................................................................................................27 5.2 Important or key issues...................................................................................................29 5.3 Resources of value.........................................................................................................30

6 ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................32

6.1 The infrastructure of the ORWRDP ................................................................................34 6.2 Olifants Water Resources (Quality and Quantity) ...........................................................35 6.3 Coal Mining Areas ..........................................................................................................35 6.4 Middle Olifants Mineral Resource Development .............................................................36 6.5 Lower Olifants Mining and Industry.................................................................................37 6.6 Kruger National Park ......................................................................................................37 6.7 Ecotourism Areas ...........................................................................................................38 6.8 Greater Sekhukhune Region ..........................................................................................39



vi

7 ASSESSMENT ...........................................................................................................................41 7.1 Cumulative Effects Before Management Action..............................................................42

7.1.1 Water Resources of the Olifants River System.....................................................42 7.1.2 The Sekhukhune Region ......................................................................................43 7.1.3 Mpumalanga Panorama, Highlands and K2C Ecotourism Areas..........................44 7.1.4 The Middle Olifants Mineral Resources Development ..........................................47 7.1.5 Discussion ............................................................................................................47

7.2 Future Incremental Effects..............................................................................................47 7.2.1 Compounding negative impacts on water resources ............................................48 7.2.2 Compounding social upliftment in Sekhukhune Region ........................................49 7.2.3 Impacts on Ecotourism and Natural Areas............................................................51 7.2.4 Discussion ............................................................................................................52

8 DISCUSSION, MITIGATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................54

8.1 Water Resources............................................................................................................54 8.1.1 Olifants River System ...........................................................................................54 8.1.2 Water Resources and Mining................................................................................56 8.1.3 Water Resources and Tourism .............................................................................59

8.2 Development in the Sekhukhune Region........................................................................59 8.3 Final Comment ...............................................................................................................61

9 BIBLIOGRAPHY.........................................................................................................................63 APPENDIX A .............................................................................................................................65 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: The ORWRDP – Olifants River Catchment..........................................................................................5 Figure 2: Effect of Mining on Water Quality in the Olifants and Limpopo Catchments.....................................15 Figure 3: ORWRDP Infrastructure .....................................................................................................................20 Figure 4: Resources of value and cumulative effects........................................................................................33 Figure 5: Natural and ecotourism areas ............................................................................................................46 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Selected water chemistry data for water samples contaminated by mining activity in the Upper

Olifants (Data taken from Table 5.6 in MMSD 2001)..........................................................................9 Table 2: Comparison of water quality characteristics of water samples collected from the Selati and Olifants

Rivers near Phalaborwa (All units in mg/litre, except pH (log units) and conductivity (mS/metre)). (Data taken from Table 5.13 in MMSD, 2001) ..................................................................................12



vii

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

AMD Acid mine drainage

CEA Cumulative Effects Assessment

CEPA Canadian Environmental Protection Agency

DEA Department of Environment Affairs

DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

DME Department of Minerals and Energy

DWAF Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EPA (US) Environmental Protection Agency

EWR Ecological water requirements

GSDM Greater Sekhukhune District Municipality

IDC Industrial Development Corporation

IDP Integrated Development Plan

IEM Integrated Environmental Management

ISP Internal Strategic Perspective

K2C Kruger to Canyons (Biosphere Reserve)

KNP Kruger National Park

KOSH Klerksdorp, Orkney, Stilfontein, Hartbeesfontein

LGDS Limpopo Growth and development Strategy

MAR Mean annual runoff

MPRDA Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act No. 15 of 2002.

NEMA National Environmental Management Act No. 107 of 1998

NWA National Water Act No. 36 of 1998

ORWRDP Olifants River Water Resources development Project

PGM Platinum Group Metals

ROV Resources of value

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

UNESCO United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation



viii

DEFINITIONS Cumulative effects/impacts: An action that in itself is not significant but is significant when added to the impact of other similar actions (DEA, 1992). Endorheic: Referring to a surface drainage not reaching the sea. Ephemeral streams: Surface water streams that flow for a very short time, i.e. immediately after rainstorms. Development project: Specific detailed and concrete actions, activities or courses of action, packaged within a discrete implementation schedule, related to timeframes, financial allocations and performance specifications, with the specific purpose of delivering predetermined, tangible results. Development programme: A coherent, organised agenda or schedule of commitments, proposal instruments and/or activities that elaborate and implement policy related to sustainable development (CSIR, 1997). Environment means the surroundings within which humans exist and that are made up of: - the land, water and atmosphere of the earth; - micro-organisms, plant and animal life; - any part or combination of (i) and (ii) and the interrelationships among and between

them; - the physical, chemical, aesthetic and cultural properties and conditions of the foregoing

that influence human health and well-being. (NEMA). Environmental impact: The degree of change in an environment resulting from the effect of an activity on the environment, whether desirable or undesirable. Impacts may be the direct consequence of an organisation’s activities or may be indirectly caused by them. (DEAT Guideline Document) Indicators: measures the condition of the resource of interest, used as variables in the modelling of changes in environmental systems over time. Integrated Development Plan: A strategic development plan as envisaged in section 25 of the Municipal Systems Act No. 32 of 2000. It includes the vision for long term development in the municipality, development priorities and objectives, transformation needs and development strategies. Lead agent: Legal persona duly appointed and with whom the sole responsibility and duty rests to make decisions or to undertake duties or execute functions, in terms of specific administrative actions required for the implementation of development projects, unless the right to delegate the right or duty had been specifically conferred. Limits of acceptable change: Limits or standards set to which the natural environment will be allowed to degrade, but beyond which degradation will not be compromised. A basic assumption of LAC is that direct and indirect human intervention in the natural environment is virtually impossible to prevent, which then inevitably leads to degradation, but it can be accepted and managed, but only up to certain limits.



ix

Linkage: The direct interaction or nature of the connectivity between just two distinct environmental elements, in a cause – effect relationship. Pathway: The total route description of the full cause - effect relationship and the interactions between the original source (cause) of stress in the environment, the intermediate environmental elements and the eventual manifestation of the stress (effect). Policy: A general course of action or proposed overall direction that is being pursued and which guides ongoing decision-making (CSIR, 1997). Residual effects: Effects that remain after mitigation has been applied. Resources of value: In the context of this guideline document resources of value are prioritised components of the environment (interpreted in its widest sense e.g. human, natural, economic, aesthetic, cultural, etc.) that are deemed to be valuable after consideration of input by participants in a public review process, as well as analysis and interpretation of all factors in a formal cumulative effects assessment process. Scoping: An analytical process in the public domain for identifying the ambit, extent and underlying framework of the cumulative effects assessment process. Confirms temporal and spatial boundaries, main issues, information needed and places priorities on selected resources of value. Significance: Informed evaluation and value judgement or measurement, assigned to a cumulative effect identified as acting on a selected resource of value, that guides the decision making process as to whether, in what manner and to what degree, mitigation measures should be implemented to protect or safeguard the resource of value. Measured as high, medium or low significance. Strategic Environmental Assessment: A process of integrating the concept of sustainability into strategic decision-making. (SEA Guidelines) Sustainable development: Development which meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (Brundtland Report, 1987) Synergistic effects: cumulative effects that result when the interaction of a number of impacts is greater (or less) than the sum of the individual impacts. Threshold: A limit of tolerance of an environmental resource to an effect, which if exceeded, results in an adverse response by that resource.



1

1 INTRODUCTION The Olifants River is an integral part of an international river system. It is a major component of the Limpopo River System which is shared between Botswana, Mozambique, South Africa and Zimbabwe. There has been ongoing development of the water resources of the Olifants River over many decades in South Africa. So much so that it now contributes significantly not only to the national but also to the regional economies of two provinces namely Limpopo and Mpumalanga. About 5% of the South African GDP is produced within the catchment of the Olifants River. This is centred mainly in the upper catchment on the Mpumalanga Highveld, where coal mining activities take place and all of the country's largest thermal power stations are situated. However, there is reason to believe that further development of the water resources of the Olifants River is essential to underpin needed economic growth and expansion as well as social upliftment of the people in large areas of the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces. Existing water resource developments are found mainly in the upper parts of the Olifants River catchment. There has been relatively little water resources development in the middle and lower parts of the Olifants River, which includes one of its main tributaries, namely the Steelpoort River. The available water resources in these regions are currently used mainly for direct supply of domestic and irrigation needs. The existing large water demands centres in the catchment are the following: - Coal mining and thermal power generation in the upper catchment. - Domestic demand over a wide area on the Western Highveld of Mpumalanga; - The Loskop Irrigation scheme. - Domestic, industrial and mining demands at Polokwane and Phalaborwa. - Irrigation on the lower Blyde River; and - Demands for the Ecological Reserve. In terms of their mandate to manage the water resources of South Africa in a sustainable manner, the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) plans to implement the Olifants River Water Resources Development Project (ORWRDP) (see Figure 1). It comprises two main phases. • Phase 1 - raising Flag Boshielo Dam • Phase 2 – De Hoop Dam and associated bulk distribution infrastructure in the middle

Olifants region. It is imperative that any further development of the water resources of the Olifants River has to be planned and viewed as a vehicle to underpin development on a very wide and regional front. It must be planned in a manner that is integrated, comprehensive and effective, so that the effects and results of the development process, benefit as many people and as broadly as possible. The purpose of this study is to a large extent premised on this statement so that the planned development can be considered within the strategic environmental context of the whole of the sub region.



2

For instance, the Olifants is one of the major rivers feeding the Kruger National Park. In both the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces ecotourism is considered a major driver in the growth and development strategies of their regional economies. Any other developments that impact on the water resources of the Olifants River System may therefore have a direct and strategic effect on a very important development and economic sector (tourism) on a provincial and regional basis. 1.1 Terms of Reference The essence of the terms of reference for this work is to give a strategic perspective on the direct and indirect effects and the cumulative impacts, that can be expected from the development of the ORWRDP. The terms of reference are presented in more detail in Appendix A. 1.2 Assumptions and Limitations As with any environmental assessment process, this evaluation is subject to certain limitations and assumptions that must be noted when trying to understand the import, the significance and the context of the findings of this report. 1 No new research and a very limited amount of investigative work were carried out

during this investigation. There is already an extended knowledge base to underpin developments and environmental concerns and issues for the area under consideration. The process therefore made use of existing data and other information wherever possible from the many source documents that are available.

2 Broad consultation and input from stakeholders and interest groups was not sought specifically for this work. Very limited and very focused consultation with stakeholders was carried out where appropriate. However, a significant amount of formal and broad-based public consultation was done for the ORWRDP in general and for the generic environmental assessment process in particular. This included public meetings and community liaison and is still ongoing

3 This is not a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) in the classical sense or as it is understood in South Africa today. An investigative approach has been used that is called a strategic perspective. It borrows from the methodologies of higher order environmental assessment processes but does not purport to be the same.

4 Important elements that are normally part of an SEA framework like an environmental vision, alternatives and sustainability parameters are not really considered.

5 The exercise must be seen as an endeavour to assist in and to support the environmental decision making and authorisation processes, required under existing and impending regulations in this country. It therefore considers not just the letter but also the broader spirit of requirements that are actually part of decision making and authorisation in the environmental management regulatory process. These include the principles of sustainable development, cumulative impacts, environmental opportunity costs, integrated development planning and programmes and to some extent policies.

6 Because it is more strategic in nature, this assessment looks only at the main elements of the primary broad development options and alternatives that can be identified for the area under consideration.



3

7 Key strategic issues have been identified and used to focus the assessment. They form the link between what exists (current status) and what has to be achieved (policy).

1.3 Approach and Literature Reviewed Noting the limitations and assumptions given above, the sources of information used and the types of reports that have been scanned are the following: 1 The specialist reports prepared for the environmental assessment process for the

ORWRDP. 2 Previous reports prepared in feasibility and screening studies for the ORWRDP

(DWAF, 2004a). 3 The ORWRDP Environmental Authorisation Study Draft Scoping Report (DWAF,

2005a). 4 The DWAF overview and strategic perspective reports on the Olifants, as well as other

Water Management Areas. 5 Other specialist reports such as the Minerals and Mining Sustainable Development

reports of 2001 (MMSD, 2001). 6 Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy (summary presentation). 7 Mpumalanga Growth and Development Strategy (summary presentation). 8 Greater Sekhukhune Municipality Integrated Development Plan



4

2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Economic, development and investment planning studies have shown that demand for water in the Mokopane (Mogalakwena River Catchment), Polokwane (Sand River Catchment), the Dilokong Mining Corridor between Lebowakgomo and Burgersfort and the Steelpoort River Valley and environs will increase in the future. It includes domestic and mining water supplies in an area that is situated mainly in or adjacent to the Middle Olifants sub region. Demand for water for new developments in the catchment is expected to outstrip the available water resources by 2006. It is anticipated that these future demands will shift more to the east as the coal mining activities on the Mpumalanga Highveld are scaled back. Water will be needed for the establishment of new platinum mines in the Steelpoort area, expansion of mining in the Eastern Limb of the Bushveld Igneous Complex, as well as the area west of Phalaborwa. Polokwane and Mokopane will need additional water supplies. There is also an urgent need to provide basic water supplies to large areas in the Sekhukhune and Nebo areas, where people currently have to rely on precarious supplies of domestic water. In addition water may also be required for agricultural purposes. There are a number of irrigation schemes that could be developed for emerging farmers. Although some are based on the resuscitation or revival of existing water allocations, there are possibilities for the development of new schemes (sugar cane) in a number of areas. Any new requirements will be centred on or adjacent to the Middle Olifants sub region. In order to make sure that the water demands and associated delivery deadlines can be met, the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) commissioned the Olifants River Water Resources Development Project (ORWRDP) (see Figure 1). It comprises two phases. Phase 1 involves the raising of Flag Boshielo Dam and Phase 2 the investigation and development of additional water resource infrastructure, specifically within the Middle Olifants Water Management Area. Implementation of Phase 1 is already far advanced. Phase 2 is now entering its final planning stages and consists essentially of the following large components of infrastructure: • A dam at the farm De Hoop, including road realignments. • A pipeline and associated pump stations from De Hoop along the mining rim to Atok

Mine. • A pipeline and associated pump stations from Flag Boshielo Dam to Mokopane. A project team headed by ACER (Africa) Environmental Management Consultants (ACER) together with CSIR Environmentek (CSIR), was appointed by DWAF to deal with the integrated environmental management (IEM) aspects related to the infrastructure developments for Phase 2 of the ORWRDP.



5

Figure 1: The ORWRDP – Olifants River Catchment



6

2.1 The Olifants River Basin The Olifants River is very important in the context of economic activity in South Africa. A large amount of information in terms of the water resources, hydrology, climate, land use, rainfall, economic activity, demographics, geology, terrestrial ecology and many other aspects, is available elsewhere. It may be found in the other reports prepared for the environmental assessment of the ORWRDP and the other source documents referred to. It will not be given here. However, it is necessary to provide a bit of a broader perspective on certain key areas or themes, that are related to sustainable use of natural resources in the Olifants River System. 2.1.1 Ecotourism There are a number of important ecotourism areas within the ambit of the regions adjoining the project area. Some of these are related to regional initiatives where the attractions and points of interest, cultural imagery and historic or other significance, are all packaged together as a tourism experience that can be presented to different market segments. Other places or areas are significant in their own right as destinations. Among the most important of the latter type are the following:

1 The Kruger National Park and adjoining protected areas (Klaserie, Timbavati, Olifants Conservancy, Umbabat, etc). The KNP is Africa's and one of the world's premier conservation areas and ecotourism destinations.

2 Wolkberg Wilderness Area on the northern rim of the Olifants catchment. 3 Legalametse Nature Reserve south east of the Wolkberg. 4 Loskop Dam Nature Reserve.

Together with these, as mentioned above there are also large areas that have been identified on a regional scale and are the target of intensive eco-tourism development initiatives. They lie in both Mpumalanga and Limpopo Provinces and border on or are directly linked or affected by the Olifants River. Mpumalanga Ecotourism Areas The Mpumalanga Provincial Government has divided the province up into a number of unique tourism areas. There are three along the Olifants River that are applicable to this strategic perspective.

1 Cultural Heartland. Includes an area in the west of the province, taking in the towns of Witbank, Middelburg, Siyabuswa, Groblersdal, Marble Hall and Roossenekal. The Cultural Heartland exposes visitors to the colourful Ndebele culture who are renowned for their vibrant house painting, bead work and crafts, all of which are on display at cultural villages in the region. The Loskop Dam Nature Reserve falls within this area.

2 Highlands Meander. An area which extends from Carolina and Barberton in the south, through Dullstroom and Lydenburg and up to the Steelpoort River and Burgersfort in the north. The area is a nature lover's paradise and the area around Dullstroom is South Africa's premier fly-fishing destination. However its unique attractions include a number of rare bird species, rock climbing, and spectacular wild flower displays within an area characterised by wild mountain ravines and streams. The De Hoop Dam will be built within this ecotourism area.



7

3 The Panorama. This area lies on the northern tip of the Province all along the escarpment. It is situated on the east side of the project area where the De Hoop Dam will be built. It includes the Blyde River Canyon, Bourke's Luck Potholes and three rondawels. The towns of Lydenburg and White River are gateways to the route, which takes visitors through the towns of Pilgrim's Rest, Sabie, Graskop, Ohrigstad and Hazyview.

The Kruger National Park South Africa is rich in biodiversity, and is recognised as the third most biologically diverse country in the world. Many of South Africa’s people have livelihoods dependant on this biodiversity, which also forms the base on which much of the country’s development is built. This is true of the Kruger National Park (KNP) itself, as well as large areas that surround it. The Kruger National Park is South Africa's premier ecotourism destination and second most important tourist draw card overall. The Olifants River enters the KNP just south of Phalaborwa and flows through the Park before entering Mozambique. The KNP is the anchor point for all eco-tourism and related activities over a significant part of the Lowveld areas of the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces. The economic value which such a large area of consolidated conservation land adds to the region is inestimable. This relates to factors such as direct land values as well as heightened economic and business appeal and a multitude of business opportunities, especially those in the tourism sector. The total area of the KNP is almost 20 000 km2. It is a true haven of biodiversity. Its game population alone includes more than 130 species of mammals, over 450 bird species, 114 species of reptiles and 40 species of fish. In no other game sanctuary in the world is so much available to people who have many different pastimes and interests. The Olifants is one of 7 major rivers that feed the KNP. It is the main water resource of the central section of the Park. Like all the others, the Olifants is a river in crisis. The water that reaches the KNP that is needed to maintain acceptable levels of biodiversity is unacceptable in terms of both quality and quantity. The Olifants River now carries such a high sediment load that it threatens to silt up its natural pools, which are important to riverine eco-systems. Whereas in very recent history all the main rivers of the KNP were considered to be strongly perennial, this has now changed so that it is no longer so. Agricultural, industrial, mining and water use for human consumption along the whole length of the Olifants has reduced it to a shadow of what it once was. The flows that do reach the KNP are increasingly polluted with a greatly reduced fitness for use. The Central Lowveld The area of the Olifants catchment between Phalaborwa in the east and the escarpment is commonly referred to as the Central Lowveld or also the Valley of the Olifants. The economy of this region is underpinned by three distinct thrusts. They focus on ecotourism and agriculture in a wide area around Hoedspruit, mining around Phalaborwa and Gravelotte and forestry and more traditional mass tourism-based activities in the south towards Pilgrims Rest and Graskop. Together with the sub-tropical fruit growing areas that are centred around Tzaneen in the Letaba district, the evidence suggests that this whole region is the primary driver of economic activity in the Limpopo Province. Estimates of the region's Gross



8

Geographic Product (GGP) are probably in excess of 6 billion Rand annually which accounts for some 60% of the provincial total. Tourism revenues derived from the region have increased exponentially since 1994. Starting from a relatively low base, tourism revenues are already greater than those derived from agriculture and can be expected to surpass mining income within the next decade. As a tourist destination, the region is fed from one side by the Kruger National Park, and the other from Mpumalanga's “Panorama Route”. The Central Lowveld is therefore the link between the KNP and Pilgrims Rest/Graskop, the natural splendour of the Blyde River Canyon, God’s Window and Bourke’s Luck Potholes. All of this area is now included in what is known as the Kruger to Canyons Biosphere Reserve (K2C). This is an internationally recognised development initiative that complies with and is accredited to UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere programme. In such areas widely accepted principle of planning around a core protected area, surrounded by areas where varying forms of conservation/utilisation take place, are applied. It provides opportunities to link disjunctive areas, and/or expand the area of influence of conservation considerably. In this area of the Olifants catchment and included in K2C, is an area that abuts onto the western boundary of the KNP. It lies between Acornhoek and Phalaborwa and is the largest area of privately owned conservation land in the world. The inclusion of the Timbavati, Balule, Klaserie, Umbabat and other private nature and game reserves has effectively added in excess of 250 000 ha (more than 10%) to the conservation area of the KNP. 2.1.2 Mining Mining is carried out in virtually all parts of the Olifants River Basin. However, there are three major concentrations of mining activity that are important in terms of this strategic perspective. They are:

1 The coal mining areas of the Mpumalanga Highveld. 2 The mineral rich Steelpoort Valley and adjoining areas. 3 The Phalaborwa Industrial Complex and Gravelotte.

Coal Mining Coal mining started in the Witbank area in the 1890s. It was also where the first coal fired power station was erected on the coal fields located there by the then Victoria Falls Power Company (VFP). Today there is extensive coal mining in the whole of the Upper Olifants region, particularly in the central and eastern areas. This covers the subcatchments of the Riet, Klein Olifants and the main stream of the Olifants River itself. Some of these mines are very large e.g. Optimum and Middelburg. Additional water has to be brought into the sub-catchment via inter-basin transfer schemes from the Komati, Usutu and Vaal systems, primarily to supply the large volumes required by the eight coal fired power stations located on the Mpumalanga Highveld. Most of the stations are very large in terms of generating capacity (> 3000 MW) and their pulverised fuel boilers are specially designed to burn the lower grades (> S content) of coal that otherwise could only be exploited at an unacceptably high financial premium. Power stations are also usually commissioned with their own dedicated coal supply from an adjacent colliery.



9

The available evidence suggests that the extensive coal mining in the region has had, and will continue to have, very high impacts on water resources, particularly water quality in all streams and rivers. The primary cause of the degradation is the extensive acid mine drainage where water of low pH, with high concentrations of total dissolved salts and metals, enters local water courses. This results in a complete change in water chemistry. Some work was done in the past to remedy this situation. Currently there is extensive collaboration on research, monitoring and collective effort to cut down on the impacts from coal mining on the water resources of the region. However, the large volumes of acid mine drainage and the long period of time over which these discharges and seepages have taken place has resulted in the impacts still being discernable (as altered water chemistry characteristics) over two hundred kilometres downstream from the Witbank and Highveld Coalfields. These effects are also accentuated by seepages from power station ash dumps, as well as effluent discarded by different industries and the larger municipalities. Some indication of the extent of chemical contamination of water resources from coal mining is shown in Table 1 below. The Steelpoort Valley and Adjoining Areas The greater part of the central Olifants River and its most important tributary the Steelpoort River, drain an area that is relatively dry (500 mm annual precipitation), although on the eastern rim along the escarpment, average annual precipitation does exceed 1 000 mm per annum. It is a rural area and undeveloped, with a large population that is spread out.

Table 1: Selected water chemistry data for water samples contaminated by mining activity in the Upper Olifants (Data taken from Table 5.6 in MMSD 2001).

Sampling Sites Parameter Deep

under-ground

mine

Shallow under-ground mine

Surface Flow (Close to source)

Surface Flow (750m from

source)

Surface Flow

(1500m from source)

pH 8.06 6.78 3.41 3.20 3.12

EC (mS/m) 164 228 120 212 219

Ca mg/l 186 561 60 139 144

Mg mg/l 89 107 38 83 91

Na mg/l 120 15 46 44 40

Cl mg/l 13 3 66 52 44

SO4 mg/l 910 1,767 562 1,460 1,509



10

Underlying this is a unique geological phenomena known as the Bushveld Igneous Complex (BIC). The BIC is what is known as a Lopolith (from the Greek "lopos" or basin). It was formed by the intrusion of volcanic rock into overlying geology, in four main phases of igneous activity over a long period of geological time. It is oval shaped and measures nearly 500 km from east to west on its longer axis and is several kilometres thick. On the eastern rim and to the west of Burgersfort, Steelpoort and Stofberg, the geology of the BIC is exposed over a large area. This is the Lebowa Granite Suite, Rustenburg Layered Suite and a small section of the Rooiberg Group. The BIC is the world's largest and most valuable layered intrusion. It holds over half the world's platinum, chromium, vanadium and refractory minerals and has ore reserves that could last for hundreds of years. These also include significant reserves of tin, fluorite and copper. A number of mines are already operational in the Middle Olifants. But the mineral wealth of the region is the reason why the mining sector is considered to hold the greatest potential for future economic development in Limpopo Province. Currently there is a large amount of mining in the whole of the Middle Olifants, varying from very small prospecting activities and small mines (Driefontein – Vanadium), to very large operations. The largest operating mines in the area are the following (MMSD, 2001):

• Lebowa Platinum (Chrome, Platinum) • Havercroft (Andalusite) • Dilokeng (Chrome) • Montrose (Chrome) • Winterveld (Chrome) • Lannex (Chrome) • Tweefontein (Chrome, Platinum) • Kruger’s Post (Andalusite) • Thorncliffe (Chrome) • Mapochs (Vanadium, Copper)

All of these mines have medium to large impacts on the environment and their environmental footprints are significant. Available water quality data reveal clear effects of mining on general water quality, probably due to of acidic seepage (MMSD, 2001), showing that that mining has an adverse effects on water quality in the river systems. This is in addition to possible natural background contamination, which would be caused by the general lithological makeup of the area. Considerable tension has also developed over the last two decades or so, between government, commercial farmers, irrigators and mine operators in this region, based on allegations of various types of metal toxicity to humans, crops and livestock. This has not been satisfactorily settled to date. Any expansion in mining activities in the future is sure to deepen these differences and heighten the debate of environmental degradation on a wide front. Expansion of mining activities and the implementation of a development project like the ORWRDP must therefore include programmes and policies for management options to monitor, prevent and where applicable control further degradation of the water resources. Preliminary estimates done by DWAF indicated that at least and maybe more than 25 million m3 of water per annum would be required for future mining developments that are being planned. This was in addition to the existing requirement for water supplied to established mines in the area (DWAFa, 2003 and DWAFe, 2004). Recent population estimates (Statistics



11

South Africa, 2002) predict a steady increase in population in the area, which will be centred mainly on the key mining and industrial areas. The fact is that the rich mineral deposits present in the Olifants River Catchment, are and will remain the primary driver of many developments undertaken in the area. This particular region is currently experiencing rapid and dramatic growth in the mining sector, which is expected to continue over the next few years. Specifically in terms of the ORWRDP, new mining developments aimed at the exploitation of rich deposits of platinum group metals (as well as vanadium, chrome and iron) have been initiated in the Steelpoort/Mogoto and Mokopane areas, will not be able to be implemented unless additional water resources are made available. The Phalaborwa Mining and Industrial Complex The Phalaborwa mining and industrial complex is underlain by granite and gneiss rocks of the Basement Complex. These were intruded by a cyclical series of alkaline-rich magmas that have given rise to the highly mineralised carbonatite and pyroxenite rocks of the Phalaborwa Complex. Plugs and dykes of fine-grained syenite that were intruded during the alkaline phase of the Phalaborwa Complex are resistant to weathering and remain as conspicuous stack-like hills and ridges. The main water supply to the town of Phalaborwa and its mines and industries comes from the Olifants River which lies some 12 km to the south. The Selati River which flows through the mining complex, joins the Olifants just before it enters the KNP (Mamba Weir). The Phalaborwa complex was intruded at the same time as the Bushveld Complex, and contains a veritable treasure house of minerals. The Palabora Mining Company is South Africa's largest copper producer and in addition also produces titaniferous magnetite, nickel, uranium, gold, silver, rare-earth elements, phosphates, vermiculite and PGM's. Foskor is a very large producer of phosphate and zirconium as well as small quantities of copper, PGMs and other minerals. To the west of Phalaborwa, rocks of the Gravelotte Group (part of the Murchison Sequence) and Rooiwater Complex outcrop in the vicinity of the town of Gravelotte. Quartzite, schists, basic lava and granitic rocks dominate the Gravelotte Group lithology. These greenstone formations contain important deposits of antimony and gold, with minor deposits of mercury and zinc. An extensive deposit of heavy mineral sands (illmenite, rutile and zirconium) is located near the town of Gravelotte. The mines at Phalaborwa do impact on both the Olifants and the Selati Rivers. Water quality is also further impaired by agricultural return flows and other effluent discharges upstream. After the inflow of the seepage and effluent from Phalaborwa into the Selati River, the concentrations of a few constituents increases but there is no overall improvement or worsening of water quality. In contrast, the water quality in the Phalaborwa Barrage is comparatively good, but when mixed with water from the Selati River, there is a marked deterioration in water quality as shown by the results for Mamba Weir below.



12

Table 2: Comparison of water quality characteristics of water samples collected from the Selati and Olifants Rivers near Phalaborwa (All units in mg/litre, except pH (log units) and conductivity (mS/metre)). (Data taken from Table 5.13 in MMSD, 2001)

Parameter Selati River (Upstream)

Selati River (Downstream)

Phalaborwa Barrage

Mamba Weir (B7M015)

Conductivity 342 358 48 192

pH 7.5 7.2 7.9 7.9

Ca 142 104 26 61

Mg 214 204 25 100

Na 280 325 38 141

K 84 113 1 63

Cl 1,322 1,230 34 128

F 4.3 4.4 0.3 2.1

SO4 531 594 19 254

Si 9 18 8 11.0

Total Alkalinity 266 145 170 162

NH4-H 0.21 0.16 0.04 0.05

NO2-N + NO3-N 0.24 0.07 0.10 0.02

PO4-P 0.08 0.35 0.01 0.16

Fe 0.031 0.132 - 0.131

Mn 0.095 0.332 - 0.045

Cu 0.004 0.006 - 0.002 Aquatic ecosystems in the lower Olifants River and in the KNP are placed under heavy stress by the quality of water in the Olifants River. This is greatest during the dry winter months when river flows are lowest. Moreover, there have been occasions where the water is almost unfit for human consumption in the Kruger National Park. In addition, the quality of water entering the Massingir Dam in Mozambique is not suitable for irrigation of sensitive crops and may contravene the requirements of international agreements between South Africa and Mozambique (MMSD, 2001). 2.1.3 The Water Resources of the Olifants River Water Availability1 Of all the water used in the Olifants Basin, the irrigation sector is the largest water user, namely 57% of the total. Power generation uses 19% of the total available resource and urban, industrial and mining together a further 19%.

1 DWAF 2004c. Olifants Water Management Area: Internal Strategic Perspective. Report No. P WMA 04/000/00/0304



13

In the upper Olifants area most of the water is used for cooling in the thermal power stations. It is a highly consumptive use and requires a relatively high quality of water. In the middle Olifants, water requirements are dominated by irrigation, because of the large agricultural developments downstream of Loskop Dam. Although this area is the most populous in the Olifants Basin, urban, domestic and rural water use is relatively low, because of the primary nature of the water use by these sectors. In the Steelpoort and Lower Olifants River areas, irrigation and mining are the largest water use sectors which reflects the nature of the land-use in these areas. Scenarios for population and economic growth in the Olifants Basin indicate that the future growth in water requirements in the Olifants Basin is expected to be in the Upper Olifants, Middle Olifants and Steelpoort Sub-areas. In the Upper Olifants growth will be driven by the urban water requirements of the Witbank and Middleburg local authorities as well as the requirements of Eskom for generation of power from the coal fired power stations on the Mpumalanga Highveld. The growth in water requirement in the Middle Olifants and the Steelpoort areas will be driven by substantial growth in the mining industry over a wide area. A number of platinum and chrome mines are planned or currently being developed in this area. These developments have socio-economic impacts with the influx of people into the area to work on the mines. The town of Burgersfort is likely to expand substantially to house many of the mining people and those associated with supporting business activities. No meaningful change in the rural requirements for water is foreseen. Under current developments, estimates show that the specific water resources of the Olifants River are substantially over utilised (± 33%). This is mainly in the Upper Olifants where the requirements for power generation place a substantial burden on utilisation of the resource. As a result of this a large amount of water has to be imported into the area to meet the demand. In the calculations an appropriate allowance was rightly made for the ecological water requirements (EWR) of the resource. Under the same assumptions, these current estimates indicate that the local requirements for water in the Middle Olifants, the Steelpoort area as well as the Lower Olifants are substantially greater than the water resources that are available to meet the demands. What this illustrates very rightly is that the overall water resources of the Olifants River are coming under increasing stress. It does not mean that there is absolutely no water available for further development. The important thing is that the assurance of supply is much lower and may even be unacceptable or the risk of non supply is increased to unacceptable levels. This also applies to the EWR. In the strategic perspective prepared by DWAF the projected scenarios and requirements for water supplies and requirements needed up to about the year 2025 indicate that shortages can be expected to increase quite substantially (± 45%). What it means is that for development to take place, it is critical that water resources are managed, sustainably and in a highly responsible manner. This can be achieved by means of the following:

• All new allocations must be carefully considered and must ensure that all water allocations are used effectively and efficiently.

• Trading of allocations except that trading between sectors would be problematic. Allocations "lost" from irrigation have a concomitant impact on existing employment and the social and economic fabric of the area.



14

• Eradication of alien invasive plants. • Water Conservation and Demand Management of existing allocations regardless

of whether new allocations are required, is now a critical issue. Water Quality1 Water quality in the whole of the Olifants River is in crisis, both in terms of quantity (as pointed out above), as well as quality. A very graphic illustration of the effects of mining on water quality is shown in Figure 2. It shows the location of all major mining operations exploiting a wide variety of minerals in the Olifants basin together with the effect on water quality (MMSD, 2001). In the Upper Olifants water quality is threatened by the impact of more than 100 years of coal mining. It is estimated that some 62 million m3 of water decants from closed or abandoned mine workings each year. The mining industry has assumed responsibility and undertaken the task of managing these decant volumes. There are a number of projects looking at treatment and irrigation management options. However, water quality in the upper Olifants has to be managed on a regional basis, with a collective responsibility from all involved. This too has been put in place with the formation of a cooperative initiative among the different mines involved to manage the release of saline mine water. The water quality problems in the Middle and Steelpoort areas are salinity, eutrophication, toxicity and sediment. The salinity and eutrophication problems are due to the irrigation return flows, mining impacts and sewage treatment plant discharges. Sediment problems are related to poor agricultural practise and from overgrazing in rural areas. The production of sediment in the Middle Olifants causes operational problems far downstream at the Phalaborwa Barrage as well as in the Kruger National Park where sediment laden water causes fish kills. In the Lower Olifants, water quality is affected by mining and industrial return flows from the Phalaborwa Mining and Industrial Complex. Some relief is obtained from very good water quality emanating from the Blyde River, which together with the good quality water from the Mohlapitse River, usually maintains the water quality in the Olifants River in the KNP at an acceptable level. Water quality in the Olifants River is greatly affected by the wide variety of mining operations and mineral processing activities that take place all over the catchment. This is in terms of the water resources available to other users and on the water quality of these resources. From the available data, it seems clear that those mining operations that are located within low rainfall regions of the basin (predominantly the north-eastern and eastern regions, where physical weathering processes dominate) have relatively low and/or localized impacts on the water resources. In contrast, mining operations located in the wetter regions of the basin (predominantly the southern regions, where chemical weathering processes prevail) tend to have far more extensive impacts. This seems to be due to the presence of ample moisture within the soil profile that enables continual chemical changes to take place and allows the water available to mobilize and transport the different contaminants that become available.



15

Figure 2: Effect of Mining on Water Quality in the Olifants and Limpopo Catchments



16

Water quality problems from mining are also exacerbated by irrigation return flows, sediment caused by bad agricultural practise and overgrazing, as well as uncontrolled release of sewage effluent and other urban runoff. Quantity and quality problems will have to be addressed on a catchment wide and integrated basis in the future, as the demands on the water resources of the Olifants River and its tributaries increase and become more intense. In the long term it will be the only answer to the problem of supplying water for development on a sustainable basis, that is acceptable in terms of quality and quantity. Water resources and mining The impacts of mining are well known, the most widespread and pervasive of which is acid mine drainage (AMD). It comes from ore bodies that contain or that are contaminated with sulphides, especially iron sulphide (“pyrites”). When they are exposed to air and moisture, the sulphide minerals present oxidize resulting in high concentrations of total dissolved salts (particularly sulphates), low pH values and high concentrations of dissolved metal ions (especially iron). The resulting solution is toxic to most forms of aquatic life and can lead to dramatic changes in ecosystem functioning as well as changes in the structure and chemical composition of soils. Once started this process is very difficult to stop and the resulting AMD may persist for centuries. In the Olifants catchment there is a high prevalence of AMD in the high-sulphur coalfields on the Mpumalanga Highveld. The problems are accentuated both by the number of collieries and by their size, as well as the long time periods over which they have operated (decades), and the relatively abundant supplies of water that are available in this area. Water quality changes attributable to AMD from this area can be discerned (principally as changes in the sulphate to chloride ratio in water samples) for up to two hundred kilometres downstream in the Olifants River (MMSD, 2001). Extensive new mining operations are now planned in the Middle Olifants area, in addition to mines that are already established. Granted they are not coal mines. But they will generate huge amounts of solid waste in the form of waste rock dumps, process waste as well as liquid waste discharges. The Reserve The National Water Act No.36 of 1998 (NWA) makes specific provision for the Ecological Reserve, which refers to the quality and quantity of water needed to ensure that the natural environment continues to meet the demands made on it for ecosystem goods and services. A detailed study of the ecological water requirements of the Olifants River System was done in 2000. It recommended that a total annual volume of 35.68 million m3 for ecological requirements for a Category D river in the vicinity of the proposed De Hoop Dam. This represented 20.8% of the natural Mean Annual Runoff (MAR). A subsequent assessment of the hydrology of the Steelpoort River indicated that the nMAR was about 30% lower than previous estimates. This means that the ecological requirements in the vicinity of de Hoop Dam represent about 27% of the nMAR, and that the assured yield of the dam would be significantly lower than initial estimates (DWAF, 2004d).



17

3 APPROACH USED IN THIS ASSESSMENT 3.1 Strategic assessment processes The ORWRDP is not a project which exists in isolation. It is part of a bigger development scenario that is being played out in the north eastern part of South Africa, particularly the north western parts of Mpumalanga and the south eastern parts of Limpopo. This is in effect the basin of the Olifants River. The key questions that have to be asked are, what substantial influence and effect will the ORWRP have on the greater environment around it? Or even more importantly, what significant cumulative impacts on the environment can be expected in the future, from the combined effects of the ORWRDP and other major development projects which it will support or that will be implemented because of it? What are the major resources of value in the greater environment around the ORWRP that must be considered as fundamental building blocks of any sustainable development initiatives that are undertaken in the region? Part of the answer to the first question has already been addressed in the extensive EIA process that has been run for the ORWRDP. However, there are still some important elements related to this question that need to be looked, specifically in the context of the greater environment in which the ORWRDP is being implemented. This is not something that normal EIA processes are designed for and do not usually evaluate either. This strategic perspective will therefore endeavour to identify and then address these issues. However, the reason why the ORWRDP is being implemented is to facilitate and underpin further regional development. It will enable and support further significant development initiatives over a very wide area. Current developments, together with other reasonably foreseeable future developments including the ORWRDP, may possibly have a symbiotic relationship with each other and cause significant cumulative environmental impacts that will not be evident if the assessment of such developments is considered in isolation. This is essentially what the second and third questions are asking. To answer them what has to be done is to consider the ORWRDP in terms of the strategic environment and context in which it is implemented. Judging from previous experience, the best way of doing this is to apply a form of cumulative effects assessment (CEA) to do the investigation. In such processes a number of basic elements have to be considered. These are things such as: • Understanding the relevant elements in the existing environment. • Establishing the strategic intent of the development or projects undertaken. • Understanding the boundaries and issues involved in the assessment. • Analysis of trends and forces that shape and direct development. • Strategic assessment • Recommendations and mitigation

An important part of successfully completing such a strategic perspective is that there must be a proper understanding of the fact that it is not possible to look at every single detail and to cover all eventualities. One cannot assess the world. Hence it is very important to put boundaries on the process and to understand the key issues.



18

In section 2 relevant information has been looked at that deals with the important elements in the current environment that are of importance for this assessment. The strategic intent of development in general and the ORWRDP in particular, in the Middle Olifants is discussed in section 4 below. The boundaries and issues are dealt with in section 5. Analysis and discussion is carried out in sections 6 and 7. The assessment framework formed by these elements will be applied within the context of regional development that is taking place in the Middle Olifants area of the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces and other areas adjoining it. The ORWRDP will not only impact on the immediate environment or region where it is built. It will also cause effects that will be discerned a great distance away, while developments in other areas will also have an influence on it.



19

4 STRATEGIC CONTEXT OF THE ORWRP 4.1 Background The effects or impacts that the ORWRP has on the environment cannot be assessed individually or in isolation from other developments and activities taking place around it. The project is part of a more strategic development thrust that will directly influence both the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces. The map in Figure 3 shows the extent and placement of the ORWRDP infrastructure in terms of the provincial boundaries, major roads and concentrations of people. 4.2 Policies, Plans and Programmes Current development planning frameworks for the areas covered by the ORWRDP, list the key regional development challenges as: • Poverty alleviation, gender inequality, lack of basic services, safety and security of

communities, low health service provision and low skills. • Stimulation of the local economy • Physical and social integration of the communities • Building institutional capacity • Improving revenue base and financial management • Promotion and maintenance of sustainable environment • Provision of social and economic infrastructure • Economic and sustainable utilization of natural resources. These are all in line with the Government's main national development policy objectives of poverty alleviation, employment creation, equity in access to natural resources, land reform, rural development and cooperative governance. The ORWRDP and all local and regional planning initiatives must be seen in the light of these higher order policy objectives. In terms of this, the ORWRDP is actually a very large and complex development project, originating from policy level decisions within the national government. It is a project that relates not only to strategic water supply. It is a major intervention by government in the economic, social and ecological environment, not just in the Middle Olifants Region but much further afield as well.



20

Figure 3: ORWRDP Infrastructure



21

4.2.1 Limpopo Provincial Growth and Development Strategy A Provincial Growth and Development Strategy is a framework that aligns provincial development initiatives with those at a national level. It serves as a guideline for both provincial departments and municipalities to deal with the main developmental challenges in the province, in line with overarching national goals such as:

• poverty alleviation, • employment creation, • equity in access to natural resources, • land reform, • rural development, • eliminating service delivery backlogs in terms of adequate water and sanitation,

roads, other infrastructure, social services such as health and the like, and • cooperative governance.

In response to these challenges the Limpopo Provincial Growth and Development Strategy contains six areas of priority intervention based primarily on the socio-economic development needs of the Province, namely;

• Economic Development. • Development Infrastructure • Social Development • Sustainable Environmental Development. • Good Governance, and • Human Resource Development.

The strategy is supported by the following policies/strategies:

• An elaborate provincial economic development strategy. • A spatial framework for co-ordinated public and private sector infrastructure

investment. • An integrated public transport policy. • Land Development Objectives of the Limpopo Urban and Rural transitional

councils. • National Crime Prevention Strategy. • Taking Limpopo into the New Millennium.

It is in terms of all this that the ORWRDP and other projects on which it will impinge or which it will support must be evaluated and seen as integral parts of a much larger overarching strategic framework. Specific projects are not dealt with in detail in the Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy, but those listed below are part of its strategic intent to achieve the Provincial development goals. In the area of the Middle Olifants the projects that have been identified include initiatives like:

• Mining development in a large area of the middle Olifants region particularly the Steelpoort Valley, to exploit the substantial mineral wealth of the eastern limb of the Bushveld Igneous Complex in support of broad government policy for development and transformation in the mining sector.

• Secondary development of infrastructure in support of mining such as roads, housing and municipal services to benefit regional economic growth.

• Provincial tourism development in the Vhembe Region, to the west of and anchored by the pre-eminence of the Kruger National Park and then extended



22

into other areas such as the Wolkberg or the Ivory Route and the areas covered by the Kruger to Canyons Biosphere Reserve.

• Large scale bulk water supply to urban, mining and/or industrial areas outside of the Olifants River Catchment, such as Polokwane and Mokopane.

• Delivery of basic water services to people in the central Olifants area, i.e. the Nebo plateau and Sekhukhuneland.

4.2.2 Mpumalanga Provincial Growth and Development Strategy In Mpumalanga one of the key thrusts of the Growth and Development Strategy is the development of the tourism potential of the Province. To this end the Highlands Meander and Panorama eco-tourism routes have been identified and earmarked as primary tourism development areas. They lie adjacent to and in certain instances overlap the area of influence of development initiatives for which the ORWRDP is being implemented. All of these initiatives will collectively cause very large cumulative environmental impacts. Some of these will be positive but to a large degree the impacts will be significantly negative. They will also impact on the environment in a manner that will compound the effects created and in the worst cases cause synergistic effects as well, e.g. chemical water quality. What the Growth and Development Strategies do not do is to spell out how such cumulative effects will be managed or to identify and set out strategies to protect and manage the natural resources, which are their foundation and without which they are not viable. In the case of the programmes and projects listed above, the water quality (quantity and quality) of the water resources of the Olifants River are a classic example. All that can be said is that there would seem to be an implicit assumption that all such cumulative effects will be taken care of through the normal channels of environmental assessment, management and impact mitigation. This does not occur and as a result the sustainability of such programmes and projects as well as the natural resources that underpin them is placed in jeopardy. It is within this broad framework and different levels of policies, plans and programmes that the ORWRDP must be seen. It is in this way that the policies, plans and programmes do not in themselves directly affect the environmental resources of value that are of concern, but they do give rise to implementation actions (projects) within the boundaries chosen that have a major effect on the resources of value. 4.2.3 Local Development Plans Delivery of basic services to people is the responsibility of and a priority for Local

Government. Strategies and goals for implementation of policies for achieving this are set out in Local Government IDPs. The provision of bulk water supplies from the ORWRDP and the development of mining are all excellent mechanisms for stimulation of the local economy and will enable Local Government institutions to move towards fulfilling their mandate in a meaningful way. All will help address poverty alleviation and greatly assist in moving towards the development of distribution networks for the supply of basic water and sanitation services to individuals over a wide geographic area.

All Local Government institutions have to prepare Integrated Development Plans (IDP) in terms of the Municipal System Act No. 32 of 2000. An IDP is in essence a strategic plan for



23

the development of a local government or municipal area. An IDP is not a static plan nor a blueprint, but an ongoing process that is aimed at:

• Planning for a range of issues and sectors – economic, social, institutional, physical infrastructure and housing and environmental.

• It involves a range of role players, including the community and the other spheres of government.

• Sets out strategies to stimulate development and sets targets that can be used to measure performance.

• Provides for monitoring and review. The priorities of the Greater Sekhukhune District Municipality (GSDM), are similar to many rurally based district municipalities. Examination of its IDP documentation reveals that the following integrated infrastructure development is listed that is essential to support social and economic development needs in the region:

• Free basic services programme • Access to municipal services to areas without • Water services provisioning and maintenance • Solid Waste Removal • Electricity provisioning • Transport • Roads • Stormwater

To achieve this, the GSDM has set the following strategic priorities:

• Development of institutional capacity geared towards efficient delivery of services;

• Development of an effective and efficient financial management system. • Facilitation of access to land to ensure development. • Development of a framework for sustainable land use management for the entire

district. • Maximisation of economic growth and development through developing local

economic opportunities and facilitating community empowerment. • Development of integrated infrastructure that support social and economic

development. • Development of effective communications framework internally and externally. • Fostering of community participation and ownership of municipal programmes. • Development of a framework of co-coordinating governance structures and

facilitation of sound intergovernmental relations IDPs do contain requirements for environmental management. In the GSDM IDP the following is stated in section 8:

In line with legislative requirements as encapsulated in National Environmental Management Act; Environmental Conservation Act; EIA Regulations; White Paper on Environmental Management Policy for South Africa; Provincial and National Environmental Implementation Plans and Environmental Management Plans it is required of municipalities to develop comprehensive Environmental Management Plans as part of the Integrated Development Planning Process.



24

Section 8.3.3 states the Department of Community Services has been entrusted with the task of developing a comprehensive environmental management plan by September 2004. Whether this plan has been completed is not known. What the IDP does say is that the environmental matters of concern are air pollution, soil erosion, vegetation degradation, ground water pollution, invasive and alien plants, protected and special interest areas. But similar to the Growth and Development Strategies, the IDP does not list a commitment or responsibility for local government to deal with cumulative effects e.g. cumulative effects of water quality, communities, ecosystems, etc, caused by the environmental concerns listed. What the IDP should do is identify and set out strategies to protect and manage the natural resources, which are their foundation and without which they are not viable. In the case of the GSDM, the water quality (quantity and quality) of the water resources of the Olifants River are a classic example. All that can be said is that there would seem to be an implicit assumption that all such cumulative effects will be taken care of through the normal channels of regulation and control from national or provincial government departments, e.g. pollution control, environmental assessment, management and impact mitigation. When this does not occur the result is that the sustainability of local development programmes and projects as well as the natural resources that underpin them is placed in jeopardy. 4.2.4 National Policy There are a number of very fundamental and important themes or principles that are very clearly stated in all natural resource use and development policies published in South Africa over the last ten years. All of these have been taken up in legislation and are at the heart of delivery systems for economic upliftment and empowerment initiatives over a wide front. They include things such as:

• The State acts as the custodian of the nation’s natural resources e.g. water and minerals.

• South Africa's natural resources must be developed within a framework of sustainable development and in accordance with national environmental policy, norms and standards.

• The main objective of developing the nation's natural resources is to achieve optimum, long term, environmentally sustainable, social and economic benefit for society from their use i.e. land reform, rural development, employment creation and poverty alleviation.

• There must be proactive, equitable and effective consultation with and participation by interested and affected parties in decision-making processes, to which the rules of natural justice (audi alteram partem) shall apply.

• Government departments must co-operate and work together in mutual trust and good faith through consultation and co-ordination of actions, legislation and regulations i.e. cooperative governance.

Following from these policy requirements and to breathe life into the principles they espouse, there are now a number of statutory and administrative measures that underpin them. Some of the more important measures in terms of this Strategic Perspective include:

• Enabling legislation e.g. the National Water Act and the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act.



25

• Strategies and policies drawn up in terms of legislation e.g. the National Water Resource Strategy and the Mining Charter.

• Provincial Growth and Development Strategies and local government Integrated Development Plans.

• Catchment Management Agencies, Catchment Management Plans and the like. The National Water Act No. 36 of 1998 (NWA) contains three fundamental objectives for managing South Africa's water resources. These are all formulated in terms of the National Water Policy and are entrenched in the provisions of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996).

• Equitable access to water for all. That is, equity of access to water services, to the use of water resources, and to the benefits from the use of water resources.

• Sustainable use of water, by making progressive adjustments to water use to achieve a balance between water availability and legitimate water requirements, and by implementing measures to protect water resources.

• Efficient and effective use of water for optimum social and economic benefit. The overall strategy for the management of the water resources of South Africa is set out in the National Water Resource Strategy (NWRS), drawn up in terms of Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the NWA. It is a legal document which describes the ways in which water resources will be managed in South Africa and the institutions that will be established to do so, with the purpose of achieving the main objectives of national policy and legislation. The NWRS also further develops the philosophy of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM), which is in fact a fundamental premise of National Water Policy in South Africa. The concept is also explicitly acknowledged in the Preamble to the NWA, which recognises the need for the integrated management of all aspects of water resources. The NWRS expands on this by stating that it is only possible to manage water resources successfully if the natural, social, economic and political elements of the debates around the sustainable use of water and the protection of the water environment are considered and dealt with in an integrated and holistic manner. The NWRS defines IWRM as:

An evolving, iterative process for the co-ordinated planning and management - using a balance of technological and social approaches - of water, land and environmental resources for their equitable and sustainable use.

It is the realisation and understanding of the full meaning of what this means for the ORWRDP that is important in this Strategic Perspective. What it does mean is that development at all levels, policy, programme and project level must be integrated and undertaken in a consultative open manner with effective and proper application of the principles of cooperative governance. What it does is to define the true mandate of all the organisations, departments, agencies and other bodies that are involved. Their mandate is environmentally sustainable development that leads to social and economic benefit for all members of society. It is not simply the narrow vision of development, exploitation and/or protection of natural resources e.g. water or minerals. What this shows is that for the purposes of this Strategic Perspective, all the policy, legislative and strategy requirements for the effective and sustainable management of natural resource use and the application of sound environmental management and



26

governance principles are in place. What is required is ongoing commitment to implementation and monitoring of these tenets through an effective and coordinated representative body of decision-makers. It is these measures that should be put in place before large development projects such as the ORWRDP are implemented. The large cumulative effects of such projects cannot be effectively managed and dealt with unless it is done on the basis of effective cooperative governance and cooperative inputs from all involved during the implementation as well as operational phases. The question must then be asked, why is it that so much is being invested in basic water resource development and investment in infrastructure as expressed in the physical scope and extent of the ORWRDP? The fundamental and primary driving forces and motivations must be sought in specific national policies and programmes. 4.3 Strategic Intent of the ORWRDP The mining sector in South Africa has a total market capitalisation of R450-million and has been earmarked by government to be at the forefront of empowerment and transformation in this country2. The Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) anticipates empowerment deals, across all the mineral groups, of between R50-R100-billion over the next number of years. Government sees the future role of mining as a platform for sustainable3 development and further economic growth. This will occur with the inflow of investment into the mining sector, and the resultant establishment of small and big mining companies, as well as other related small, medium enterprises serving the industry. One of the main objectives of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act, No. 15 of 2002 (MPRDA), is to promote downstream value addition of mineral resources and ensure that holders of mining and prospecting permits contribute towards the socio-economic development of the areas within which they operate2. In terms of the Limpopo Province's Growth and Development Strategy and its objectives, the ideal place to do this is the platinum rich eastern rim of the Bushveld Complex. In the light of this and seen together with what was shown in the previous sections, the strategic intent of the ORWRDP therefore must be the following: • To enable and underpin further mining development in a large area of the middle

Olifants region particularly the Steelpoort Valley, in support of broad government policy for development and transformation in the mining sector.

• To create an environment that will attract further/continued investment in secondary development such as roads, housing and municipal services, that are needed to complement and augment large scale private sector mining investments.

• To provide the means for augmenting large scale bulk water supply to urban, mining and/or industrial areas outside of the Olifants River Catchment, such as Polokwane and Mokopane at a later date.

• To make the possibility of delivery of basic water services, a reality to many more people in the central Olifants area, i.e. the Nebo plateau and Sekhukhuneland.

2 Creamer Media's Mining Weekly Online, 18 April 2005. 3 There is a school of thought that says that mining by its very nature cannot be a sustainable activity. Please refer to MSSD,

2001 draft position paper, that discusses sustainable development for the mining and minerals sector in southern Africa, in terms of weak, moderate and strong sustainability.



27

5 BOUNDARIES AND ISSUES Boundaries and issues establish and validate the assessment framework or structure for the processes of environmental analysis and assessment. This is done in terms of a development project such as the ORWRDP i.e. a strategic perspective is done on the ORWDP in terms of the environment in which it will be implemented. Some of the important building blocks which are part of the assessment framework or structure are to be found in, but may not necessarily be limited to, the following: • Delineation of appropriate temporal and physical boundaries for the assessment. • Identification and correct definition of important issues and concerns related to the

project that should be taken up in the assessment. • Selection of sensitive or important elements of the receiving environment and the

environmental resources of value on which may be affected by developments. Please also remember that these elements or building blocks must be identified in terms of: 1 The strategic context of the project. 2 The strategic intent of the project. 3 Consideration of the important or significant elements identified during the processes

of screening and scoping that preceded the formal environmental assessment and authorisation process for the ORWRDP.

5.1 Area under consideration The Olifants River Water Resources Development Project (ORWRDP) as described, will service a large area essentially in the centre of the Olifants Water Management Area (WMA), when it is implemented. The direct impacts firstly of construction and then operationally, will be felt on a regional scale over an area of about 16 000 km2 in the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces, from Ohrigstad in the east, Mokopane in the west, Polokwane to the north and Roossenekal in the south All significant reports (e.g. NWRS) indicate that the available water resources of the Olifants River catchment are over-committed, in terms of both quantity and quality. There is actually not much scope for further sustainable development of the water resources. Agricultural use currently accounts for the major volumes of water that are used, while mining, industry, treated effluent from urban areas and poor land use practise are the cause of extended water quality problems over the whole of the Olifants catchment. The main purpose of the ORWRDP is to make additional water resources available for development and other supplies in the central Olifants and other areas of Limpopo Province. To this end it is estimated that by raising the height of the Flag Boshielo Dam, an additional yield of 16 x 106 m3 / annum will be provided from the system. Secondly a new dam at De Hoop will have an estimated yield of about 72 million m3/a (DWAF, 2004b). Its nett storage capacity will be about 326 x 106 m3. These are large quantities of water that will be taken from a system that is already under stress and then be distributed for use over a very wide area. It must be seen against the background of the following information taken mainly from the Olifants ISP (DWAF, 2004c):



28

• The mean annual runoff (MAR) of the whole of the Olifants WMA is 2 042 x 106 m3/a and the ecological Reserve requirement is estimated to be 460 x 106 m3 from the desktop methodology (i.e. > 20%).

• The MAR of the Steelpoort sub-catchment is estimated to be 396 x 106 m3 / annum. • The MAR of the Upper and Middle Olifants sub-catchments is estimated to be 947 x

106 m3 / annum. • Additional yield from Flag Boshielo Dam ± 16 x 106 m3 / annum. • The estimated yield of the De Hoop dam is ± 72 million m3/annum. • Nett storage capacity De Hoop dam ± 326 x 106 m3. • As indicated in the ISP, the Reserve must still be supplied from all these quantities • It was estimated that there was an overall deficit of 192 million m3 in the water balance

of the whole WMA for the year 2000 i.e. almost 10% of the MAR. • At the same time the EWR as determined in the NWRS was not being supplied in full. • The year 2000 water requirements as given in the ISP are 395 and 95 million m3/a for

the Middle Olifants and Steelpoort respectively. • The base scenario water requirements for the year 2025 as given in the ISP are 432

and 96 million m3/a for the Middle Olifants and Steelpoort respectively Simple analysis and comparison of the figures illustrates quite graphically that the water resources of the Olifants River system are somewhat over committed. This does not mean that new infrastructure cannot be built or that development cannot be sanctioned. A large part of the current and future water requirements are for irrigation. This can be supplied at a much lower assurance of supply than say industrial or mining water. It is important that none of these figures should be taken as absolute or interpreted out of context. For instance since a very large proportion (more than 70%) of the current and future requirements is for irrigation water, there is a very good chance that the estimates were based on the existing data base of water use licenses. These may very well be outdated or may not be in use and in the future may not be taken up or can be transferred for other uses. There is also great scope for the implementation of water conservation and water demand management measures. What it does mean is that water for development in the middle Olifants, and indeed the whole of Olifants River system is a critical natural resource. When water is supplied to anybody there has to be a very good understanding of how the assurance of supply will be affected. In periods of good rainfall there will be fewer problems. But in drier periods (which are the norm), assurance of supply may be far below usually accepted levels. In order to gain a strategic perspective of what this means in environmental management terms, it will be essential to look at significant factors that will affect the assurance of supply of water that is available to be fed into the infrastructure of the ORWRDP. This is essentially a combination of factors related to: 1 Water quality and quantity available from upstream sources i.e. the upper Olifants

River areas namely the Highveld of Mpumalanga. 2 Water quality and quantity requirements of areas downstream of the ORWRDP, e.g.

the KNP and Mozambique. 3 Water quality and quantity requirements of the Reserve for the entire Olifants River

System. 4 Water quality and quantity requirements for those areas and people that will be served

or could potentially be served by the infrastructure of the ORWRDP.



29

What this means basically is that where appropriate, this strategic perspective must look at an area that will of necessity have to cover the whole of the Olifants WMA to a greater or lesser extent. There are also factors from areas outside of the WMA, e.g. Mokopane, Polokwane and Masinger in Mozambique, that may have to be considered as well. 5.2 Important or key issues The Draft Scoping Report prepared by ACER (Africa) as part of the Environmental Authorisation Process for the ORWRDP, lists the key issues that were identified and described as part of the scoping process. It basically came down to the consideration of the potential impact of the ORWRDP: • On the quantity and quality of river flows. • On the aquatic and terrestrial ecology, particularly that of the proposed dam site. • On long-term sustainability and water demand management. • On integrated Development Planning within the project area. • In terms of minimising construction related impacts. • As related to compensation and resettlement. It is important to understand the context, identification and the use of issues, in environmental assessment processes. Issues4 are not statements of fact. They reflect the opinions, important concerns and values of a wide range of different people, groups and organisations. They simply reflect the current thinking and opinion of people as to what the most significant matters or concerns are, that should be investigated and reported on in the environmental assessment. However, the issues that are identified must be appropriate to and aligned with the level at which the relevant assessment will be carried out. At a strategic level the issues are those concerns which relate to higher (upstream) more general level of decision-making in plans and programmes. The assessments that are done in terms of these issues and the decisions that are made, will guide and directly influence specific (downstream) decisions made in project planning and implementation. The strategic issues identified may relate to direct impacts (for example, water pollution), the cause of impacts (for example, coal mining) or a general concern (for example, decreasing water quality in general). At a project level and for ordinary environmental impact assessment (EIA), issues are associated with the direct linkages of cause and effect, between action taken and effect perceived, i.e. impact of development on the environment. The four issues listed above that were identified in during the project scoping are mainly project related issues, but they do certainly contain important strategic aspects. The individual specialist studies do not examine these strategic elements and hence it is necessary for a strategic perspective such as this one to be undertaken. These issues therefore need to be considered at a higher or strategic level of assessment, so that they can be evaluated in terms of the correct and appropriate environmental management assessment techniques. This relates particularly to questions of general sustainability,

4 An issue may be strictly defined as "a point in debate on which the parties take affirmative and negative positions". An issue

can thus be any situation on which there are different positions, opinions or views. A given situation is perceived in different ways by different people and so will the ways and means to address it. An issue is thus anything that provokes reflection, raises questions, mobilises people, is relevant or pertinent to a situation. (FAO 1996).



30

sustainable development, development planning and sustainable resource use. All of the issues have a common currency or underlying common theme; that is the use and management of water resources from the ORWRDP. Looking at these issues, together with the strategic context as described in section 4 above, as well as the boundaries referred to in 5.1, in terms of this assessment therefore, the main issues that are applicable are: 1 To what extent or in what way will the ORWRDP contribute to, support or detract from

the sustainable use and management of water resources of the Olifants WMA? 2 What cumulative effects can be expected from the implementation and operation of the

ORWRDP in terms of other major development initiatives and programmes in the Olifants WMA?

3 What cumulative effects can be expected from the implementation and operation of the ORWRDP in terms of the other important resources groupings or resources of value in the Olifants WMA?

It is these questions (issues) that must be addressed and answers provided for in the assessment process. 5.3 Resources of value Resources of value are prioritised components, parts, elements and the like, of the environment (interpreted in its widest sense e.g. human, natural, economic, aesthetic, cultural, etc.) that are deemed to be important, significant or to have an intrinsic value for any recognised person, community, organisation, people or other groups. Significance must be judged in terms of the reasonable expectations they (the particular persons) have of and the value(s) that they place on a particular resource of value for any valid or reasonable reason. The main reason for identifying and working with Resources of Value, is that it is not possible or practical to investigate or try to analyse the cumulative effects of an action on the universe; the focus must be on those elements or resources that are truly important. For an assessment of this nature or to determine cumulative effects that occur over a wide area, it is essential that there is a large degree of focus in the work, to ensure that the evaluation is done meaningfully. A useful way to do this is to identify and work with the resources of value (DWAF, 2005b). The identification, description and prioritisation of the important resources of value used in an assessment, would normally be done in terms of the consideration of inputs received from participants in a public review or scoping type process, as well as analysis and interpretation of other important and relevant factors. This assessment is not different. A special scoping process will however, not be run. The results of screening and scoping actions that were carried out for the environmental authorisation process of the ORWRDP will be used. From the results of the OWRDP screening and scoping processes, as well as the strategic context, the issues framework and the discussion of the boundaries, the following resources of value are relevant to this assessment: 1 The physical infrastructure of the ORWRDP. 2 The water resources of the Olifants WMA. 3 Water quality in the Olifants River. 4 The coal mining areas of the Upper Olifants Region.



31

5 The mineral resources of the Middle Olifants region. 6 The mining areas of the Lower Olifants. 7 The Kruger National Park and adjacent conservation areas. 8 The Highlands Meander and Panorama ecotourism routes in Mpumalanga and the

area of the Kruger to Canyons Biosphere Reserve in the Central Lowveld. 9 The rural human population of the Greater Sekhukhune District. Other important factors that may significantly influence or affect these resources of value are: • Water supplies/transfer to Polokwane and Mokopane • The development policies and programmes aimed at upliftment and economic growth

for the people living in the Greater Sekhukhune District i.e. IDPs and Provincial Growth and Development Plans.

• Existing pollution loads from coal mining in Mpumalanga • Future pollution loads from new mining in the Middle Olifants • Demographic trends and the development and promotion of local ecotourism routes.



32

6 ANALYSIS The process of analysis in an assessment such as this involves identification of important cause and effect relationships between activities/projects, resources of value, ecosystems and humans. The analysis provides the basis from which both the magnitude and significance of the environmental impacts and/or cumulative effects eventually must be determined. On the basis of the analysis it must also be possible to recommend appropriate mitigation, monitoring and management measures to deal with the effects (CEQ 1997). The analysis of cumulative effects focuses on assessing effects on selected resources of value. This has two parts: i Analysis of the effects of existing or proposed individual projects or activities or policies

on selected resources of value. ii Analysis of the collective effects of a number of such projects or activities/actions on

selected resources of value. The point of departure for the analysis is always "from the point of view of the resource of value", in which the combined (i.e. cumulative) effects of the various actions on each resource of value (e.g. people, ecosystems, water resources/quality) are assessed. This has been illustrated graphically for the ORWRDP in Figure 4 on page 36 (arrows indicate an action causing an effect on a resource of value). A tabular approach to the description of impacts or effects has been used. Individual or separate impacts on selected resources of value are listed first. These are the impacts or effects that can reasonably be attributed to direct linkages with other resources of value. This includes effects of past and present actions. Then secondary and tertiary impacts that can reasonably be attributed to these activities or actions from other resources of value are also listed. The cumulative effect(s) from the different individual impacts on the resource of value as well as proposed or reasonably foreseeable future will be described in the next section. It should be remembered that the cumulative effects on a specific resource will not necessarily simply be the sum of all the effects. The assessment will finally need to consider whether the effects will be additive, antagonistic or synergistic.



33

Figure 4: Resources of value and cumulative effects



34

The resources of value that are considered important in this assessment are listed on page 36 and presented graphically in Figure 4. In the analysis below, each of the individual resources of value are considered in terms of the direct impacts or influence that it has on each of the others (if any). In addition the indirect effects are also listed together with the pathway(s) pathways of impacts between the sources and receptors and the linkages among these impacts. 6.1 The infrastructure of the ORWRDP

IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S)

OR water resources • Reduced natural water quantities available.

• Destruction/degrading of natural systems.

• Flow control and flood attenuation.

• Secondary development of water resources.

• Reduced flooding and flushing.

• Storage of water. • Distribution of large

quantities of water over wide area.

• Development & planning policies.

OR water quality • Reduced water quality (temperature, concentration of salts in dams, etc).

• Flow control and reduced flushing.

• Dams and other infrastructure.

Coal mining areas None None None

MO mineral resources • Improved water supply to mining.

• Mining development.• Secondary

development

• Infrastructure.

Lower Olifants Mining • None • Reduced water supply.

• Higher salt concen-trations in water.

• Greater river storage and flow control upstream.

Kruger National Park • None • Reduced water supply.

• Higher salt concen-trations in water.

• Greater river storage and flow control upstream.

Ecotourism areas • Detract from sense of place in areas nearby.

• Sightseeing potential.

• Increased tourism. • Secondary tourism

development (accommodation, recreation, hospitality).

• Add. infrastructure development (roads, power, urban areas).

• Development policies and planning.

Sekhukhune region • Bulk water supply available.

• Enhanced delivery of other services.

• Raised quality of life.• Add. infrastructure

development (roads, power, urban areas).

• Add. Infrastructure development (roads, power, urban areas).




35

6.2 Olifants Water Resources (Quality and Quantity) The water resources of the Olifants River catchment do not directly impact on any of the other resources of value identified above. The water resources are in fact the base from which all the other resources of value obtain their significance and importance. Without the water resources most of them will not be able to survive or exist. It is these resources which impact on the Olifants River, through use of the water, the regional effects that they cause and the policies and programmes that drive certain activities and development. The only resource of value that is really impacted on by the water resources of the Olifants River is the Kruger National Park. This includes the ecosystems as well as the tourism developments in the Park. The quantity as well as the quality of the water that is available from the Olifants River in the Park is significant in terms of the impacts that occur. 6.3 Coal Mining Areas

IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S)

ORWRDP Infrastructure

None • Increased costs of water treatment.

• River flow.

OR water resources • Abstraction for industrial and domestic use.

• Destruction/degrading/ disturbance of terrestrial and aquatic systems.

• Disturbance of physical features of the groundwater regime (sponges, dykes, soil compaction, etc.).

• Reduced down-stream opportunities for water use.

• River flow • Groundwater. • Mining development. • Development

policies.

OR water quality • Heavy pollution loads released into the Olifants from point and diffuse sources.

• Reduced fitness for use.

• Water toxicity. • Long term trend of

reducing water quality.

• Waste discharge and disposal from mines.

• Seepage from diffuse sources.

• Abandoned/defunct mining areas.

• Surface runoff.

MO mineral resources None None None

Lower Olifants Mining None None None

Kruger National Park None • Reduced water quality and quantity.

• River flow and transportation.

Ecotourism areas None None. None

Sekhukhune region • Provides employment for people.

• Unbalanced societies with widespread male absenteeism.

• Rural poverty and lack of opportunities.



36

6.4 Middle Olifants Mineral Resource Development

IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) ORWRDP Infrastructure

None None None

OR water resources

• Abstraction for industrial and domestic use.

• Destruction/degrading/ disturbance of terrestrial and aquatic systems.

• Disturbance of groundwater regime.

• Reduced down-stream opportunities for water use.

• Water resources placed under stress.

• Groundwater yield reduced.

• River flow • Groundwater. • Mining development. • Mining dewatering. • Development

policies.

OR water quality • Pollution of surface water resources from runoff, waste discharge and waste dumps.

• Reduced fitness for use.

• Groundwater pollution.

• Possible toxicity. • Long term trend of

reducing water quality. • Water treatment may be

necessary.

• Waste discharge and disposal from mines.

• Seepage from diffuse sources.

• Abandoned/defunct mining areas.

• Surface runoff. • Mining dewatering.


Lower Olifants Mining

• None • Reduced water supply. • Higher salt concen-

trations in water. • Water treatment may be

necessary.

• Greater river storage, flow control and water use upstream.

Kruger National Park

• None • Reduced water supply. • Higher salt concen-

trations in water. • Possible toxicity. • Water treatment.

• Greater river storage, flow control and water use upstream.

Ecotourism areas • Detract from sense of place of nearby areas.

• Visual scarring.

• Increased local tourism. • Secondary development

to cater for urban and mining market.

• Economic upliftment of large areas on periphery.

• Add. Infrastructure development (roads, power, urban areas).


Sekhukhune region • Employment opportunities.

• Direct private sector investment in area.

• Focus on mining and less attention paid to other sustainable long term development.

• Economic multipliers. • Raised quality of life. • Add. infrastructure

development (roads, power, urban areas).

• Social ills of increasing affluence.

• Deepening rural poverty amidst pockets of affluence.

• Private sector investment.

• Add. infrastructure development (roads, power, urban areas).


• Political will.



37

6.5 Lower Olifants Mining and Industry

IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) ORWRDP Infrastructure

None None None

OR water resources • Direct water use • Reduced water

quantities available. • Destruction/degrading

of natural systems.


• Storage of water. • Distribution & use of

large quantities of water over wide area.

• Development & planning policies.

OR water quality • Reduced water quality (incr. salt concentrations in dams, streams, etc).

• Direct waste discharge from point & diffuse sources.

• Minimum flows in rivers.

• Flow control and reduced flushing.

• Dams and other infrastructure.

• Water management practise from mining and industry.



Ecotourism areas None None None

Sekhukhune region None None None

Kruger National Park • Sense of place • Visual scarring. • Air pollution. • Reduced river flows. • Reduced water

quality. • Aquatic habitat

degradation.

• Human and animal health risks from toxicity of water supplies.

• Long term negative impact on tourism.

• Industrial water use. • Waste discharges &

disposal practise. • River storage and

flow management/ control in Olifants River.

6.6 Kruger National Park IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) ORWRDP Infrastructure

None None None

OR water resources • Direct conservation of water resources.


• Very large, premium conservation area.

• Conservation and development structures and policies.

OR water quality • Direct positive impact on water quality in conservation area.

• Greatly improved aquatic habitat.

• Sink and filter action for pollutants.

• Very large, premium conservation area.

• Conservation and development structures and



38

IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) policies.



Lower Olifants Mining • Softens harsh mining/ industrial regional image.

• Secondary tourism industry development and diversification.

• Recreational capacity

• Image of KNP as premier conservation area.

• Proximity.

Ecotourism areas • Positive linkages between KNP & ecotourism routes.

• Enhanced status of secondary ecotourism routes.

• Enhanced tourism development possibilities.

• Increased revenues from tourism.

• Employment creation.


Sekhukhune region • Positive linkages between KNP & ecotourism routes.

• Anchor point for ecotourism over a wide area.

• Enhanced tourism development & diversification possibilities.


6.7 Ecotourism Areas IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) ORWRDP Infrastructure

• Higher assurance of water supply, sourced from those areas feeding the ORWRDP.

• Good water quality available for treatment that comes from natural areas.

• Source area for water.

• High rainfall area. • Earmarked as

ecotourism/non industrial development area.

OR water resources • Reasonable protection of water source areas.

• Preservation of natural and even pristine areas.

• Lowered risk of degradation/ destruction of terrestrial ecosystems and resources.

• Conservation and development policies and programmes.

• Development planning.

OR water quality • Direct positive impact on water quality in conservation area.

• Good aquatic habitat..

• Very large areas earmarked for tourism development.

• Policies for development of low polluting industry.




39

IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) MO mineral resources None None None


Kruger National Park None • Secondary tourism development in support of Kruger.

• Assists in diversification of overall ecotourism experience.


• Intrinsic natural beauty of areas.

• Link to image of KNP as premier conservation area.

• Anchor role of Kruger over a wide area.

• Development and tourism policies.

Sekhukhune region None • Enhanced tourism development & diversification possibilities.

• Positive linkages between Sekhukhune region & ecotourism routes.




6.8 Greater Sekhukhune Region IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) ORWRDP Infrastructure

• Use of associated infrastructure by people.

• Possible damage/ vandalism to infrastructure.

• Possible unsolicited water use.

• Infrastructure is in rural areas that are relatively densely populated.

• ORWRDP layout. • Rural poverty. • Lack of basic

service delivery/development over extended area.

OR water resources • Erosion and degradation of terrestrial landscapes.

• Degradation of riverine areas.

• Severe degradation of riverine areas during extreme events e.g. floods.

• Groundwater regime affected negatively.

• Diminishing assurance of supply from ground-water sources.

• Rural poverty. • Population densities. • Lack of development

opportunities. • Unsustainable land

use practises. • Development

planning & delivery



40

IMPACT ON DIRECT EFFECTS INDIRECT EFFECTS PATHWAY(S) OR water quality • High sediment loads

in runoff. • High nitrates in

water.

• Human and animal health problems.

• Groundwater quality impaired.

• Rural poverty. • Population densities. • Lack of development

opportunities. • Unsustainable land

use practises. • Development

planning & delivery

Coal mining areas None • Potential source of labour.

• High unemployment.• Rural poverty and

lack of opportunities.• Development

policies.

MO mineral resources None • Potential source of labour.

• High unemployment.• Rural poverty and

lack of opportunities.• Development

policies.

Kruger National Park None None None

Ecotourism areas • Negative contrast/ linkages of extensive rural poverty to prime ecotourism area (security, vagrants, squalor, informal settlements, "honey pot" effect).

• Additional tourism development & diversification possibilities.

• Creation of positive linkages between Sekhukhune region & ecotourism routes.


• Rural poverty and lack of opportunities.


• Cultural tourism potential.


• Mining and infrastructure investment.




41

7 ASSESSMENT The main purpose of the assessment process is to determine the significance of the effects analysed. This is done in terms of the issues and has two parts; significance ratings before and after applying mitigation. Significance is expressed as a judgement of whether it is high, medium or low. It is especially those of high significance that are important. The main factors that have to be taken into account when determining the significance of cumulative effects are: • Sensitivity of the environment. An effect that would ordinarily be assigned a low

significance, must be treated far more circumspectly in the context of it proximity to or potential effect on a sensitive environment.

• Likelihood or probability of occurrence; and • Consequence or intensity of the effects. In terms of Figure 4 on page 36 the ORWRDP impacts directly on 4 other resources of value. They are: • The water resources of the Olifants River system. • The Sekhukhune Region. • The Middle Olifants mineral resources and mining development. • The Panorama and Highlands Meander ecotourism development areas in

Mpumalanga and the K2C Biosphere zone adjacent to them (see figure 5 on page 52). The ORWRDP is itself directly impacted on by one other resource of value namely the Mpumalanga Panorama, Highlands Meander and K2C ecotourism areas. What is set out below is the manner in which the impacts on each of these resources of value by the ORWRDP, is further influenced (either positively or negatively) by the actions or activities from other resources of value or other outside effects, acting together with the ORWRDP.



42

7.1 Cumulative Effects Before Management Action 7.1.1 Water Resources of the Olifants River System

Impact Pos/Neg Cause Likelihood Consequence Significance

Artificial river flows , Dam construction/Abstraction Certain Ecological stress High

ORWRDP

Water quality (temp, salt conc.) , Dam storage Certain Ecological stress Medium

Reduced water quality, reduced river flows.

, AMD, abstractions, waste discharge, seepage, etc.

Existing Reduced fitness for use, eco-logical stress.

High

Increased water availability in the upper Olifants system

[ Transfers in. Existing Reduced stress on resource Low

Coal mining areas

Groundwater regime disturbed. , Surface & underground mines, dewatering, pumping.

Existing Flow regime disturbed esp. in dry periods.

Medium




Medium MO mineral resources development Groundwater regime disturbed. , Underground mining, de-

watering, pumping. Existing Flow regime disturbed esp. in

dry periods. Medium

Lower Olifants Mining




Medium

Ecotourism areas Water quantity and quality [ Natural areas with high rainfall Existing Maintains flow in Steelpoort River & water quality

Medium


, Unacceptable land use practise, erosion, abstraction.

Existing Ecological stress, reduced water quality & fitness for use.

High Sekhukhune region

Groundwater regime disturbed. , Unsustainable abstraction Existing Lower water table, reduced flow in dry periods.

Low

CUMULATIVE EFFECT Reduced water quantities and quality for all the water resources of the Olifants River System. HIGH ( , )



43

7.1.2 The Sekhukhune Region


Socio-economic - (employment, skills training)

[ Construction and operation of the ORWRDP.

Certain Knock on effects (financial, employment, opportunities)

Low

Further short term deterioration of social fabric in a rural society.

, Influx of workers & money over a wide area.

Certain Social ills (alcohol abuse, prostitution, HIV, etc)

Medium

ORWRDP

Infrastructure development [ Better supply of basic services, roads, etc.

Certain Better quality of life possible. Medium


[ Formal employment opportunities.

Existing Knock on effects (financial, employment, opportunities)

Low Coal mining areas

Social ills at family level. , Migrant workers. Existing Perpetuation of dysfunctional rural family structures.

Low


[ Mining investment and formal employment opportunities.

Existing Knock on effects (financial, employment, opportunities)

Low

Raised infrastructure service levels.

[ Secondary development in towns and related infrastructure

Existing Better quality of life possible. Low

MO mineral resources development

Social differentiation and fragmentation.

, Deepening of divide between many with nothing and a few with something.

Existing Heightened social tension, antag-onism and confrontation.

Low

CUMULATIVE EFFECT Some development and social upliftment in Sekhukhune Region. Will remain low unless there is committed and ongoing management and development intervention from public and private sectors in collaboration. Low ( [ )



44

7.1.2 Mpumalanga Panorama, Highlands and K2C Ecotourism Areas


Detract from sense of place in those areas close to infra-structure development.

, Visual scarring & large manmade structures near to or in areas of natural beauty

Uncertain Negative tourism experience, decreased tourism

Very low

ORWRDP

Diversification of tourism mix. [ Increased sightseeing potential Probable Increased tourism, secondary tourism development (recreation, accommodation, hospitality).

Low

Detract from sense of place in those areas close to mining developments.

, Visual scarring & large manmade structures and infrastructure near to or in areas of natural beauty

Certain Negative tourism experience, decreased tourism

MO mineral resources development

Pollution (effluent, smoke, solid waste, dust, etc.)

, Uncoordinated industrial, mining & informal urban development.

Probable Negative tourism experience and degrading landscapes.

Medium and in some cases high.

Vegetation stripping and loss of bio mass.

, Source of natural resources for poor rural people.

Possible Degrading landscapes and loss of biodiversity.

Medium Sekhukhune Region

Migration from Sekhukhune district to Mpumalanga.

, Rural poverty, lack of opportunities, development backwater.

Possible Negative tourism experience, additional uncontrolled hawking, settlements, begging, crime.

Low

Increased marketability of region.

[ World renowned conservation area & regional tourism anchor.

Certain Boundless opportunities for tourism markets to sell area.

Very High Kruger Park

Reduced tourist numbers , Kruger Park north loses ground as tourist destination - Water Quality problems in Olifants.

Existing Areas fade or even fail as tourism destinations.

High

Cumulative Effect Deterioration of Panorama, Highlands & K2C as conservation and tourism areas because of a combination of knock on effects such as lack of opportunity in greater Sekhukhune Region, mineral development in the

Medium to high (, )



45

middle Olifants and water resource effects of the Olifants River in the Kruger National Park.



46

Figure 5: Natural and ecotourism areas



47

7.1.4 The Middle Olifants Mineral Resources Development Figure 4 shows that the Middle Olifants Resource Development area is only impacted on by the ORWRDP. While the area has great influence on other resources of value under consideration, none of them have a significant impact on it. The direct and indirect effects of the ORWRDP on the Middle Olifants Minerals Resource development were considered in section 6.1 above. 7.1.5 Discussion In terms of the issues identified above, there are three cumulative impacts that may be identified from the analysis that are of greatest significance. What must be remembered is that as indicated in section 7.1, these cumulative impacts have been assessed for a situation where the current status is maintained and no management action is taken. The assessment with the application of management action is considered in section 8 below. The most significant cumulative impacts then are:

1 Reduced water quantities and quality for all the water resources of the Olifants River System. (High negative cumulative impact under existing/current conditions)

2 Some development and social upliftment in Sekhukhune Region. (Low positive cumulative impact under existing/current conditions).

3 Deterioration of Panorama, Highlands & K2C as conservation and tourism areas because of a combination of knock on effects such as lack of opportunity in greater Sekhukhune Region, mineral development in the middle Olifants and water resource effects of the Olifants River in the Kruger National Park (medium to high negative cumulative impact under existing current conditions).

These are the most significant cumulative impacts that have emerged when considering the place or part that the ORWRP has in the greater development picture in the Middle Olifants region. As pointed out before, the ORWRDP cannot be seen in isolation. It is an integral part of a much bigger development initiative that comes from the implementation of government policy. Its main purpose is undoubtedly to enable and underpin further mining development in a large area of the middle Olifants region, as well as the delivery of basic water services to many people over a wide area in the Sekhukhune Region. But in doing this there will be some very significant cumulative impacts. In terms of the three cumulative impacts identified, the implementation of the ORWRDP will bring a High and a Medium to High, Negative impact in two cases, and a Low, Positive impact in the other. All are the opposite of what is desired. The question then must be asked, what further incremental reinforcement or weakening of these cumulative effects can be expected from other reasonably foreseeable future actions? Will such incremental effects compound the total impact or be synergistic in nature and possibly cause the total effect to diminish? Once again the case is considered in terms of the current situation and without the implementation of management action. 7.2 Future Incremental Effects



48

7.2.1 Compounding negative impacts on water resources In terms of Figure 4 on page 36 the water resources of the Olifants River System are impacted on by the following actions or activities.

• Coal mining and power generation on the Mpumalanga Highveld. • The Sekhukhune Region. • The mineral resources and mining development of the Middle Olifants. • The ORWRDP itself. • The Highlands Meander and Panorama ecotourism areas of Mpumalanga (+ve). • The Phalaborwa / Gravelotte mining and industrial area.

In addition the water resources of the Olifants River System are used for activities such as:

• Water supply to urban areas (Witbank, Middleburg, Groblersdal, Phalaborwa) • Water supply to rural areas (boreholes) • Irrigation (Loskop Dam, Lower Blyde River) • Small scale mining and industry (outside of the areas listed)

All of these add to the fact that the water resources of the Olifants River System are already in crisis. This is expanded on in section 2.1.3. In terms of this assessment, what can be expected from reasonably foreseeable future actions? A scenario that might possibly unfold is the following:

1 Coal mining on the Mpumalanga Highveld is unlikely to increase. However, despite current efforts, the waste loads that are transported to the rivers and streams from existing mines as well as closed, defunct and abandoned mines will increase. The main reasons why this will probably occur is that despite concerted efforts over the last 20 to 30 years to curb and control the pollution from mining, the situation has actually deteriorated. Research is being done on the problem. Laws have been tightened and collective approaches are being used. But more strategic management interventions will have to be considered.

2 The growing scope and complexity of dealing with this water quality problem on the Mpumalanga Highveld is immense to say the least.

3 As noted in the strategic intent the fundamental purpose of the ORWRDP is to underpin future mining development in the Middle Olifants. This does not only involve consumptive use but the water quality problems from mining in terms of waste discharge and AMD amongst others, will be extensive and complex to deal with properly.

4 Irrigation already uses the lion's share of water from the Olifants River System (> 50%). While much of this use can be curtailed or more effectively managed through compulsory licensing and proper policing, regional planning initiatives have identified the expansion or resuscitation of defunct irrigation schemes, particularly in the Middle Olifants, as a means of driving further development in the area.

5 The other major arm of the ORWRDP is the transfer of water to Polokwane and Mokopane and the provision of basic water services to a large area in the Sekhukhune Region.

6 Many of these actions do have return flows (irrigation and municipal water use). However, inevitably there is an increasing drop in water quality from such return flows.



49

Therefore the further assessment of the cumulative effect of these reasonably foreseeable actions on the water resources of the Olifants River System may be summarised as follows:

Additional Action Effect Pos/Neg Compounding/ Synergistic Significance

Coal mining areas Water quality problems , Synergistic High

Irrigation Reduced river flows and lower water quality.

, Compounding and synergistic

Medium

Mining in the Middle Olifants

Reduced river flows and increasing water quality problems


High

Transfers Abstraction & reduced river flow. , Compounding Medium

Basic water to Sekhukhune

Abstraction, reduced river flow & distribution over wide area.

, Compounding Low

In all cases it can be seen that the significance of the cumulative effects will increase. It was already of High significance. In terms of this analysis it could even probably become Very High. 7.2.2 Compounding social upliftment in Sekhukhune Region One of the basic functions of the ORWRDP as a development intervention should be seen as the influence and effect that it can or must have, on improving the quality of life of the rural people of Greater Sekhukhune, both directly and indirectly. The analysis of section 6.8 indicates that the cumulative effect that the ORWRDP and the many other actions and activities will have on the Greater Sekhukhune region will be positive, but of low significance. This includes consideration of the secondary development that will come from development initiatives from both the private and public sectors. It is therefore necessary to consider some important reasons why this is so. In industries like mining which is based on exploiting the value of a depleting resource, the rapid pace of automation and resource depletion means that employment in many cases shrinks even as output grows. Such industries that extract and process raw materials use large amounts of energy. They are not only among the most polluting of human activities, they also absorb substantial sums of investment money while providing only a relatively small and declining number of jobs (Renner 2002). There is a traditional model of economic development that holds that an extractive industry like mining brings wealth into a community in terms of capital invested and the jobs that it provides. The overall well-being of the people and communities is therefore inevitably tied to the fate of mining operations. What is said is that if mining operations are controlled or constrained in any way (e.g. through stringent environmental regulations) this will invariably result in significant secondary job losses in the local economy, with devastating consequences. However, what is undoubtedly true is that local economies are unduly put at risk when exploitative industries like mining are allowed to deplete an area’s resource base, through one sided or selfish business and operational policies. In the very worst cases such operations can become both indiscriminate and uncontrolled and a region could be stripped of its natural and social assets in a very short time. This is not what is likely to occur in the



50

middle Olifants. The thinking in South Africa today in terms of social and sustainable development in mining is very progressive and it also has the necessary legal framework to support it. This worst case scenario will therefore probably not occur. However, even a limited or similar type of scenario would be totally unacceptable. It will need concrete measures to ensure that there is no chance that it does occur. What is very necessary is that a more sustainable approach be followed. The more a region or a local community diversifies its economy and the more it develops a complex web of local economic activities, the better able it will be to weather any downturns and market vagaries that affect the fortunes of an industry like mining. In the absence of an approach of purposeful long term diversification and expansion of the local economy in the Middle Olifants, what will happen is that revenues brought in by direct mining and related investments and their subsequent operations, will simply leak out to be spent elsewhere. The Greater Sekhukhune Region is therefore unlikely to benefit from the mining development that is potentially ready to take off there unless there is a concerted effort to counteract the establishment and operation of a local economy built almost solely around an extractive industry and based on the exploitation of the region's natural resources (minerals and water). Examples of this can be seen in South Africa where this has happened or is in the process of happening in places like the East Rand, Stilfontein and the Free State Goldfields. While it can be said that these areas did provide employment and other benefits for a very long period of time (> 50 years), the livelihoods of many people in a regional context are now threatened because of a lack in diversification of the regional economy. The Witwatersrand region is an example of what happens when mining ceases where there is a highly diversified regional economy. The main point that is being made is that mining alone is not enough to provide all the work, jobs, wealth and other benefits that are critically needed in an under developed region like Sekhukhuneland. Therefore the further assessment of the cumulative effect that reasonably foreseeable actions will have on development and upliftment in the Greater Sekhukhune Region, may be summarised as follows:


Coal mining areas Reduced employment opportunities as coal mining areas close down.

, Compounding Low

Employment opportunities [ Compounding Low

Investment in infrastructure & housing, roads, health services

[ Compounding Medium

More mining development in Middle Olifants

Knock-on effects on the economy though employment

[ Synergistic Low

Employment opportunities [ Compounding Medium Secondary development in Middle Olifants

Investment in some basic new services and housing.

[ Compounding Low



51


Some stimulation of rural / local economy.

[ Compounding Low

"Honey pot" effect – people drawn from rural areas to towns. Steady disintegration of existing social order.

, Compounding Medium

Increasing social ills, growing divide between haves and have nots


Medium

What this analysis says is that the cumulative effects on development and upliftment in the Sekhukhune Region, from future actions and activities taking place outside of the region, will probably have a Low to Medium positive effect overall. This assessment takes into account that will probably be some additional Low to Medium negative effects as well. It does not of course take into account mitigatory actions that could enhance the effects. This is discussed further in section 8 below. 7.2.3 Impacts on Ecotourism and Natural Areas The extension and focused development of ecotourism and natural areas in the Mpumalanga and Limpopo Provinces are listed as priorities in their Growth and Development Strategies. However, no matter what additional tourism development is mooted, the main driver and anchor of all such activity in both these provinces remains the Kruger National Park. As noted above, the Kruger National Park is a driver of regional economic activity the value of which is inestimable. It is South Africa's premier ecotourism destination and second most important tourist draw card overall. It is the anchor point and primary driver of extended and very significant eco-tourism sector business activity in the Lowveld areas of the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces. This premier tourist destination has now been linked to the Mpumalanga Panorama and Highlands Meander Tourism areas through the Kruger to Canyons Biosphere Reserve in the Central Lowveld. Without the base of the Kruger National Park however, the tourism appeal all these areas would be substantially less and also less effective. It is the worldwide appeal of the KNP together with the diversity of features offered by the other areas, that makes them all so much more attractive as tourism destinations. It is therefore important to further assess the cumulative effects that reasonably foreseeable actions will have on all these ecotourism areas in the future.


Coal mining areas Reduced water quality in the Olifants River from abstraction but mainly abandoned mines.


Medium



52


Reduced water quality (abstraction, AMD, waste discharge, pumping etc.)

, Compounding & synergistic

High

Visual scarring, degraded landscapes & encroachment on natural areas.

, Compounding Medium

Future mining development in Middle Olifants

Aesthetic impacts (smoke, dumping, odours, etc.)

, Compounding Low

Reduced water quality from abstraction and waste discharge

, Compounding MediumFuture secondary development in Middle Olifants Encroachment of urban areas/

development on natural areas. , Compounding Low

Sekhukhune Much as before. Vegetation stripping and loss of bio mass. Migration of people into ecotourism areas, in search of livelihoods.

, Compounding Low

7.2.4 Discussion In terms of the analysis above, what is seen is that as development takes place in the Middle Olifants certain impacts on resources of value become compounded. There are significant cumulative effects. The most critical of these is the impact on water quality (quantity and quality) of the water resources of the Olifants River. It will occur along the whole length of the river. Secondly, the cumulative impacts on the natural or ecotourism areas will probably increase. This will come from a number of different sources and includes increasing stress on and deterioration of the water resources, terrestrial environment and tourism attractiveness of the areas. The latter is particularly true of those that are near to high intensity mining and industrial activities. The third area of cumulative effects namely on development and upliftment of people in the Sekhukhune Region, would seem to be influenced slightly by certain reasonably foreseeable future actions and activities. The whole strategic intent of the ORWRDP and associated development planning initiatives is to bring development to the region at a scale that will meaningfully impact on the quality of life of the people who live there in terms of things such as employment, basic service delivery and a more diversified local economy. It will be argued that this is exactly what the IDP and Provincial Growth and Development Strategies are designed to do, together with the many legal requirements that are now in place for cooperative governance. This is not denied but the problem is that there are a number of factors external to the area that are the main drivers of development or that can constrain it in a manner that could make such development largely ineffectual and unsustainable. Development must therefore be managed effectively at a very broad strategic level, if the full strategic intent of development in the Middle Olifants is to be realised.



53

The most significant of these external factors are listed below and they have to be tackled in an integrated way as part of concerted management action that is put in place to effectively achieve sustainable development in the Middle Olifants Region.

1 The water resources of the Olifants River System as the lifeblood of an extended region, which cuts across and supports many different sectors of economic activity e.g. mining, agriculture, tourism, conservation, etc.

2 Recognition of the fact that while mining development may be highly desirable the external cost and both its direct and indirect impacts are very high and need to be fully accounted for and properly factored into environmental planning and management.

3 All economic activity is inter-related and the actions or activities of one project usually have a significant effect on many others. Development planning must be integrated across disciplines, geographical regions and political boundaries. Large development programmes and projects must not be assessed in isolation as if their footprint is unique and entirely spatially constrained within a limited geographical area around them. That is why it has been essential to look at this strategic perspective for the ORWRDP.

4 Development and upliftment of people in the Sekhukhune Region will not take place unless there is a large degree of cooperation and integration of effort and investment between the public and private sectors in the area. This process has already commenced, yet it is important that the commitment and time required to ensure a successful end result is not underestimated.

5 Development of a project like the ORWRDP must be seen in the context of the wider institutional and development planning regime of which it is a part. The full train of linkages between the project, the other major development initiatives and all the main resources of value that may be affected or which must support development, should be identified and the environmental consequences properly assessed and brought into a wider environmental management institutional framework from the outset. For example, the Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy contains a number of initiatives referred to as "competitive clusters", e.g. mining, tourism and forestry development, that all directly affect or rely on sustainable use of the water resources of the Olifants River System. However, as shown the Olifants System is already stressed and there is not much supply or assimilative capacity left in it. Thus, further development will require a high level of ongoing and committed cooperative governance and action between DWAF, the Province, DME and local government.



54

8 DISCUSSION, MITIGATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS In the discussion below, a number of management actions are recommended to mitigate the negative effects and enhance the positive effects that have been identified in this study. 8.1 Water Resources 8.1.1 Olifants River System The water resources of the Olifants River currently support a wide variety of economic activities and are the lifeblood of many industries and people over the whole of its length. The water resources are under serious threat and are in danger of being used in a manner that is unsustainable. Because of the many linkages, transfers, direct and indirect effects that come into play over a very wide area over the whole area where the resources are used, it is essential that the management of the resource is done on an integrated basis over the whole of the length of the river i.e. at WMA level. In this study the water resources of the Olifants System have been identified as a resource of value that is fundamental to achieving the aims and objectives of sustainable development over a wide area of Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces. Yet the Provincial Growth and Development Strategies do not recognise this specifically and do not put forward any specific actions to make sure that the resource is protected. At best there is a tacit assumption that this responsibility will be adequately handled by DWAF, who have a dual mandate to develop and manage the water resources of the country as well as to protect them. The ORWRDP is very good example of the development and management side of this mandate. The second part of the mandate has received intense and focused attention from DWAF, particularly over the last twenty to twenty five years, under increasing evidence of the pressures and stresses impacting on all facets of water resources. The approach to water quality management has evolved from the following (van Wyk et al):

• Disposal-to-land approach (1919 to 1956). • Pollution control (1956 to 1991). • Receiving Water Quality Objectives (RWQOs) (1991 to 1998) • Resource Quality Management (RQM) (1998 to 2003). • Integrated Water Quality Management (IWQM) and Integrated Water Resource

Management (IWRM) for the future. The need for IWQM and IWRM stems from the necessity for sustainable development and demands that all resource management efforts must be integrated in an Integrated Catchment Management context. It is an holistic approach towards the protection, use, development, conservation, management and control of water, where the departure point is life cycle assessment and the practise of effective co-operative governance. Over the last twenty years a lot of work has been done by DWAF in order to address this issue. This includes initiatives such as the National Water Resource Strategy, as well as the Resource Directed Measures for Protection of Water Resources and the Source Management Strategy. They are all national strategy documents that provide the framework within which all water resource protection activities must take place. In addition there are numerous Regulations, Best Practise Guidelines, Operational Guidelines, agreements and



55

many other studies and documents that all provide a very sound basis for water resource management in South Africa. In the Olifants River system itself, numerous studies have been done in the past and are currently underway, that are related to effective water resource management. One of the most important is the process of compulsory water use licensing that is being undertaken as an outcome of the NWRS process. However, just as important is the work being done at local government or water service provider level, on water conservation and demand management e.g. on the western Highveld. All of this will also feed into the Provincial Blueprint for Water Service Provision. What this study has highlighted is that there are a few important areas related to the management of cumulative impacts on water resources that are not being addressed. The great need for guidelines that can be used to do cumulative effects assessment for IWRM in mining, has been recognised by DWAF and some work has been done by the department to draw up such documentation (DWAF, 2005b). But it is not yet formally taken up in the licensing, monitoring and enforcement processes for IWRM. What is needed is that cumulative effects are taken up in a water management model of the whole river system. Through this the present and future water resources situation for the whole system can effectively be managed to meet the current and future water demands optimally, sustainably and equitably. Because the water resources of the Olifants System are so stressed and also because of the inter-linked nature of demand and water requirements the management focus will have to be much broader than just one relatively small area of the Olifants System. It must for instance also include the Letaba catchment and the downstream international requirements in Mozambique. The Olifants is also the only source left for transfer of water to the upper parts of both the Mogalakwena and Sand catchments that supply Polokwane and Mokopane. In addition such a model will also have to be robust and complex enough to deal with influence and use of the groundwater resources in the system. Groundwater is currently extensively used for the supply of urban and agricultural water requirements e.g. the dolomitic areas around Delmas and on the Springbok Flats. But the sustainable yields of the groundwater system must be better understood so that the links between exploitation of groundwater resources and the subsequent impact on the surface water resources can be managed effectively. This applies equally to the Middle Olifants area. To achieve sustainable development there must be proper and appropriate understanding the water resources and they must be managed sustainably and equitably. To set such a model up will require an effective legal, institutional and administrative base from which to act. The most appropriate model must probably be a Catchment Management Agency. What is important is that the necessary institutional, legal and administrative structures are put in place sooner rather than later. The main functions of such institutional arrangements must be to:

• Oversee water allocations and water use in an equitable way for the whole Olifants System.

• Monitor and regulate the consumptive use of water. • Monitor and regulate non consumptive uses such as waste discharge and

disposal.



56

• Enforcement of pollution control regulations. • Facilitate cooperation and integration of water resource use and protection on a

catchment wide basis. This whole section implies that a management system based on a Catchment Management Agency (CMA) model and implementation and management of the Reserve, is what should be used to solve the problems listed and achieve sustainable development. Although the legal framework is in place and many of the required initiatives are currently underway, work is still required to achieve the goals of the legislation in terms of the effective functioning of a CMA. As indicated above, much work that would precede the formal establishment of a CMA for the Olifants WMA has already been done. In fact a stakeholder consultation process in support of this was initially started by DWAF in 1994 (BKS, 2003). Discussions with key stakeholders were held from 1994 to 1999 and after a round of public meetings in 1999, a Stakeholder Reference Group (SRG) was formed to enable meaningful consultation regarding the establishment of the CMA. The SRG met on five occasions between November 1999 and February 2002. A second round of public meetings took place during April 2000. The stakeholder consultation process, technical and organisational situation assessments, boundaries, name, functions, structure and funding of the CMA, as well the Advisory Committee were discussed at these meetings. The SRG had opportunity to comment on two draft versions of the proposal. All the legal requirements and regulations, as well as the scientific and technical investigations, the support data and information that are needed to underpin the establishment and functioning of a CMA for the WMA, are in place. But to date it has not been taken further. The institutional changes and arrangements must still be finalised and implemented. In Chapter 3 Part 8 of the NWRS, Figure 3.8.2 gives a proposed programme for establishing catchment management agencies in the 19 WMAs in the country. For the Olifants WMA a date of about the end of 2005 is given to complete the task. Judging by current progress on other WMAs (Komati) there is still a very long time to go on the Olifants. This institutional change is important, in order to separate the functional responsibilities for water resource development and management, from the regulatory function. A CMA institution will have the authority and representation to deal effectively with the cumulative impacts on the water resources of the Olifants River System, which is both important and required for the Olifants River, particularly as development is set to expand considerably within the Middle Olifants Catchment. 8.1.2 Water Resources and Mining The Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy (LGDS) has identified the PGMs and Chrome mineral resources of the Sekhukhune Region as a potential economic growth cluster for development in the Province. There is nothing wrong with this. However, what the LGDS does not do is to formally make the important linkage between exploiting the mineral resources and sustainable use of the water resources. Water is a basic natural resource that must be used efficiently and equitably if there is to be any sustainable long term economic growth at all.



57

The water resources of the Olifants River System have already been placed under great stress in terms of both water quantity and quality. One of the main reasons for this is the amounts of waste discharged to the system from the multitude of point as well as diffuse pollution sources related to mining activity along its whole length. No mining operation can fully control or successfully recover all the metal or metals that it seeks to extract. Residual metals are released into the external environment where they may have a seriously detrimental effect on the biophysical environment. Nearly all metals are highly toxic when they are present as metal ions in solution. The metals that cause the greatest problems are mercury, cadmium, chrome, vanadium, zinc, copper, and, to a lesser extent, iron and manganese, many of which are part of the mix in the Middle Olifants. What this means is that there will in all likelihood be a quantum increase in the total waste load discharged to the Olifants River from mining operations in the Middle Olifants during the next 10 years and thereafter. This will come on top of the existing overall waste load that has already seriously impaired the natural functioning of the river. To successfully deal with this problem will need additional action over and above the normal or standard pollution control measures that are now applied. It may be argued that the pollution from mining and its other impacts will be taken care of in the EMPR and EMP approvals issued by DME that are part of all mining authorisations and operations. But this is exactly where project specific assessments can fall short of addressing all the cumulative impacts Four current and probably extreme but very pertinent examples can be quoted to illustrate the point. These refer to the coal mining areas of the Mpumalanga Highveld, the worked out gold mining areas of the Witwatersrand, the gold mines on the dolomitic areas of the Far West Rand (Carletonville) and the gold mining areas at Klerksdorp, Orkney, Stilfontein and Hartbeesfontein (KOSH). In all these cases there is a considerable problem in controlling the discharge of large volumes of waste water into the natural systems. It has come about because of the cumulative effects of mining over large areas and where the actions (or lack of action or inability of individual mines) to adequately fulfil their environmental management responsibilities in terms of water quality discharged from their operations. In the Wibank / Middelburg / Bethal area, the coal mines work together collectively to control discharges and to manage the water quality in the Olifants River System. This has not come about because of action by the regulators. It comes from the realisation that it is in the mines' own interests and that the water quality problems cannot be solved at the level of individual mines. On the Witwatersrand the legacy of abandoned and worked out deep level gold mines and their impact on the water resources of the Vaal River, is a very big problem. Conservative estimates indicate that it could cost up to R10 billion or more, to fix these problems. It will also have to be an ongoing long term and collective effort by DWAF, DME and the mining companies to be successful. It will take many decades before acceptable remediation will be achieved.



58

On the Far West Rand a similar problem of inter connected deep level mines exists that is exacerbated by the dolomitic formations that overlie the gold bearing formations. Pumping and waste discharge from mining operation over more than 50 years, have wreaked havoc on the water resources over a wide area. In the KOSH area, directives and court orders have recently been issued against mining companies in terms of the shared responsibility for dewatering and dealing collectively with the problems of underground water in the whole KOSH area. The situation was brought to a head because of the sudden announcement of the owners of the Durban Roodepoort Deep (DRD) gold mine that the mine would be closing. This had an immediate and significant knock on effect on the operations of the other producers in the area and created a situation that is untenable to say the least. The mines now have to take action on a collective basis and a "cluster" of mines has effectively been created that will have to work together. It is submitted that such clusters should become the norm rather that be seen as ad hoc measures to deal with situations like this. Comment It must be recognised that the negative effects of mining raised in the preceding paragraphs are the

result of past mining activity that preceded the development of more stringent environmental legislation. However, regardless of how adequate the current legislation may be, the key issue is how effectively and timeously it can be implemented into what is an already highly stressed natural system (the Olifants), that will determine how significantly future cumulative impacts will further impact the water resources. Thus, it is recommended that the precautionary principle be applied where possible, even at this early stage.

It might be said that the lessons for the Middle Olifants, taken from these actual cases, are very apparent to say the least. What are the implications and recommendations for the ORWRDP?

1 Some of the biggest beneficiaries from the development of the ORWRDP will be the mining companies that are already operating and those that will be developed in the Middle Olifants.

2 The development of a mining cluster in the Middle Olifants is seen as an excellent vehicle to underpin and drive development and upliftment over a wide area on a regional scale. This is what is advocated in the Provincial Growth and Development Strategies and IDPs.

3 However, the full reality of the cumulative effects that will occur and the possible direct impact that this will have on the water resources of the region must be fully understood and the responsibility for managing the impacts must be accepted, by those that advocate and promote mining development.

4 Genuine commitment and effective cooperation between DWAF, DME and the mining companies involved will be necessary to ensure that the water resources are used sustainably and properly protected.

5 From the start, not at the end of the mining cycle, the regulators and all the mines involved must work together and take action on a collective basis in a "cluster" arrangement, to manage the impacts on the water resources of the region, rather than on an individual basis as is currently the case in typical EMPR authorisation processes.

6 This must also be seen as part of and aligned with the overall management of the whole Olifants River System, as set out in section 8.1.1 above.



59

8.1.3 Water Resources and Tourism The tourism sector is a priority item in the strategies of Limpopo and Mpumalanga in order to promote economic growth through the formation of such competitive clusters. In both these provinces extensive areas have been set aside as development clusters for further development of tourism. This includes the Panorama, Highland Meander, Ivory Route and the Vhembe Region of Limpopo, west of the Kruger National Park. All of these areas contain prime natural areas. However, there are also other large cluster developments that will take place within them e.g. mining and agriculture. Not only the mining developments but also many of these other developments will be made possible or will be supported by water provided from the ORWRDP. Moreover as South Africa's premier ecotourism destination and second most important tourist draw card overall, the Kruger National Park is the anchor point for all eco-tourism and related activities over a significant part of the Lowveld areas of the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces. This includes all the proposed tourism development areas mentioned above. Without a healthy and functioning Kruger National Park their appeal and viability will be significantly affected. It is therefore important the water resources in all the areas and where water has to be supplied to the area concerned, must be protected and managed sustainably. But in particular, proper supplies of water to the Kruger National Park are critical, and must enjoy a very high priority. With the implementation of the Reserve this concern will be adequately addressed, yet the Reserve process is likely to take many years to implement. Although the De Hoop Dam will supply the Reserve as soon as impoundment commences, its influence on the Reserve flows for the whole Olifants River System is small. 8.2 Development in the Sekhukhune Region Development in the Sekhukhune Region of Limpopo will take place within the framework of policies and plans as set out in the Provincial Growth and Development Strategies and Local Government IDPs. The ORWRDP and the expansion of mining in the region are seen as important vehicles to achieve economic growth in the region. Many of these policies and strategy documents have an inward looking bias and an almost exclusive focus on needs. This is particularly true of IDPs. What is needed is a balance between fulfilling needs and harnessing growth potential effectively. What must be understood is:

• There must be a balance between the allocation of resources to needs and growth.

• Needs are pressing, but cannot resolve themselves. • Growth creates more resources to allocate towards meeting needs

As shown in section 7.2.2 above, in the absence of an approach of purposeful long term diversification and expansion of the local economy in the Middle Olifants, the desired economic growth will probably not take place. The Greater Sekhukhune Region is unlikely to benefit from the mining development unless there is a concerted effort to counteract the establishment and operation of a local economy built almost solely around an extractive



60

industry and based on the exploitation of the region's natural resources (minerals and water). This then begs the question, how should this be done? In the National Water Resource Strategy (Chapter 1 section 1.1) it is stated that the three fundamental objectives for managing South Africa's water resources are:

• Equitable access to water i.e. equity of access to water services, to the use of water resources, and to the benefits from the use of water resources.

• Sustainable use of water. • Efficient and effective use of water for optimum social and economic benefit.

The philosophy of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) is developed in the NWRS as the way that this should be achieved. IWRM is based on the understanding both in this country and internationally as well, that water resources can be successfully managed only if the natural, social, economic and political environments in which water occurs and is used are taken fully into consideration. What all of this says is that those who benefit or profit most from the use of the water resources of the Olifants River System in general and the ORWRDP in particular, must participate actively in the upliftment and development of the areas where the exploitation or use of the resources takes place. This is in fact what Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act No 15 of 2000 (MPRDA) states.

1 One of the objects of the Act is to ensure that holders of mining and production rights promote justifiable social and economic development and contribute towards the socio-economic development of the areas in which they are operating. (section 2 (h & i)).

2 Organisations involved in mining operations generally, must comply with the requirements of the prescribed social and labour plan; (sections 23 and 25).

This is expanded on in the broad-based Socio-economic Empowerment Charter for the SA Mining Industry, drawn up in terms of § 100 of the MPRDA. In terms of community and rural development there are targets related to issues such as whether companies cooperate in the formulation of integrated development plans and with government in the implementation of these plans for communities where mining takes place and for major centres where labour is sourced. In these cases special emphasis must be placed on development of infrastructure. It also requires companies to engage the local mine community and communities in major centres where labour is sourced. This moves beyond typical "triple bottom line" reporting. The challenge actually lies in showing how using water and exploitation of minerals can be done so that it benefits people and communities, particularly as required by the Charter in rural areas and major centres where labour is sourced. However, it is unlikely that action taken by individual mines or companies is likely to have any great effect in addressing this very important strategic objective. For such programmes to have the maximum benefit, it essential that cooperative efforts are initiated and managed, between numbers of mining companies and organisations, together with Local, Provincial and National Government departments. It was not possible to verify whether such an approach is currently being used or not. If it is, then such collective action is to be welcomed. If not, then it is recommended that it be implemented.



61

A number of actions are therefore necessary in order to address this issue. In broad terms they can be:

1 DWAF and DME must be in agreement on a common approach to the issue of equity in the distribution of wealth and benefits from the use and exploitation of natural resources. Personal communication with people in both DWAF and DME has indicated that there is not yet unanimity on this issue.

2 This must be done in consultation with the stakeholders in the mining sector, as well as Provincial and Local Government, Communities and other important roleplayers.

3 Similar to what was said in section 8.1.2 above, from a very early stage of the development of mining operations, the authorities from all relevant spheres of government together with the mines involved, must work together. Action must be taken on a collective basis in a "cluster" arrangement, to ensure that economic growth is diversified and managed over as broad a front and as widely as possible.

4 Action by mines on an individual basis will not have the same impact as collective and coordinated effort on the part of all concerned.

5 Provincial Growth and Development Strategies and LDPs, together with instruments such as the Mining Charter, mines' social plans, EMP's, water use licenses and the like, must be used collectively and in harmonized way, to coordinate and implement these actions.

8.3 Final Comment What does the analysis say in terms of the issues that were identified in section 5.2. They were: 1 To what extent or in what way will the ORWRDP contribute to, support or detract from

the sustainable use and management of water resources of the Olifants WMA? 2 What cumulative effects can be expected from the implementation and operation of the

ORWRDP in terms of other major development initiatives and programmes in the Olifants WMA?

3 What cumulative effects can be expected from the implementation and operation of the ORWRDP in terms of the other important resources groupings or resources of value in the Olifants WMA?

What has been shown is the following: 1 The sustainable use of the water resources of the Olifants River System is in jeopardy.

It is not that there is no water. In times when rain is plentiful there is no problem. At other times there is a crisis of varying proportions depending on the assurance of supply demanded. This has serious implications for the continued sustainable use of the resource and developments that are planned, based on the assumption that water from the Olifants System will be available. The knock on effects or cumulative effects on other resources of value such as ecotourism areas and the Sekhukhune region are also serious. However, there is strategic management action that can be taken to mitigate this.

2 The widespread nature of the cumulative effects is such that intermittent or isolated management action to mitigate the effects is probably doomed to failure. What is needed is concerted, coordinated and collective action by all role players involved. These measures include basin wide and integrated management of the water resources of the whole of the Olifants Basin. Previous and current examples of the



62

effects that mining can have on water quality, dictate that collective action to monitor and manage water resources must be done in terms of "cluster" agreements. Users must act in unison and this must be done sooner rather than later.

3 The ORWRDP has knock on effects on other developments and other resources of value in the Olifants Water Management Area and beyond. These include direct and indirect effects. It is particularly those developments and resources of value which have links to water resources that are the most at risk. What this means is that almost all are affected since water resources are the life blood of people, development and general quality of life. There are strategic management actions that can be implemented to mitigate and counteract these cumulative effects. What is needed that all spheres of Government must cooperate and work with private sector role players such as mines and developers. Provincial Growth and Development Strategies, IDPs, water use licenses, mining authorisations, mining social plans and similar relevant planning and delivery processes must work together. There must be effective cooperative governance and cooperation with the private sector and civil society to ensure that development is truly sustainable.



63

9 BIBLIOGRAPHY BKS, 2003. Draft Proposal for the Establishment of a Catchment Management Agency for the Olifants Water Management Area.

DWAF, 2002. National Water Resource Strategy

DWAF, 2003a. Draft Scope of Work for a Feasibility Study for the Augmentation of Water Resources of the Middle Olifants Water Project.

DWAF, 2003b. Olifants Water Management Area: Overview of Water Resources Availability and Utilization. DWAF Report No. P WMA 04/000/00/0203.

DWAF, 2004a. ORWRDP Environmental Authorisation Study Phase 1: Screening Investigation.

DWAF, 2004b. ORWRDP Environmental Authorisation Study Scoping Report.

DWAF, 2004c. Olifants Water Management Area: Internal Strategic Perspective. Report No. P WMA 04/000/00/0304.

DWAF, 2004d. ORWRDP Environmental Assessment Specialist Study Aquatic Ecology.

DWAF, 2005a ORWRDP Environmental Authorisation Study Draft Scoping Report.

DWAF, 2005b Comprehensive Framework: IWRM: Mining. Cumulative Effects Assessment. Draft Final Guideline Document.

FAO, 1996. Development of a National Watershed Management Programme.

Greater Sekhukhune District Municipality, 2005. Integrated Development Plan. 2004/ 2005 IDP Review.

MMSD, 2001. An Overview of the Impact of Mining and Mineral Processing Operations on Water Resources and Water Quality in the Zambezi, Limpopo and Olifants Catchments in Southern Africa.

Renner, Michael, 2002. Working for the Environment: A Growing Source of Jobs. WorldWatch Institute, Washington DC.

Van Wyk JJ, P. Moodley, SAP Brown and P Viljoen, WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM Towards a National Water Quality Management Framework Policy for South Africa. WISA 2002.



APPENDIX A

Terms of Reference



67

Terms of Reference Environmental Assessment Technologies were appointed by the project team to prepare a short and succinct strategic environmental perspective on the project proposals for development of the water resources of the Middle Olifants River as envisaged by Phase 2 of the ORWRDP. The terms of reference for this work are essentially to provide a brief Strategic Environmental Perspective of the ORWRDP in relation to other development within the project area. This includes consideration of current development trends and considerations of sustainability and cumulative effects on a wide front. The ORWRDP must also be placed in context to the Provincial Growth and Development Strategies (GDS), the Integrated Development Plans (IDP) of Local Government and other major development initiatives in the Middle Olifants region, as diverse as ecotourism, basic services and mining. The strategic directions, and economic opportunities and objectives of the Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provincial Governments need to be considered in terms of the concept of sustainability and the ability of the environment to sustain this development. Similarly, the aims and objectives of local Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) need to be considered. Furthermore, other known initiatives within the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, for example, Cumulative Effects Framework for the mining sector’s effects on water quality, and other Government departments need to be brought into the proper contextualisation of the proposed development. The types of issues that will be investigated include but are not limited to the following: • The implications of the Provincial GDS and the IDP of local government, in relation to

the ORWRDP and its secondary effects. • Cumulative impacts from the synergies and interactions between the ORWRDP, mining

and people. • The cumulative impacts on ecosystems, both terrestrial and aquatic. • The Kruger National Park – its place and context both as a driver of development and

the threats/risks it faces as a world renowned area of very high natural value, from development such as the ORWRDP.

• The consideration of externalities. • Examine these impacts in the scenario that no further water developments are

implemented but mining development is encouraged to operate within the available existing resources.

• Recommend (with reasons) the options for mitigating strategic and cumulative impacts and indicate (quantitatively) the extent to which each proposed mitigatory action would reduce specific adverse impacts and enhance specific positive impacts.

olifants river water resources … perspective final.pdf · olifants river water resources...

Documents