FAUNA & FLORA SPECIALIST BASIC ASSESSMENT:

NUWEVELD GRID CONNECTION AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE

PRODUCED FOR ZUTARI

First Draft - May 2020 This Draft – April 2021

[email protected] RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Red Cap Energy (Pty) Ltd (Red Cap) intends to develop three wind farms on a 35,000ha site situated about ~65km north of Beaufort West along the R381 to Loxton, in the Beaufort West Local Municipality, Central Karoo District Municipality, Western Cape. In order to evacuate the power from the wind farm, Red Cap are proposing, a ~120km long 132 or 400kV powerline from the windfarm to the Eskom Droërivier Substation located south-west of Beaufort West. As the power line falls within the Beaufort West REDZ and an ESKOM Strategic Corridor, a Basic Assessment process would be required for authorisation of the power line. Zutari are conducting the required BA process and, as part of the Basic Assesmsent process, the developer, Red Cap, has appointed 3Foxes Biodiversity Solutions to provide a specialist terrestrial fauna and flora study of the proposed Nuweveld Grid Corridor. It should be noted that the intention is to consider both the development of the 132kV and 400kV within the corridor and seek authorisation for both although only one would ultimately be developed. The reason for this is, that the need for a 132kV line or a 400kV line will only be determined by Eskom at a later stage, following the undertaking of the BA process.

The purpose of the Nuweveld Grid Connection Terrestrial Biodiversity Report is to describe and detail the ecological features of the proposed grid connection corridor; provide an assessment of the ecological sensitivity of the affected area and identify the likely impacts that may be associated with the development of a 132kV or 400kV power line, although only one would be developed. Several site visits as well as a desktop review of the available ecological information for the area were conducted in order to identify and characterise the ecological features of the identified corridor. This information is used to derive an ecological sensitivity map that has been used to inform the final routing of the power line. Impacts are assessed for the pre-construction, construction, operation, and decommissioning phases of the development. A variety of avoidance and mitigation measures associated with each identified impact are recommended to reduce the likely impact of the development and which should be included in the EMPr for the development.

The Nuweveld Grid Corridor traverses a wide range of landscape units and associated habitats along the proposed route from the Nuweveld Wind Farms site to the Eskom Droerivier Substation. Areas of particular sensitivity and potential concern include the section of the corridor along the Krom River, the majority of which is classified as CBA1 and also contains extensive areas of floodplain vegetation associated with the Krom River and which are known to support Riverine Rabbits. Further south, the corridor descends the escarpment near De Jagers Pass where it traverses a lot of rugged and mountainous terrain before reaching the lower elevation plains. Despite the sensitivities and rugged terrain, the proposed route through this area is considered acceptable and avoids the major sensitivities of the area. It is however considered important that erosion potential is limited and it is recommended that where pylons need to be positioned on steep slopes, that the access is constructed along the contour and on gentler slopes and not directly down the slope where it is very difficult to control water flow and potential erosion damage. Alternatively means that do not scar the ground can be used such as carrying the material to these areas or to use a helicopter or other options like a suspended cable if no suitable access is available.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 2

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

The majority of impacts associated with the grid connection would occur during the construction phase as a result of disturbance and habitat loss. Long-term operational impacts would be lower as a result of recovery of the vegetation within the disturbed areas and lower levels of disturbance. The long-term impact of the power line on CBAs is however a potential concern. The presence of the power line within areas of CBA is, in its own right, not seen as being of very high potential concern, but as there are usually sensitive features present within the CBA, safeguarding these features of concern is a critical measure required to ensure maintenance of biodiversity and long-term ecological function within these CBAs. The CBAs along the major water courses are for water course protection from development as well as habitat protection due to the potential presence of Riverine Rabbits. The relevant riparian features have been mapped and identified as having a very high sensitivity and no pylons or other major infrastructure should be placed in these areas. The other major area of concern associated with CBAs are the steep slopes associated with the escarpment areas and rugged terrain of the corridor. The more sensitive parts of these areas have been mapped as very high sensitivity features and no pylons should be located within these areas. With the recommended mitigated and avoidance implemented, it is highly unlikely that the presence of the power line would significantly compromise the ecological value or functioning of the affected CBAs. In addition, certain infrastructure such as pylons and substations are excluded from Very High sensitivity areas and it is only the access tracks that are allowed within the highest sensitivity areas, thereby reducing potential impact on these areas. The power line would not impact future conservation expansion priority areas as there are no 2016 NPAES focus areas in proximity to the power line corridor.

The impact to terrestrial ecology of a 132 kV and 400 kV line was found to be largely similar and any differences are insignificant and would not change the impacts or the final significance of any of the impacts (see below). Therefore, all impacts and mitigation measures identified would apply to both line capacities and the impact assessment thus considers the pre-mitigation and residual impacts of what is effectively the WCS that could be developed within the corridor.

Summary assessment of the impacts associated with the 132 or 400kV power lines and associated switching stations and access tracks. 132 kV powerline 400 kV powerline WCS Impact Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Pre- Post- mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation Construction Impact on Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - vegetation and negative negative negative negative negative negative plant SCC Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Impact on fauna negative negative negative negative negative negative

Operational Phase

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 3

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Increased soil Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - erosion risk negative negative negative negative negative negative Decommissioning Phase

Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Faunal Impact negative negative negative negative negative negative

Increased soil Minor - Negligible - Minor - Negligible - Minor - Negligible - erosion risk negative negative negative negative negative negative Cumulative Impacts Impacts on CBAs, ESAs and broad – Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - scale ecological negative negative negative negative negative negative processes.

Impact Statement There are no terrestrial ecological fatal flaws associated with the assessed Nuweveld grid corridor. Although there are a variety of no-go areas within the corridor, these features have been avoided by the preferred power line routing. As such, the preferred routing is considered acceptable and any similar routing confined to the corridor would also be acceptable provided that the no-go areas are avoided. As such, there are no terrestrial ecological reasons to oppose the development of the Nuweveld Grid Connection which includes the development of a 132kV or 400kV line and associated infrastructure. As such, it is the reasoned opinion of the specialist that either the 132 kV or 400kV can be developed within the corridor, provided that all mitigation measures are implemented.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 4

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Compliance with Appendix 6 of the 2014 EIA Regulations, as Amended

Addressed in the Requirements of Appendix 6 – GN R326 2014 EIA Regulations, 7 April 2017 Specialist Report 1. (1) A specialist report prepared in terms of these Regulations must contain- a) details of- i. the specialist who prepared the report; and Pg. 6 ii. the expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae; b) a declaration that the specialist is independent in a form as may be specified by Pg. 7 the competent authority; c) an indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report was prepared; Section 1 (cA) an indication of the quality and age of base data used for the specialist report; Section 2

(cB) a description of existing impacts on the site, cumulative impacts of the Section 3 proposed development and levels of acceptable change; d) the date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season to Section 2.3 the outcome of the assessment; e) a description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or carrying out Section 2 the specialised process inclusive of equipment and modelling used; f) details of an assessment of the specific identified sensitivity of the site related to the proposed activity or activities and its associated structures and infrastructure, Section 3 and 4 inclusive of a site plan identifying site alternatives; g) an identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers; Section 3 and 4 h) a map superimposing the activity including the associated structures and infrastructure on the environmental sensitivities of the site including areas to be Section 3 and 4 avoided, including buffers; i) a description of any assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in Section 2.3 knowledge; j) a description of the findings and potential implications of such findings on the Section 3 impact of the proposed activity or activities; k) any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr; Section 6 l) any conditions for inclusion in the environmental authorisation; Section 5 m) any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or environmental Section 7 authorisation; n) a reasoned opinion- i. whether the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised; (iA) regarding the acceptability of the proposed activity or activities and Section 7 ii. if the opinion is that the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised, any avoidance, management and mitigation measures that should be included in the EMPr, and where applicable, the closure plan; o) a description of any consultation process that was undertaken during the course See Main Report of preparing the specialist report;

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 5

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

p) a summary and copies of any comments received during any consultation See Main Report process and where applicable all responses thereto; and any other information requested by the competent authority. 2) Where a government notice gazetted by the Minister provides for any protocol or Since Government minimum information requirement to be applied to a specialist report, the requirements Notice No. 320 has as indicated in such notice will apply. been gazetted, a verification report (Annex 5) and protocols (Annex 7 and Annex 8) aligned with the requirements have been included in this report

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 6

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2 Compliance with Appendix 6 of the 2014 EIA Regulations, as Amended ...... 5 Table of Contents ...... 7 List of Figures ...... 9 Short CV/Summary of Expertise – Simon Todd ...... 11 Specialist Declaration ...... 13 1 Introduction ...... 14 1.1 Scope of Study...... 14 1.2 Approach & Assessment Philosophy...... 15 1.3 Relevant Aspects of the Development...... 16 2 Methodology ...... 19 2.1 Data Sourcing and Review ...... 19 2.2 Site Visits & Field Assessment ...... 20 2.3 Sensitivity Mapping & Assessment ...... 20 2.4 Limitations & Assumptions ...... 21 3 Description of the Affected Environment ...... 21 3.1 Broad-Scale Vegetation Patterns ...... 21 3.2 Listed Plant Species ...... 31 3.3 Critical Biodiversity Areas & Broad-Scale Processes ...... 32 3.4 Faunal Communities ...... 35 4 Nuweveld Grid Sensitivity Assessment ...... 38 5 Impacts and Issues Identification ...... 41 5.1 Identification of Potential Impacts ...... 41 6 IMPACTS ASSESSMENT – Nuweveld Grid Connection & Associated Infrastructure ...... 42 6.1 Construction Phase Impact 1. Impacts on vegetation and plant species of conservation concern due to the development of the powerline, substations and Access tracks ...... 44 6.2 Construction Phase Impact 2. Direct and indirect faunal impacts...... 45 6.3 Operational Phase Impact 1. Increased soil erosion risk during operation ...... 47 6.4 Decommissioning Phase Impact 1. Faunal impacts due to decommissioning ...... 49 6.5 Decommissioning Phase Impact 2. Increased soil erosion risk following decommissioning ...... 50 6.6 Cumulative Impact 1. Impacts on CBAs and Broad-Scale Ecological Processes...... 51

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 7

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.7 No-Go Alternative ...... 52 6.8 Summary Assessment ...... 53 7 Conclusion & Recommendations ...... 53 8 References ...... 56 9 ANNEX 1. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES ...... 57 10 ANNEX 2. LIST OF MAMMALS ...... 75 11 ANNEX 3. LIST OF REPTILES ...... 77 12 ANNEX 4. LIST OF AMPHIBIANS ...... 79 13 ANNEX 5. SITE VERIFICATION REPORT ...... 80 14 Annex 6. Criteria for the Assessment and Reporting of Impacts on Terrestrial Animal Species for Activities Requiring Environmental Authorisation ...... 84 15 Annex 7. Criteria For The Assessment And Reporting Of Impacts On Terrestrial Biodiversity For Activities Requiring Environmental Authorisation ...... 88

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 8

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

List of Figures

Figure 1. Satellite image showing the boundary of the Nuweveld Wind Farms in the north and the proposed grid connection corridor and preferred grid alignment route to the substation at Beaufort West in the south...... 17 Figure 2. The national vegetation map (SANBI 2018 Update) for the grid corridor and surrounding area...... 23 Figure 3. Typical open plains present in the north of the grid corridor, corresponding with the Eastern Upper Karoo vegetation type. Typical and dominant species include Pentzia incana, Eriocephalus spp., Rosenia spp., Lycium cinereum, Ruschia intricata and Zygophyllum retrofractum...... 24 Figure 4. Aerial view of part of the northern extent of the grid corridor within the Nuweveld WEF area. This is the area that would be affected by the collector switching station/substation linking the wind farms to the grid connection...... 25 Figure 5. The escarpment near to De Jagers Pass, the majority of which is classified as Upper Karoo Hardeveld. The steep slopes and cliffs are considered high sensitivity and finding an acceptable route for the power line through this section will require flatter areas to be identified on the steeper slopes that are suitable for pylons or the line to span the steep. ... 26 Figure 6. Upper Karoo Hardeveld from the north of the corridor, showing an area that is currently mapped as Eastern Upper Karoo, but is clearly more closely allied with Upper Karoo Hardeveld...... 26 Figure 7. Looking along the grid corridor towards Beaufort West which is visible in the distance, showing the typical plains below the escarpment which are classified as Gamka Karoo and which are dissected by numerous drainage lines belonging to the Southern Karoo Riviere vegetation type...... 27 Figure 8. Well-developed riparian vegetation along a tributary of the Krom River, identified as potential Riverine Rabbit habitat. Impact to these areas should be avoided as much as possible...... 28 Figure 9. A smaller drainage line towards the north of the grid corridor, illustrating that some of these features have permanent pools that are important for fauna such as amphibians, but would also be vulnerable to disturbance and pollution from nearby development activities...... 29 Figure 10. Example of one of the endorheic (without outflow) pans which occurs on the plateau area of the wind farm in the north of the grid connection corridor...... 30 Figure 11. Example of one of the rock pavements from the area. Although these areas appear to be devoid of vegetation, they are home to numerous small succulents and geophytes which are specialised inhabitants of these areas...... 31 Figure 12. Extract of the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan for the grid corridor, showing the fairly extensive CBAs associated largely with the Krom and Platdoring Rivers as well as the two formal conservation areas within the study area, the Karoo National Park and the Steenbokkie Private Nature Reserve the latter of which is within the corridor...... 34 Figure 13. Examples of common reptiles observed during the site visits. From top left, Leopard Tortoise, Puff Adder, Karoo Tent Tortoise and Ground Agama...... 37 Figure 14. Common amphibians present at the site include the Karoo Toad, left and the Common Platanna, right...... 38

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 9

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 15. Ecological sensitivity map for the Nuweveld Grid Corridor and wind farm site...... 39 Figure 16. Ecological sensitivity of the northern section of the grid corridor, showing the location of the on-site switching stations, collector switching station/collector substation and wind farm substations...... 40

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 10

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Short CV/Summary of Expertise – Simon Todd

Simon Todd is Director and principal scientist at 3Foxes Biodiversity Solutions and has over 20 years of experience in biodiversity measurement, management and assessment. He has provided specialist ecological input on more than 200 different developments distributed widely across the country, but with a focus on the three Cape provinces. This includes input on the Wind and Solar SEA (REDZ) as well as the Eskom Grid Infrastructure (EGI) SEA and Karoo Shale Gas SEA. He is on the National Vegetation Map Committee as representative of the Nama and Succulent Karoo Biomes. Simon Todd is a recognised ecological expert and is a past chairman and current deputy chair of the Arid-Zone Ecology Forum. He is registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (No. 400425/11).

Skills & Primary Competencies • Research & description of ecological patterns & processes in Nama Karoo, Succulent Karoo, Thicket, Arid Grassland, Fynbos and Savannah Ecosystems. • Ecological Impacts of land use on biodiversity • Vegetation surveys & degradation assessment & mapping • Long-term vegetation monitoring • Faunal surveys & assessment. • GIS & remote sensing

Tertiary Education: • 1992-1994 – BSc (Botany & Zoology), University of Cape Town • 1995 – BSc Hons, Cum Laude (Zoology) University of Natal • 1996-1997- MSc, Cum Laude (Conservation Biology) University of Cape Town

Employment History • 2009 – Present – Sole Proprietor of Simon Todd Consulting, providing specialist ecological services for development and research.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 11

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

• 2007 Present – Senior Scientist (Associate) – Plant Conservation Unit, Department of Botany, University of Cape Town. • 2004-2007 – Senior Scientist (Contract) – Plant Conservation Unit, Department of Botany, University of Cape Town • 2000-2004 – Specialist Scientist (Contract ) - South African National Biodiversity Institute • 1997 – 1999 – Research Scientist (Contract) – South African National Biodiversity Institute

A selection of recent work is as follows:

Strategic Environmental Assessments Co-Author. Chapter 7 - Biodiversity & Ecosystems - Shale Gas SEA. CSIR 2016. Co-Author. Chapter 1 Scenarios and Activities – Shale Gas SEA. CSIR 2016. Co-Author – Ecological Chapter – Wind and Solar SEA. CSIR 2014. Co-Author – Ecological Chapter – Eskom Grid Infrastructure SEA. CSIR 2015. Contributor – Ecological & Conservation components to SKA SEA. CSIR 2017.

Recent Specialist Ecological Studies in the Vicinity of the Current Site Environmental Impact Assessment for the Proposed Komsberg East and Komsberg West Wind Farms and Associated Grid Connection Infrastructure: Fauna & Flora Specialist Impact Assessment. Arcus Consulting 2014. Proposed Rietkloof & Brandvallei Wind Farms and Associated Grid Connection Infrastructure: Fauna & Flora Specialist Impact Assessment Report. EOH 2016. Proposed Gunstfontein Wind Farm and Associated Grid Connection Infrastructure: Fauna & Flora Specialist Impact Assessment Report. Savannah Environmental 2016. Mainstream South Africa Dwarsrug Wind Energy Facility: Fauna & Flora Specialist Impact Assessment Report. Sivest 2014. Phezukomoya and San Kraal Wind Energy Facilities and associated grid connection. Fauna and Flora specialist studies. Arcus Consulting 2018. Kokerboom Wind Energy Facilities (1-4) and associated grid connections. Fauna and Flora specialist studies. Aurecon 2017.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 12

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Specialist Declaration

I, ..Simon Todd...... , as the appointed independent specialist, in terms of the 2014 EIA Regulations, hereby declare that I: ▪ ▪ I act as the independent specialist in this application; ▪ I perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant; ▪ regard the information contained in this report as it relates to my specialist input/study to be true and correct, and do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity, other than remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 and any specific environmental management Act; ▪ I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work; ▪ I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the Act, Regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity; ▪ I will comply with the Act, Regulations and all other applicable legislation; ▪ I have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity; ▪ I have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding; ▪ I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority; ▪ I have ensured that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the specialist input/study was distributed or made available to interested and affected parties and the public and that participation by interested and affected parties was facilitated in such a manner that all interested and affected parties were provided with a reasonable opportunity to participate and to provide comments on the specialist input/study; ▪ I have ensured that the comments of all interested and affected parties on the specialist input/study were considered, recorded and submitted to the competent authority in respect of the application; ▪ all the particulars furnished by me in this specialist input/study are true and correct; and ▪ I realise that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 48 and is punishable in terms of section 24F of the Act.

Signature of the specialist: ______

Name of Specialist: ____Simon Todd______

Date: ____19 April 2021______

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 13

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

1 INTRODUCTION

Red Cap Energy (Pty) Ltd (Red Cap) intends to develop three wind farms on a 35,000ha site situated about ~65km north of Beaufort West along the R381 to Loxton, in the Beaufort West Local Municipality, Central Karoo District Municipality, Western Cape. Additionally, a ~120km 132 or 400kV powerline would evacuate electricity from the windfarms to the Eskom Droërivier Substation located south-west of Beaufort West. As the power line falls within the Beaufort West REDZ and an ESKOM Strategic Grid Corridor, a Basic Assessment process would be required for authorisation of the power line. Zutari are conducting the required BA process and, as part of the BA process, the developer, RedCap, has appointed 3Foxes Biodiversity Solutions to provide a specialist terrestrial fauna and flora study of the proposed Nuweveld Grid Connection. It should be noted that the intention is to consider the development of either the 132kV or 400kV within the corridor and seek authorisation for both although only one would ultimately be developed within the corridor. The reason for this is that the need for a 132kV line or a 400kV line will only be determined by Eskom at a later stage, following the undertaking of the BA process.

The purpose of the Nuweveld Grid Connection Terrestrial Biodiversity Report is to describe and detail the ecological features of the proposed grid connection corridor; provide an assessment of the ecological sensitivity of the affected area and identify the likely impacts that may be associated with the development of a 132kV or 400kV power line, although only one would be developed. Several site visits (detailed in Section 1.1.4) as well as a desktop review of the available ecological information for the area were conducted in order to identify and characterise the ecological features of the identified corridor. This information is used to derive an ecological sensitivity map that represents the ecological constraints for the development and has been used to inform the final routing of the power line. Impacts are assessed for the pre-construction, construction, operation, and decommissioning phases of the development. A variety of avoidance and mitigation measures associated with each identified impact are recommended to reduce the likely impact of the development, which should be included in the EMPr for the development. Finally, a statement is made as to the general ecological acceptability of the Nuweveld Grid Connection and whether or not the development should be authorised.

1.1 SCOPE OF STUDY

The study includes the following activities:

• a description of the environment that may be affected by a specific activity and the manner in which the environment may be affected by the proposed project; • a description and evaluation of environmental issues and potential impacts (including assessment of direct, indirect and cumulative impacts) that have been identified;

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 14

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

• a statement regarding the potential significance of the identified issues based on the evaluation of the issues/impacts; • an indication of the methodology used in determining the significance of potential environmental impacts; • an assessment of the significance of direct indirect and cumulative impacts of the development; • a description and comparative assessment of all alternatives including cumulative impacts; • recommendations regarding practical mitigation measures for potentially significant impacts, for inclusion in the Environmental Management Programme (EMPr); • an indication of the extent to which the issue could be addressed by the adoption of mitigation measures; • a description of any assumptions uncertainties and gaps in knowledge; and • an environmental impact statement which contains: - a summary of the key findings of the environmental impact assessment; - an assessment of the positive and negative implications of the proposed activity; and - a comparative assessment of the positive and negative implications of identified alternatives. General Considerations for the study included the following:

• Disclose any gaps in information (and limitations in the study) or assumptions made. • Identify recommendations for mitigation measures to minimise impacts. • Outline additional management guidelines. • Provide monitoring requirements, mitigation measures and recommendations in a table format as input into the EMPr for faunal or flora related issues. • The assessment of the potential impacts of the development and the recommended mitigation measures provided have been separated into the following project phases: - Planning and Construction - Operational - Decommissioning

1.2 APPROACH & ASSESSMENT PHILOSOPHY

This assessment is conducted according to the 2014 EIA Regulations (Government Notice Regulation 982) in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) as amended (NEMA), as well as the recently promulgated notice issued in terms of NEMA, “National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 Of 1998): Procedures to be followed for the assessment and minimum criteria for reporting of identified environmental themes in terms of section 24(5)(a) and (h) and 44 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998, when applying for environmental authorisation [G 43110 – GN 320]”. The applicable site verification report as required, is included under Annex 5 of this report and the required Protocols for the assessment and reporting of environmental impacts on terrestrial animal species, plant species

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 15

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

and terrestrial biodiversity are provided in Annex 6-8. It should however be noted that this assessment does not need to be aligned with the protocols, since the DEA has indicated that irrespective of whether an EA application for a development has been submitted, if an assessment started before the protocols came into effect on 9 May 2020 the protocols are not applicable and the assessment should adhere Appendix 6 of the EIA regulations. Since this assessment commenced in 2019, the study should comply with Appendix 6. However, the content of this report is aligned to be compliant to Appendix 6 and protocols.

In terms of NEMA, this report assesses how the proponent intends to comply with the principles contained in Section 2 of NEMA, which amongst other things, indicates that environmental management should: • (In order of priority) aim to: avoid, minimise or remedy disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biodiversity; • Avoid degradation of the environment; • Avoid jeopardising ecosystem integrity; • Pursue the best practicable environmental option by means of integrated environmental management; • Protect the environment as the people’s common heritage; • Control and minimise environmental damage; and • Pay specific attention to management and planning procedures pertaining to sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems.

1.3 RELEVANT ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT

The grid connection corridor is illustrated below in Figure 1. The corridor runs from the wind farm located along the R381 approximately 70km north of Beaufort West to the Droerivier Substation located near the N12 southwest of Beaufort West. The total length of the line would be approximately 120km. A preferred grid alignment within the grid corridor has been provided for the assessment. Furthermore, the line would be either a 132kV line or a 400kV line and therefore both options have been assessed. The project components assessed within the corridor are described below in Table 1.

It is important to note that the final corridor and preferred route have been derived following an iterative design process where various design and corridor permutations have been considered, assessed and further refined to ensure adherence to the environmental and technical constraints present on site. Previous iterations include a Screening, Pre-Application and Scoping Phases. This specialist assessment has been updated to reflect impacts profile associated with the latest iteration. The recommendations made in the preceding phases have informed the refined corridor and a provisional and preferred alignment within the corridor. The initial corridor width that was assessed was considerably wider than the 2km corridor that is assessed as part of the BA study and the original corridor is illustrated in the sensitivity mapping to provide the broader context.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 16

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 1. Satellite image showing the boundary of the Nuweveld Wind Farms in the north and the proposed grid connection corridor and preferred grid alignment route to the substation at Beaufort West in the south.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 17

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Table 1. Summary of the Nuweveld Gridline components and specifications.

Project Approximate Components Specifications Disturbance Description areas (WCS)

• Each wind farm will have a Switching Station yard of 150m x 75m located Switching next to the Wind Farm Substation. The Switching Station will consist of a stations (x3) Switchgear building and High Voltage Gantry. 3.4ha • The switching stations form part of the Gridline infrastructure and will be handed to Eskom in the operations phase (i.e. becoming part of the National Grid) 132kV collector • Up to approximately ≤15km of overhead 132kV high voltage monopole transmission pylon powerline is required to link the switching stations (x3) to the 0.5ha lines Collector switching station/substation. The pylons will, on average, be about 260m apart (estimate 65 pylons x 80m2= 0.5ha) Collector • 132kV scenario: 150m x 150m - 132kV collector switching station with switching collector & switchgear building and High Voltage gantry (2.25ha) 12.0ha station/substation • 400kV scenario: 300m x 400m – 400kV collector substation with collector & switchgear building and High Voltage gantry (12ha) • 132kV scenario: Up to approximately ≤105km of overhead 132kV overhead powerline (440 x 80sqm = 3.5ha): o Monopole spans, without stays, are on average 260m o Triple pole (‘twin tern’) spans for valleys can be up to 800m o Pylon type and span distance is determined by topography but the 132/400kV majority will be the single monopole structures 3.5ha Gridline • Up to approximately 105km of 400kV overhead powerline (estimate 290 pylons X 100sqm = 2.9ha): o Cross-rope suspension spans, with stays, are on average 400m o Self-supporting suspension spans, without stays, are on average 400m o Pylon type and span distance is determined by topography but the majority will be the cross-rope suspension structures Temporary laydown, staging • Temporary laydown areas will be identified along the power line route, with and yards areas 5ha the main equipment and construction yards being based in one of the and access surrounding towns or at the wind farm site camp & laydown areas. roads/tracks required for the • Existing access roads and tracks (upgraded to ± 2-4m wide where needed) construction / will be used as far as possible and new access tracks would be created 56ha decommissioning where needed – these would be 2-4m wide (wider than 2m when side phase drains are needed or due to the topography).

Total disturbance footprint (WCS) 81ha

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 18

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 DATA SOURCING AND REVIEW

Data sources from the literature consulted and used where necessary in the study includes the following:

Vegetation: • Vegetation types and their conservation status were extracted from the South African National Vegetation Map (2018 update). • Information on plant and animal species recorded for the wider area was extracted from the SABIF/SIBIS database hosted by SANBI. Data was extracted for a significantly larger area than the study area, but this is necessary to ensure a conservative approach as well as counter the fact that the site itself has not been well sampled in the past. • The IUCN conservation status of the species in the list was also extracted from the database and is based on the Threatened Species Programme, Red List of South African Plants (2021).

Ecosystem: • Freshwater and wetland information was extracted from the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas assessment, NFEPA (Nel et al. 2011) and the 2018 NBA. • Critical Biodiversity Areas in the study area were obtained from the 2017 Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan (WC-BSP), for the Beaufort West municipality, which includes the study area.

Fauna • Lists of mammals, reptiles and amphibians which are likely to occur at the site were derived based on distribution records from the literature and the ADU databases (ReptileMap, Frogmap and MammalMap) http://vmus.adu.org.za. • Literature consulted includes Branch (1988) and Alexander and Marais (2007) for reptiles, Du Preez and Carruthers (2009) for amphibians, EWT & SANBI (2016) and Skinner and Chimimba (2005) for mammals. • The faunal species lists provided are based on species which are known to occur in the broad geographical area, as well as an assessment of the availability and quality of suitable habitat at the site. • The conservation status of mammals is based on the IUCN Red List Categories (EWT/SANBI 2016), while reptiles are based on the South African Reptile Conservation Assessment (Bates et al. 2013) and amphibians on Minter et al. (2004) as well as the IUCN (2018).

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 19

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

2.2 SITE VISITS & FIELD ASSESSMENT

The site was visited on three occasions for the current study, from 13-15 June 2019, 17-19 September 2019 and 10-12 October 2019. The initial site visit included a helicopter flight along the power line alignment as well as across the wind farm area. During the site visits, the power line route was investigated in the field. Potentially sensitive features within the corridor were investigated, validated and characterised in the field including any pans, rocky outcrops and major drainage features that were observed in the field or from satellite imagery of the site. In addition to the current site visits, the wind farm area was also visited in August 2013 for a screening study for a previous wind farm development in the area. In addition to the above site visits, the vegetation of the veld and riparian areas at various locations in the study area was sampled by the consultant in 2018 as part of research into veld condition and Riverine Rabbit habitat condition assessment. Thus, the consultant has a very good understanding of the site which has been developed over the years from 2013 to present.

2.3 SENSITIVITY MAPPING & ASSESSMENT

An ecological sensitivity map of the site was produced by integrating the results of the site visits with the available ecological and biodiversity information in the literature and various spatial databases as described above. As a starting point, mapped sensitive features such as wetlands, drainage lines, rocky hills and pans were collated and buffered where appropriate to comply with legislative requirements or ecological considerations. Additional sensitive areas were then identified from the satellite imagery of the site and delineated. All the different layers created were then merged to create a single coverage. The ecological sensitivity of the different units identified in the mapping procedure was rated according to the scale as indicated below.

• Low – Areas of natural or transformed habitat with a low sensitivity where there is likely to be a negligible impact on ecological processes and terrestrial biodiversity. Most types of development can proceed within these areas with little ecological impact. • Medium- Areas of natural or previously transformed land where the impacts are likely to be largely local and the risk of secondary impact such as erosion low. These areas usually comprise the bulk of habitats within an area. Development within these areas can proceed with relatively little ecological impact provided that appropriate mitigation measures are taken. • High – Areas of natural or transformed land where a high impact is anticipated due to the high biodiversity value, sensitivity or important ecological role of the area. These areas may contain or be important habitat for faunal species or provide important ecological services such as water flow regulation or forage provision. Development within these areas is undesirable and should only proceed with caution as it may not be possible to mitigate all impacts appropriately.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 20

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

• Very High – Critical and unique habitats that serve as habitat for rare/endangered species or perform critical ecological roles. These areas are essentially no-go areas from a developmental perspective and should be avoided.

In reality, there are all categories of ecological sensitivity along the power line route and the higher sensitivity areas must be negotiated by the power line alignment with minimum impact. Provided that the actual pylons are not located within the no-go areas, it is acceptable for the overhead line to span these features and for new access tracks to traverse these areas subject to specific review.

2.4 LIMITATIONS & ASSUMPTIONS

The current study is based on several site visits as well as an associated desktop study. This significantly reduces the assumptions required for the current study and in particular the sensitivity mapping. Although it was very dry during the 2019 site visits, there were good summer rains in the summer with the results that the conditions in the February 2020 were excellent for the vegetation assessment. As a result, there are few limitations in this regard and the timing of the site visit is not seen to limit the results of the study in any way.

In terms of fauna, many species are shy or rare and their potential presence at the site must be evaluated based on the literature and available databases. In many cases, these databases are not intended for fine-scale use and the reliability and adequacy of these data sources relies heavily on the extent to which the area has been sampled in the past. Many remote areas have not been well-sampled with the result that the species lists derived for the area do not always adequately reflect the actual fauna and flora present at the site. In order to further reduce this limitation, and ensure a conservative approach, the species lists derived for the site from the literature were obtained from an area significantly larger than the study site. As the site falls within the known distribution of the Riverine Rabbit, specific attention was paid to the presence and distribution of the riparian floodplains known to be the dominant habitat of this species in the area. In addition, 50 camera traps were distributed across the wind farm site, of which a section of the corridor overlaps, in order to check for the presence of this species as well as inform the presence of fauna in the area more generally. The information from the camera trapping (8 months) is available to inform the current study and significantly reduces uncertainty regarding the composition of the faunal community of the area.

3 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

3.1 BROAD-SCALE VEGETATION PATTERNS

The national vegetation map (Mucina & Rutherford 2006 & 2018 SANBI update) for the study area is depicted below in Figure 2. The northern half of the grid corridor is dominated by Eastern

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 21

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Upper Karoo with some limited areas of Upper Karoo Hardeveld associated with the steep slopes of the larger mountains, plateaus and escarpments of the area. The lower-lying plains in the south of the corridor consist of Gamka Karoo with Southern Karoo Riviere along the major water courses which traverse the plains.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 22

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 2. The national vegetation map (SANBI 2018 Update) for the grid corridor and surrounding area.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 23

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

The different vegetation types within the corridor are described and illustrated below with images from characteristic sites along the corridor.

Eastern Upper Karoo Eastern Upper Karoo, has an extent of 49 821 km2 and is the most extensive vegetation type in South Africa and forms a large proportion of the central and eastern Nama Karoo Biome. This vegetation type is classified as Least Threatened, and about 2% of the original extent has been transformed largely for intensive agriculture. Eastern Upper Karoo is however poorly protected and less than 1% of the 21% target has been formally conserved. Mucina & Rutherford (2006) list eight endemic species for this vegetation type, which considering that it is the most extensive unit in the country, is not very high. Overall, at a broad level, this is not considered to represent a sensitive vegetation type. Within the study area, this vegetation unit is relatively homogenous and is usually dominated by typical karoo shrubs with various perennial grasses in between. There is however some variation in composition present in the area related to the substrate conditions, with some change in dominance between areas on dolerite soils, shale-derived soils and occasional areas of sandy soils. Few species of conservation concern were observed present at the site within the areas of Upper Karoo and most areas mapped as this vegetation unit are considered relatively low sensitivity.

Figure 3. Typical open plains present in the north of the grid corridor, corresponding with the Eastern Upper Karoo vegetation type. Typical and dominant species include Pentzia incana, Eriocephalus spp., Rosenia spp., Lycium cinereum, Ruschia intricata and Zygophyllum retrofractum.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 24

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 4. Aerial view of part of the northern extent of the grid corridor within the Nuweveld WEF area. This is the area that would be affected by the collector switching station/substation linking the wind farms to the grid connection.

Upper Karoo Hardeveld The Upper Karoo Hardeveld vegetation type is associated with 11 734 km2 of the steep slopes of koppies, butts, mesas and parts of the Great Escarpment covered with large boulders and stones. The vegetation type occurs as discrete areas associated with slopes and ridges from Middelpos in the west and Strydenburg, Richmond and Nieu-Bethesda in the east, as well as most south- facing slopes and crests of the Great Escarpment between Teekloofpas and eastwards to Graaff- Reinet. Altitude varies from 1000-1900m. Mucina & Rutherford (2006) list 17 species known to be endemic to the vegetation type. This is a high number given the wide distribution of most karoo species and illustrates the relative sensitivity of this vegetation type compared to the surrounding Eastern Upper Karoo. The extent of this vegetation within the corridor is greater than has been mapped, especially in the north and apart from the majority of steeper slopes within the corridor, the numerous small dolerite koppies emerging from the plains can also be considered to represent this vegetation type. Towards De Jagers Pass, where the route passes through a lot of rugged terrain associated with the escarpment, this is the dominant vegetation type. This vegetation type usually consists of very rocky ground and is often associated with steep slopes, with the result that it is considered vulnerable to disturbance but is also an important habitat for fauna. It also contains a higher abundance of protected plant species than the adjacent areas of Eastern Upper Karoo. Consequently, it is generally considered higher ecological sensitivity than the surrounding areas. Particularly in the north of the corridor, this unit has been under-mapped and there are numerous rocky outcrops and escarpment areas that correspond to this vegetation type that have not been mapped.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 25

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 5. The escarpment near to De Jagers Pass, the majority of which is classified as Upper Karoo Hardeveld. The steep slopes and cliffs are considered high sensitivity and finding an acceptable route for the power line through this section will require flatter areas to be identified on the steeper slopes that are suitable for pylons or the line to span the steep.

Figure 6. Upper Karoo Hardeveld from the north of the corridor, showing an area that is currently mapped as Eastern Upper Karoo, but is clearly more closely allied with Upper Karoo Hardeveld.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 26

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Gamka Karoo Towards Beaufort West, the majority of the grid corridor is classified as Gamka Karoo. The Gamka Karoo vegetation type has a total extent of 20 324 km2 and occurs in the large basin bounded by the Nuweveld Mountains in the north and northwest and the Swartberg and adjacent Cape Fold Mountains in the south. Gamka Karoo is classified as Least Threatened and less than 1% has been transformed (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). The vegetation type is however poorly protected as less than 2% falls within formal protected areas compared to the target of 16%. Gamka Karoo is characterised by irregular to slightly undulating plains covered in dwarf spiny shrubland dominated by karoo dwarf shrubs, with occasional low trees. Dense stands of perennial bunchgrasses cover broad sandy bottomlands. Geology consists of mudstones and sandstones of the Beaufort Group with some Ecca shales supporting very shallow and stony soils of the Glenrosa and Mispah forms, typical of the Fc land type. It is regarded as one of the most arid units of the Nama-Karoo Biome, with rainfall varying from 100mm in some areas in the rain shadow of the Cape Fold Mountains to about 240mm against the great escarpment. Although this is generally considered to represent a low sensitivity vegetation type, it is typically dissected by drainage features which increase the general sensitivity of these areas.

Figure 7. Looking along the grid corridor towards Beaufort West which is visible in the distance, showing the typical plains below the escarpment which are classified as Gamka Karoo and which are dissected by numerous drainage lines belonging to the Southern Karoo Riviere vegetation type.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 27

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Southern Karoo Riviere Although not all areas associated with this vegetation type have been mapped in the VegMap, the vegetation along the major rivers within the site corresponds with the Southern Karoo Riviere vegetation type. The Southern Karoo Riviere vegetation type is associated with the rivers of the central karoo such as the Buffels, Bloed, Dwyka, Gamka, Sout, Kariega and Sundays Rivers. About 12% has been transformed as a result of intensive agriculture and the construction of dams. Although it is classified as Least Threatened, it is associated with rivers and drainage lines and as such represents areas that are considered ecologically significant. These areas are conspicuous in the north of the grid connection corridor along the Krom River and its tributaries as well as in the south of the grid corridor where the open plains are dissected by numerous drainage lines.

Figure 8. Well-developed riparian vegetation along a tributary of the Krom River, identified as potential Riverine Rabbit habitat. Impact to these areas should be avoided as much as possible.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 28

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 9. A smaller drainage line towards the north of the grid corridor, illustrating that some of these features have permanent pools that are important for fauna such as amphibians, but would also be vulnerable to disturbance and pollution from nearby development activities.

Special Habitats There are a few specific habitats within the study area that warrant special attention. Along the corridor in the south as well as within the corridor within the wind farm site, there are occasional small pans present. As these are rare habitats, these should be avoided as much as possible. As the pans are generally small, these features can be easily avoided and would not pose a significant limitation for development of the power line.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 29

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 10. Example of one of the endorheic (without outflow) pans which occurs on the plateau area of the wind farm in the north of the grid connection corridor.

Apart from the pans there are also some localised areas of rock pavement. These usually consist of areas of flattish exposed bedrock with numerous small pockets of soil or gravel that create habitat for associated dwarf succulents and geophytes. As this is a rare habitat with specialised associated plant species such as Stomatium, Anacampceros and Trichodiadema, these areas are considered sensitive and should be avoided.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 30

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 11. Example of one of the rock pavements from the area. Although these areas appear to be devoid of vegetation, they are home to numerous small succulents and geophytes which are specialised inhabitants of these areas.

3.2 LISTED PLANT SPECIES

As many as 18 red-listed plant species are known from the broad area around the grid corridor. Investigation of the list however reveals that at least 6 of these are erroneous and included on the list due to outdated taxonomy and do not in fact occur in the vicinity of the site (Species have been split into several species or they were incorrectly identified at the time). Of the remainder at least half can be confirmed present or have a high probability of occurring at the site. Despite the errors in the database, this is still a relatively high total for the Nama Karoo which is generally low in endemic and rare species. The high number can be ascribed to the location of the site along the Great Escarpment which is wetter than the surrounding areas and also contains a number of relictual species. The listed species known from the area are provided in Table 1 below. Although not all of these species are likely to occur within the grid corridor itself, there is a reasonable probability that a moderate proportion of these are present. The high-lying plateau areas of the Nuweveld are poorly known and further investigation is likely to turn up additional listed species. The high-lying dolerite areas are likely to prove most fruitful in this regard. Despite spending significant time along the power line corridor, none of these species were observed, indicating that if present, these species are not common and would occur at a low density if present within the final corridor at all. As such, a significant impact on any plant species of concern is unlikely and the preconstruction walk-through of the final power line would identify any

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 31

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

such species present along the final authorised route and ensure that impact on such species is avoided.

Table 2. Listed plant species known from the broad area around the Nuweveld Grid Corridor. Not all of these species would occur within the affected area.

Family Species Status Probability

GERANIACEAE Pelargonium chelidonium EN V.Low ASPHODELACEAE Kniphofia ensifolia subsp. autumnalis EN Incorrect ID MESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Sceletium expansum VU Incorrect ID ROSACEAE Cliffortia arborea VU V.Low ASPARAGACEAE Asparagus stipulaceus NT Incorrect ID ASTERACEAE Gnaphalium declinatum NT Incorrect ID GERANIACEAE Pelargonium exhibens NT Moderate AMARYLLIDACEAE Gethyllis longistyla Rare High ASTERACEAE Phymaspermum schroeteri Rare High CRASSULACEAE Adromischus humilis Rare High FABACEAE Lotononis azureoides Rare Moderate LOBELIACEAE Lobelia eckloniana Rare Incorrect ID MALVACEAE Anisodontea malvastroides Rare Low ASTERACEAE Cineraria lobata subsp. lobata Declining Low APOCYNACEAE Duvalia angustiloba DDD Revised to LC High APIACEAE Annesorhiza filicaulis DDT Incorrect ID

3.3 CRITICAL BIODIVERSITY AREAS & BROAD-SCALE PROCESSES

The CBAs along the grid connection corridor are illustrated below in Figure 12. There are large tracts of CBA along the Krom River in the north and then along the Platdoring River in the south. Towards Beaufort West, there are two formal conservation areas, the Karoo National Park as well as the Steenbokkie Private Nature Reserve as well as some adjacent CBAs within the corridor. The CBAs along the major water courses are for water course protection from development as well as the potential presence of Riverine Rabbits. These relevant riparian areas have been identified as having a very high sensitivity (no go area) and the development should avoid these areas. Although the development of the power line through the CBAs will result in some habitat loss, the long-term impact of the power line can be reduced to a minor level through avoidance of these very high-sensitive riparian floodplains (“no go” areas) identified in this report. If these areas are avoided by pylons and roads and the mitigation measures as proposed are implemented, it is highly unlikely that the presence of the power line would significantly compromise the ecological value or functioning of the CBAs. The long-term footprint of the power line would be restricted to limited areas of disturbed but potentially well-recovered ground (residual impact from

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 32

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

construction) around the base of the pylons and an access track. As this would be linear in nature and highly localised, the impact on fauna and flora would be minor and is considered acceptable. Overall, the impacts of the power line would be moderate during construction and low during operation on terrestrial ecological features and functioning.

In terms of the 2016 Protected Area Expansion Strategy, the only area demarcated for protected area expansion in the vicinity of the grid corridor is adjacent to the northern boundary of the Karoo National Park and is well outside of the grid corridor. As such, there would be no impact on future protected area expansion potential in the area.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 33

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 12. Extract of the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan for the grid corridor, showing the fairly extensive CBAs associated largely with the Krom and Platdoring Rivers as well as the two formal conservation areas within the study area, the Karoo National Park and the Steenbokkie Private Nature Reserve the latter of which is within the corridor.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 34

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

3.4 FAUNAL COMMUNITIES

Mammals

As many as 70 mammals are listed for the study area in the MammalMap database, but many of these are introduced or conservation dependent and approximately 48 can be considered to be free-roaming and potentially impacted by the development (Annex 2). This includes several red- listed species including the Riverine Rabbit Bunolagus monticularis (CR), Black-footed Cat Felis nigripes (VU), Grey Rhebok Pelea capreolus (NT), Mountain Reedbuck Redunca fulvorufula (EN) and Brown Hyena Hyaena brunnea (NT). Of these, the Riverine Rabbit is of greatest concern, firstly because of its threat status and secondly because of a higher likelihood of impact on this species as compared to the others. A summary of the likely presence of these red-listed species, within the affected area is provided below in Table 2.

Table 2. Red-listed mammals known from the broad area and their likely presence in the Nuweveld more generally.

Species Status Likely Presence

Confirmed present in the area, especially along the R381 Riverine Rabbit CR in the vicinity of the Sak River, but also in some areas Bunolagus monticularis along the Krom and these rivers’ tributaries. There are historical records from the Nuweveld area and it is considered to be possibly present within the Karoo Black-footed Cat National Park but not confirmed. As such, it is potentially VU Felis nigripes present within the affected area, but the low number of recent records suggests the density of this species in the area is likely to be low. This species is confirmed present in the area and can Grey Rhebok NT commonly be seen in most areas of high-lying ground in Pelea capreolus the Karoo and along the Great escarpment. This species is confirmed present in the area, both within Mountain Reedbuck EN the Karoo National Park and more generally in the area, Redunca fulvorufula in high-lying areas with good grass cover. This species occurs at a naturally low density within the Karoo and is known from a few records from the Karoo Brown Hyena NT National Park but may also roam freely on farmland. If Hyaena brunnea present within the affected area, this would likely be of a transient nature.

The camera trapping within the wind farm site, found that a total of 25 different species are confirmed present within this part of the site. As the habitats within the rest of the corridor are fairly similar to that within the wind farm, this is considered to provide a generally representative indication of the faunal community that is likely to be present across the majority of the grid

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 35

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

connection corridor. In terms of the listed species which may occur in the area, only the Mountain Reedbuck was observed on the WEF site and is likely to occur in other parts of the grid corridor as well. The absence of the Brown Hyena is not surprising and it is seen as being unlikely that this species maintains a free-ranging population in the area. Similarly, the Black-footed Cat prefers areas with a higher prey density and it is also unlikely that this species is present especially within the high-lying parts of the corridor. Although no Riverine Rabbits were observed within the WEF site, this species is confirmed present from other parts of the grid corridor and it is certainly present along the Krom and Sak Rivers where there is suitable habitat present.

The major impacts on mammals associated with the grid connection would be transient disturbance during the construction phase and then some minor habitat loss and maintenance- related disturbance during operation. The long-term footprint of the power line would be low and the linear nature of this would act to minimise local impacts as well as the amount of habitat loss within an area would be very low. In addition, the majority of the construction-related footprint would recover over time, resulting in a low long-term impact. Vervet Monkeys and Baboons are however present in the area and sometimes climb on the pylons or may even overnight in their structures. Both species have been known to get electrocuted on power lines and measures to reduce this impact such as insulation of cables at pylons may be required.

Reptiles Reptile diversity in the area is relatively high which can be ascribed to the diversity of habitats present, especially along the escarpment. The only species of conservation concern that may occur in the area is the Karoo Padloper Chersobius boulengeri (EN). There is habitat within the corridor that is considered suitable for this species and it is considered likely to be present in at least some parts of the corridor. Direct habitat loss for this species would be low and a significant negative impact on the Karoo Padloper highly unlikely. In general, the major impacts on reptiles associated with the development would be disturbance and habitat loss during construction. However, there do not appear to be any species that would be especially affected. The footprint of the power line would be spread along its length with the result that the impact on any important habitats present would be low. In addition, there are no highly restricted habitats of high value for reptiles along the route. As such there do not appear to be any significant limitations or red-flag issues associated with reptiles and the development of the power line.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 36

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 13. Examples of common reptiles observed during the site visits. From top left, Leopard Tortoise, Puff Adder, Karoo Tent Tortoise and Ground Agama.

Amphibians The diversity of amphibians in the study area is relatively low with only 11 species having being recorded in the area. Species observed at the site include the Karoo Toad, Clawed Toad and Cape River Frog. The only red-listed species known from the area is the Giant Bull Frog Pyxicephalus adspersus (NT). This species is associated with temporary pans in the Karoo, Grassland and Savannah Biomes, but is not commonly recorded in the study area. As amphibians are associated with the drainage systems and wetlands of the study area which are generally classified as very high sensitivity, the footprint within these areas would be low and a significant impact on amphibians from the grid connection and associated infrastructure would be low.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 37

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 14. Common amphibians present at the site include the Karoo Toad, left and the Common Platanna, right.

4 NUWEVELD GRID SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT

The sensitivity map for the grid corridor is depicted below in Figure 15 and Figure 16Error! Reference source not found. Major sensitive features include the Krom River, its major tributaries and associated riparian areas in the north and central parts of the corridor, the De Jagers Pass area towards the south and then the Platdoring River system on the plains towards Beaufort West. The primary measures that should be implemented within the grid corridor to reduce the final impact of the power line as much as possible would be to reduce or eliminate the physical footprint (i.e. pylon placement or new roads) within important riparian habitats (shown as very high/no-go) and within the steeper mountainous areas (also shown as very high/no-go). In addition, no switching stations or collector switching station/substation should be developed within areas of potential Riverine Rabbit habitat or within any relevant buffers that have been mapped around these features. Under the layout provided for the on-site switching stations and the collector switching station/collector substation, the locations of these comply with the requirements and the substations and switching stations are restricted to low and medium sensitivity areas (Figure 16).

The major impacts associated with the power line would occur during the construction phase as a result of disturbance and habitat loss, but in the long-term the footprint associated with the power line and associated infrastructure would be low and impacts on fauna and flora reduced to an acceptable level. Large sections of the power line corridor are within CBA1 areas and while development within these areas is not encouraged, the underlying features are not likely to be significantly negatively impacted by the development and as such, this would be considered acceptable. Overall, there do not appear to be any fatal flaws associated with the proposed grid corridor.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 38

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 15. Ecological sensitivity map for the Nuweveld Grid Corridor and wind farm site.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 39

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 16. Ecological sensitivity of the northern section of the grid corridor, showing the location of the on-site switching stations, collector switching station/collector substation and wind farm substations.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 40

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

5 IMPACTS AND ISSUES IDENTIFICATION

5.1 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS

The development of the Nuweveld Grid Connection and associated infrastructure is likely to result in a variety of impacts, associated largely with the disturbance, loss and transformation of intact vegetation and faunal habitat during construction. There would be some subsequent recovery during operation as the vegetation within the disturbed areas returned or recovered. The following impacts are identified as the major impacts that are likely to be associated with the development.

Impact 1. Impacts on vegetation and listed or protected plant species The development would require vegetation clearing for pylons, access tracks and switching station and collector switching station/substation. Apart from the direct loss of vegetation within the development footprint, listed and protected species are likely to be impacted. These impacts would occur during the construction phase of the development, with additional vegetation impacts during operation likely to be low. Although the abundance of plant species of concern appears to be relatively low, there are numerous provincially protected species present.

Impact 2. Direct Faunal Impacts Increased levels of noise, pollution, disturbance and human presence during construction will be detrimental to fauna. Sensitive and shy fauna are likely to move away from the area during the construction phase as a result of the noise and human activities present, while some slow-moving species would not be able to avoid the construction activities and might be killed if proper management and monitoring is not in place. Traffic at the site during all phases of the project would pose a risk of collisions with fauna. Slower types such as tortoises, snakes and certain mammals would be most susceptible and the impact would be largely concentrated to the construction phase when vehicle activity was high. Some mammals and reptiles would be vulnerable to illegal collection or poaching during the construction phase as a result of the large number of construction personnel that are likely to be present. The potential presence of Grey Rhebok and the Riverine Rabbit are highlighted as the major faunal issues related to the development. During the operational phase, faunal impacts would be significantly reduced, but there would still be potential for some impacts such as electrocution of both Vervet Monkeys and Chacma Baboons which are both confirmed present along the power line route.

Impact 3. Increased Erosion Risk The disturbance created during construction would leave the affected areas vulnerable erosion. Some parts of the route traverse steep ground and specific mitigation and avoidance would be necessary to reduce this impact to acceptable levels. This impact is also of concern given the significance of the drainage lines in the area as Riverine Rabbit habitat and the consequent need to prevent and limit impact on these features.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 41

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Impact 5. Impacts on CBAs and broad-scale ecological processes Impact to the CBAs along the grid corridor is a significant potential concern associated with the development. Due to the linear nature of the power line and the localized impact associated with the construction and operation of the power line, it is the potential impact of the development on specific features of concern, that are the underlying drivers of the presence of the CBAs, that are primary cause for concern. In other words, the presence of the power line within areas of CBA is, in its own right, not seen as of very high potential concern, however, there are usually sensitive features present within the CBA and safeguarding these features of concern is a critical measure required to ensure maintenance of biodiversity and long-term ecological function within these CBAs. Within context of the corridor, features underlying CBAs and identified as being particularly vulnerable to impact and requiring avoidance are the drainage features within the CBAs as well as the steep slopes associated with the escarpment areas and rugged terrain of the corridor. It is through the avoidance of these features of high biodiversity or ecological value that impacts on CBAs are moderated and reduced to acceptable levels.

Impact 6. Cumulative Impacts The development of the grid connection and associated infrastructure would result in some habitat loss and an increase in overall cumulative impacts on fauna and flora in the area from electrical transmission infrastructure and wind farm development. Current levels of development in the area from wind farm and transmission infrastructure development are low. However, there are three other applications (Nuweveld, North, East and West WEFs overlapping with the grid corridor in the north and the total cumulative impact from all the proposed developments would be ~338ha of direct habitat loss and an additional extent of indirect habitat degradation as a result of noise and other disturbance effects. As the total footprint associated with the grid and associated infrastructure would amount to less than 100ha, this is not considered significant in comparison with the overwhelmingly intact nature of the surrounding landscape and the contribution of the grid connection to cumulative impact would be thus be minor.

6 IMPACTS ASSESSMENT – NUWEVELD GRID CONNECTION & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE

An assessment of the likely significance of each impact identified above is made below for the Nuweveld Grid Connection. The development of 400kV lattice structures would each have a larger footprint compared to a 132kV monopole. However, because the span lengths between pylons of a 400kV line are longer, more monopoles would need to be constructed for a 132kV line for the length of the 120km line, thereby offsetting the larger footprint of the lattice structures of the 400kV line. The total footprint for the 132kV pylons would be 3.5ha compared to the 2.9ha for the 400kV pylon structures. The main difference between the 132kV and 400kV transmission

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 42

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

lines would be associated with the collector switching station which would be 2.25ha for the 132kV sub and 12ha for the 400kV sub. However, in both cases, the largest footprint would be associated with the access road beneath the line, which would amount to 56ha of the total 81ha footprint. However, overall, the total impact and difference in ecological impact between the 132kV line and 400kV line are not considered sufficiently different to warrant a different assessment for each. Consequently, one set of impact tables is presented below which applies to both cases and as such would also apply to the Worst Case Scenario (WCS) and as such is applicable to either power line configuration.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 43

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACT 1. IMPACTS ON VEGETATION AND PLANT SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN DUE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE POWERLINE, SUBSTATIONS AND ACCESS TRACKS

Project phase Construction Impact Impacts on vegetation and plant SCC Description of Impact on vegetation and plant SCC due to construction of the power line, substations, impact access tracks and associated infrastructure. Mitigatability Medium Mitigation exists and will notably reduce significance of impacts • There should be a preconstruction walk-through of the power line corridor to identify species of conservation concern that should be avoided or translocated. • Any pylons or access tracks situated in areas mapped as high sensitivity should be micro-sited by a suitably qualified ecological and aquatic specialist before construction commences to ensure any potential impacts are minimised. • The powerline can span areas of concern such as very high sensitivity/ “no-go” areas as long as there are no pylons within these areas. Where necessary, new tracks may need to be constructed through these areas. Where present, existing farm tracks should be used as much as possible. Any new river crossings that may be required should be reviewed prior to construction and subject to the preconstruction walk-through to Potential ensure that these are in favourable areas where impacts can be minimised. mitigation • Ensure that lay-down and other temporary infrastructure is within low sensitivity areas, preferably previously transformed areas if possible. • Minimise the development footprint as far as possible and rehabilitate disturbed areas that are no longer required by the operational phase of the development. • Preconstruction environmental induction for all construction staff on site to ensure that basic environmental principles are adhered to. This includes topics such as no littering, appropriate handling of pollution and chemical spills, avoiding fire hazards, minimizing wildlife interactions, remaining within demarcated construction areas etc. • Demarcate all areas to be cleared with construction tape or other appropriate and effective means. However, caution should be exercised to avoid using material that might entangle fauna. Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative Impact may be permanent, Impact may be permanent, or in Duration Permanent Permanent or in excess of 20 years excess of 20 years Extending across the site and Extending across the site and to Extent Local Local to nearby settlements nearby settlements Natural and/ or social Natural and/ or social functions Intensity Moderate functions and/ or processes Low and/ or processes are moderately altered are somewhat altered There are sound scientific Certain / Probability reasons to expect that the Likely The impact may occur definite impact will definitely occur Substantive supportive data Substantive supportive data Confidence High exists to verify the High exists to verify the assessment assessment The affected environment The affected environment will will not be able to recover Reversibility Low Medium only recover from the impact from the impact - with significant intervention permanently modified Resource The resource is not damaged The resource is not damaged Low Low irreplaceability irreparably or is not scarce irreparably or is not scarce

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 44

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Significance Moderate - negative Minor - negative Comment on While there is some scope for avoidance of sensitive species and habitats, some vegetation significance loss is an inevitable consequence of development that cannot be avoided. As existing impacts in the area are low, the contribution of the Nuweveld grid connection to Cumulative such cumulative impacts is considered low because of the linear nature of the power line impacts and the resulting low local impacts.

6.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACT 2. DIRECT AND INDIRECT FAUNAL IMPACTS

Project phase Construction Impact Direct and indirect faunal impacts Description of Construction phase impact on fauna impact Mitigatability Medium Mitigation exists and will notably reduce significance of impacts • Preconstruction walk-through of the powerline route to identify areas of faunal sensitivity. Any fauna threatened by construction activities should be removed to safety by the ECO or other suitably qualified person. • All laydown areas, construction sites etc with waste disposal bins, should be provided with lockable bins that are tamper proof by baboons, monkeys and other fauna. • Existing roads and access routes should be used wherever possible. During construction all vehicles should adhere to demarcated tracks or roads and the speed limit should not exceed 40km/h on larger roads and should be 20- 30km/h on smaller access tracks. • All construction staff should undergo environmental induction before construction commences in order to raise awareness and reduce potential faunal impacts. To avoid impacts on amphibians, all spills of hazardous material should be cleared in the appropriate manner according to the nature and identity of the spill and all contaminated soil removed from the site. • Avoid the use of machinery within sensitive faunal habitats such as drainage lines Potential and wetlands. mitigation • No excavated holes or trenches should be left open for extended periods as fauna may fall in become trapped. • Fires should only be allowed in specifically demarcated fire-safe areas. • If any parts of site such as construction camps must be lit at night, this should be done with low-UV type lights (such as most LEDs or HPS bulbs) as far as practically possible, which do not attract insects and which should be directed downwards. All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of the spill. • Appropriate design of roads and other infrastructure where appropriate to minimise faunal impacts and allow fauna to pass through or underneath these features. • No electrical fencing within 30cm of the ground as tortoises become stuck against such fences and are electrocuted to death. • Open space management plan for the development, which makes provision for favourable management of the facility and the surrounding area for fauna. Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative impact will last between Short impact will last between 1 and 5 Duration Short term 1 and 5 years term years

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 45

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Extending across the site Extending across the site and to Extent Local and to nearby Local nearby settlements settlements Natural and/ or social Natural and/ or social functions functions and/ or Intensity Moderate Moderate and/ or processes are processes are moderately altered moderately altered Almost certain / It is most likely that the Probability Likely The impact may occur Highly probable impact will occur Substantive supportive Substantive supportive data Confidence High data exists to verify the High exists to verify the assessment assessment The affected environment will only The affected environmental will Reversibility Medium recover from the impact High be able to recover from the with significant impact intervention The resource is not Resource The resource is not damaged Low damaged irreparably or Low irreplaceability irreparably or is not scarce is not scarce Significance Minor - negative Minor - negative Comment on While there is some scope for avoidance of sensitive habitats, some disturbance and habitat significance loss are an inevitable consequence of development that cannot be entirely avoided. Cumulative Cumulative impacts on fauna are predicted to be too low because of the linear nature of the impacts power line and low likely impact on high-value faunal habitats such as riparian areas.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 46

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.3 OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACT 1. INCREASED SOIL EROSION RISK DURING OPERATION

Project phase Operation Impact Increased erosion risk Description of The large amount of disturbance created during construction would leave the affected impact areas vulnerable to wind and water erosion Mitigatability Medium Mitigation exists and will notably reduce significance of impacts • Where pylons need to be positioned on steep slopes, any access roads to them must be constructed along the contour and on gentler slopes and not down the steep slope. Alternative means that do not scar the ground can be used such as carrying the material to these areas or to use a helicopter or other options like a suspended cable if Potential no suitable access is available. mitigation • All roads and tracks on slopes should have water diversion structures present at regular intervals to divert water from the road and limit water capture and erosion potential. • The power line route and access roads should be inspected annually for erosion damage and rectified where necessary. Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative Impact will last between 15 Impact will last between Duration On-going On-going and 20 years 15 and 20 years Extending across the site and Limited to the site and its Extent Local Limited to nearby settlements immediate surroundings Natural and/ or social Natural and/ or social functions and/ or Intensity Moderate functions and/ or processes Low processes are moderately altered are somewhat altered Almost certain / It is most likely that the Probability Likely The impact may occur Highly impact will occur probable Substantive supportive data Substantive supportive Confidence High exists to verify the High data exists to verify the assessment assessment The affected The affected environment will environmental will be able Reversibility Medium only recover from the impact High to recover from the with significant intervention impact The resource is not Resource The resource is not damaged Low Low damaged irreparably or is irreplaceability irreparably or is not scarce not scarce Significance Moderate - negative Minor - negative Soil erosion problems could persist for the lifetime of the power line as well as thereafter. Comment on However, provided that the suggested mitigation measures are adequately implemented, significance there would be little long-term impact. As such, this is an impact of potential concern, but can be well-mitigated. The power line and service road could potentially contribute to habitat degradation in the Cumulative area, but with effective mitigation, the long-term cumulative contribution of the power line impacts to habitat loss and degradation would be low.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 47

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.4 OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACT 2. DIRECT AND INDIRECT FAUNAL IMPACTS

Project phase Construction Impact Direct and indirect faunal impacts Description of Operational phase impact on fauna impact Mitigatability Medium Mitigation exists and will notably reduce significance of impacts • Clearing of vegetation beneath the power line should be avoided and restricted to trees where necessary to comply with ESKOM power line safety guidelines. • Any snakes and other fauna encountered during power line maintenance should be allowed to move off on their own and should not be harassed or killed. • The power line occurs in an area where both Vervet Monkeys and Baboons are present. Potential Both these species can cause problems with power lines by casing shorts and the design mitigation of the pylons should include measures to limit potential electrocutions such as insulation of live components at pylons and substations. Should any persistent problems occur at specific pylons, measures to prevent monkeys and baboons from accessing the pylons should be implemented.

Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative Impact will last for the Long- Impact will last for the lifetime of Duration Long term lifetime of the power term the power line line Extending across the site Extending across the site and to Extent Local and to nearby Local nearby settlements settlements Natural and/ or social Natural and/ or social functions functions and/ or Intensity Moderate Low and/ or processes processes are are somewhat altered moderately altered Probability Likely The impact may occur Likely The impact may occur Substantive supportive Substantive supportive data Confidence High data exists to verify the High exists to verify the assessment assessment The affected environment will only The affected environmental will Reversibility Medium recover from the impact High be able to recover from the with significant impact intervention The resource is not Resource The resource is not damaged Low damaged irreparably or Low irreplaceability irreparably or is not scarce is not scarce Significance Minor - negative Minor - negative Comment on Although this is not likely to be a highly significant long-term impact, localised persistent significance impact could occur. Cumulative Cumulative impacts on fauna are predicted to be too low because of the linear nature of the impacts power line and low likely impact on high-value faunal habitats such as riparian areas.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 48

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.5 DECOMMISSIONING PHASE IMPACT 1. FAUNAL IMPACTS DUE TO DECOMMISSIONING

Project phase Decommissioning Impact Faunal impacts due to decommissioning Description of Impact on fauna due to decommissioning impact High Mitigation exists and will considerably reduce the significance of Mitigatability impacts • Any potentially dangerous fauna such as snakes or fauna threatened by the decommissioning activities should be removed to a safe location prior to the commencement of decommissioning activities. • All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the Potential site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of the mitigation spill. • All vehicles accessing the site should adhere to a low speed limit (40km/h max) to avoid collisions with susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises. • No excavated holes or trenches should be left open for extended periods as fauna may fall in become trapped. • All above-ground infrastructure should be removed from the site. Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative Short term impact will last between 1 Short impact will last between 1 and Duration and 5 years term 5 years Local Extending across the site Local Extending across the site and Extent and to nearby settlements to nearby settlements Moderate Natural and/ or social Low Natural and/ or social functions and/ or functions and/ or processes Intensity processes are moderately are somewhat altered altered Almost certain / It is most likely that the Probable The impact has occurred here Probability Highly probable impact will occur or elsewhere and could therefore occur High Substantive supportive High Substantive supportive data Confidence data exists to verify the exists to verify the assessment assessment High The affected High The affected environmental environmental will be will be able to recover from Reversibility able to recover from the the impact impact Medium The resource is damaged Low The resource is not damaged Resource irreparably but is irreparably or is not scarce irreplaceability represented elsewhere Significance Minor - negative Minor - negative Comment on Decommissioning will be of short duration and no long-term impacts are likely. significance Cumulative Decommissioning will contribute towards cumulative impacts in the area, but this would be impacts transient and no long-term impacts from decommissioning are likely to occur.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 49

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.6 DECOMMISSIONING PHASE IMPACT 2. INCREASED SOIL EROSION RISK FOLLOWING DECOMMISSIONING

Project phase Decommissioning Impact Increased soil erosion risk Description of Soil erosion as a result of the disturbance created during decommissioning impact Mitigatability High Mitigation exists and will considerably reduce the significance of impacts • Disturbance within or near the drainage lines should be kept to a minimum. • All cleared areas should be rehabilitated with locally occurring species, grown from locally- Potential sourced seed. mitigation • Erosion should be monitored annually for at least 3 years after decommissioning and any erosion problems observed along the power line servitude should be rectified as soon as possible using the appropriate revegetation and erosion control works. Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative Medium Impact will last between 5 impact will last between 1 Duration Short term term and 10 years and 5 years Extending across the site and Extending across the site and Extent Local Local to nearby settlements to nearby settlements Natural and/ or social Natural and/ or social Intensity Moderate functions and/ or processes Low functions and/ or processes are moderately altered are somewhat altered Conceivable, but only in extreme circumstances, Rare / and/or might occur for this Probability Likely The impact may occur improbable project although this has rarely been known to result elsewhere Substantive supportive data Substantive supportive data Confidence High exists to verify the High exists to verify the assessment assessment The affected environment will The affected environmental Reversibility Medium only recover from the impact High will be able to recover from with significant intervention the impact The resource is damaged Resource The resource is not damaged Medium irreparably but is represented Low irreplaceability irreparably or is not scarce elsewhere Significance Minor - negative Negligible - negative Comment on With mitigation, erosion risk can be reduced to a low level significance Cumulative Erosion would contribute to habitat degradation in the area impacts

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 50

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACT 1. IMPACTS ON CBAS AND BROAD-SCALE ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES

Project phase Operation Impact Impacts on Critical Biodiversity Areas Description of Operational phase impact on Critical Biodiversity Areas and ESAs. impact Mitigatability High Mitigation exists and will considerably reduce the significance of impacts • The final power line route should be reviewed by the specialist to ensure that there are no parts of the power line within very high sensitivity/ no go areas as mapped (important riparian areas and steep slopes). • Any pylons or access tracks situated in areas mapped as high sensitivity should be Potential micro-sited by a suitably qualified ecological and aquatic specialist before construction mitigation in that area starts to ensure any potential impacts are minimised. • The taller woody vegetation should only be cleared where this is necessary for operational safety of the power line.

Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative Impact may be permanent, or Impact will last between Duration Permanent On-going in excess of 20 years 15 and 20 years Extending across the site and Extending across the site Extent Local Local to nearby settlements and to nearby settlements Natural and/ or social Natural and/ or social functions and/ or Intensity Moderate functions and/ or processes Very low processes are slightly are moderately altered altered There are sound scientific Certain / Probability reasons to expect that the Likely The impact may occur definite impact will definitely occur Substantive supportive data Substantive supportive Confidence High exists to verify the High data exists to verify the assessment assessment The affected environment will The affected environment not be able to recover from will only recover from the Reversibility Low Medium the impact - permanently impact with significant modified intervention The resource is damaged The resource is not Resource Medium irreparably but is represented Low damaged irreparably or is irreplaceability elsewhere not scarce Significance Moderate - negative Minor - negative Comment on Impacts of the power line are largely local in nature as a result of the linear nature of the significance power line. Cumulative impacts on CBAs are undesirable as this can potentially impact the ecological Cumulative value and functioning of the CBAs. The contribution of the current development to such impacts transformation is however low due to the small footprint and linear nature of the power line.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 51

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.8 NO-GO ALTERNATIVE

Assuming that the project does not occur, the wind farm and power line would not be built and the current land use would continue into the future. The area is currently used for extensive livestock and/or game farming which is seen as being largely compatible with biodiversity maintenance. Some species may be negatively affected by farming including many predators which are targeted due to their negative impact on livestock, while some species may also be vulnerable to habitat loss or degradation and may experience depressed populations within the farming landscape. It is however important to recognise that the development does not represent an alternative to the above situation, but rather an additional impact that may serve to compound some of the negative effects of the existing land use.

Project phase No-Go Alternative Impact Impact on Terrestrial Ecology should the project not go ahead Description of The no-go alternative assumes the project does not go ahead impact Mitigatability High Mitigation exists and will considerably reduce the significance of impacts Potential • Standard agricultural management practices remain in place and are actively mitigation implemented by the local farming community. Assessment Without mitigation With mitigation Nature Negative Negative Impact may be permanent, or Impact will last between Duration On-going On-going in excess of 20 years 15 and 20 years Extending across the site and Extending across the site Extent Local Local to nearby settlements and to nearby settlements Natural and/ or social Natural and/ or social functions and/ or Intensity Low functions and/ or processes Very low processes are slightly are moderately altered altered There are sound scientific Certain / Probability reasons to expect that the Likely The impact may occur definite impact will definitely occur Substantive supportive data Substantive supportive Confidence High exists to verify the High data exists to verify the assessment assessment The affected The affected environmental environmental will be able Reversibility High will be able to recover from High to recover from the the impact impact The resource is not Resource The resource is not damaged Low Low damaged irreparably or is irreplaceability irreparably or is not scarce not scarce Significance Minor - negative Negligible - negative Comment on The area is currently subjected to extensive livestock grazing which is seen as largely significance compatible with biodiversity maintenance. Farming will increase cumulative impacts on vulnerable species such as predators which Cumulative are specifically persecuted or on habitat specialist species which may be vulnerable to impacts habitat loss or degradation.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 52

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

6.9 SUMMARY ASSESSMENT

As noted above, the impacts associated with the development of the 132kV and 400kV lines are similar and would therefore also represent the WCS. The summary of the impacts identified, as well as the WCS, is presented in the table below.

132 kV powerline 400 kV powerline WCS Impact Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Pre- Post- mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation Construction Impact on Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - vegetation and negative negative negative negative negative negative plant SCC Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Impact on fauna negative negative negative negative negative negative

Operational Phase

Increased soil Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - erosion risk negative negative negative negative negative negative Decommissioning Phase

Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Faunal Impact negative negative negative negative negative negative

Increased soil Minor - Negligible - Minor - Negligible - Minor - Negligible - erosion risk negative negative negative negative negative negative Cumulative Impacts Impacts on CBAs, ESAs and broad – Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - scale ecological negative negative negative negative negative negative processes.

7 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

The Nuweveld Grid Corridor traverses a wide range of landscape units and associated habitats along the proposed route from the Nuweveld Wind Farms site to the Eskom Droerivier Substation. Areas of particular sensitivity and potential concern include the section of the corridor along the Krom River, the majority of which is classified as CBA1 and also contains extensive areas of floodplain vegetation associated with the Krom River and which are known to support Riverine Rabbits. Further south, the corridor descends the escarpment near De Jagers Pass where it traverses a lot of rugged and mountainous terrain before reaching the lower elevation plains just north of Beaufort West. Despite the sensitivities and rugged terrain, the proposed route through this area is considered acceptable and avoids the major sensitivities of the area. It is however considered important that erosion potential is limited and it is recommended that where pylons need to be positioned on steep slopes,

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 53

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

that the access is constructed along the contour and on gentler slopes and not directly down the slope where it is very difficult to control water flow and potential erosion damage. Alternatively means that do not generate disturbance can be used such as carrying the material to these areas or to use a helicopter or other options like a suspended cable if no suitable access is available. The collector substation/switching station and on-site switching stations are located within low and medium sensitivity areas and the locations of these components of the infrastructure is considered acceptable.

The majority of impacts associated with the grid connection would occur during the construction phase as a result of disturbance and habitat loss. Long-term operational impacts would be lower as a result of recovery of the vegetation within the disturbed areas and lower levels of disturbance. The long-term impact of the power line on CBAs is however a potential concern. The presence of the power line within areas of CBA is, in its own right, not seen as being of very high potential concern, but as there are usually sensitive features present within the CBA, safeguarding these features of concern is a critical measure required to ensure maintenance of biodiversity and long-term ecological function within these CBAs. The CBAs along the major water courses are for water course protection from development as well as habitat protection due to the potential presence of Riverine Rabbits. The relevant riparian features have been mapped and identified as having a very high sensitivity and no pylons or other major infrastructure should be placed in these areas. The other major area of concern associated with CBAs is the steep slopes associated with the escarpment areas and rugged terrain of the corridor. The more sensitive parts of these areas have been mapped as very high sensitivity features and no pylons should be located within these areas, although it is acceptable if these features are spanned by the line itself. With the recommended mitigated and avoidance implemented, it is highly unlikely that the presence of the power line would significantly compromise the ecological value or functioning of the affected CBAs. In addition, certain infrastructure such as pylons and substations are excluded from Very High sensitivity areas and it is only the access tracks that are allowed within the highest sensitivity areas, thereby reducing potential impact on these areas. The power line would not impact future conservation expansion priority areas as there are no 2016 NPAES focus areas in proximity to the power line corridor.

The impact to terrestrial ecology of a 132kV vs 400kV line was found to be largely similar and any differences are insignificant and would not change the impacts or the final significance of any of the impacts (Table 3). Therefore, all impacts and mitigation measures identified would apply to both power line capacities and the impact assessment thus considers the pre-mitigation and residual impacts of what is effectively the WCS that could be developed within the corridor.

Table 3. Summary assessment of the impacts associated with the 132 or 400kV power lines and associated switching stations and access tracks. Impact 132 kV powerline 400 kV powerline WCS

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 54

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Pre- Post- mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation mitigation Construction Impact on Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - vegetation and negative negative negative negative negative negative plant SCC Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Impact on fauna negative negative negative negative negative negative Operational Phase Increased soil Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - erosion risk negative negative negative negative negative negative Decommissioning Phase Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Minor - Faunal Impact negative negative negative negative negative negative Increased soil Minor - Negligible - Minor - Negligible - Minor - Negligible - erosion risk negative negative negative negative negative negative Cumulative Impacts Impacts on CBAs, ESAs and broad – Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - Moderate - Minor - scale ecological negative negative negative negative negative negative processes.

Impact Statement There are no terrestrial ecological fatal flaws associated with the assessed Nuweveld grid corridor. Although there are a variety of no-go areas within the corridor, these features have been avoided by the preferred power line routing. As such, the preferred routing is considered acceptable and any similar routing confined to the corridor would also be acceptable provided that the no-go areas are avoided. As such, there are no terrestrial ecological reasons to oppose the development of the Nuweveld Grid Connection which includes the development of a 132kV or 400kV line and associated infrastructure. As such, it is the reasoned opinion of the specialist that either the 132 kV or 400kV can be developed within the corridor, provided that all mitigation measures are implemented.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 55

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

8 REFERENCES

Alexander, G. & Marais, J. 2007. A Guide to the Reptiles of Southern Africa. Struik Nature, Cape Town.

Branch W.R. 1998. Field guide to snakes and other reptiles of southern Africa. Struik, Cape Town.

Bates, M.F., Branch, W.R., Bauer, A.M., Burger, M., Marais, J., Alexander, G.J. & de Villiers, M. S. 2013. Atlas and Red List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 32. SANBI, Pretoria.

Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, 2007. National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act 10 of 2004): Publication of lists of Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable and Protected Species. Government Gazette, Republic of South Africa.

Du Preez, L. & Carruthers, V. 2009. A Complete Guide to the Frogs of Southern Africa. Struik Nature., Cape Town.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ & Kloepfer D (eds). 2004. Atlas and Red Data book of the frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. SI/MAB Series no. 9. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Mucina L. & Rutherford M.C. (eds) 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

Nel, J.L., Murray, K.M., Maherry, A.M., Petersen, C.P., Roux, D.J., Driver, A., Hill, L., Van Deventer, H., Funke, N., Swartz, E.R., Smith-Adao, L.B., Mbona, N., Downsborough, L. and Nienaber, S. (2011). Technical Report for the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas project. WRC Report No. K5/1801.

Skinner, J.D. & Chimimba, C.T. 2005. The mammals of the Southern African Subregion. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 56

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

9 ANNEX 1. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES

List of plant species recorded from the broad vicinity of the Nuweveld Grid Corridor, based on the SANBI POSA database. Family Genus Species Rank Subspecies IUCN Status Asteraceae Euryops nodosus LC Malvaceae Hermannia alnifolia LC Poaceae Brachiaria marlothii LC Poaceae Helictotrichon hirtulum LC Asteraceae Gazania lichtensteinii LC Asteraceae Senecio hastatus LC Poaceae Echinochloa colona LC Aizoaceae Trianthema parvifolia var. parvifolia LC Fabaceae Indigofera meyeriana LC Fumariaceae Fumaria muralis subsp. muralis Malvaceae Hibiscus pusillus LC Asteraceae Felicia namaquana LC Asteraceae Pentzia tortuosa LC Amaranthaceae Salsola kali Asteraceae Helichrysum albertense DD Poaceae Enneapogon desvauxii LC Poaceae Sporobolus ioclados LC Amaranthaceae Chenopodium album Fabaceae Prosopis glandulosa var. glandulosa NE Oxalidaceae Oxalis obtusa LC Fabaceae Argyrolobium argenteum LC Asteraceae Sonchus asper subsp. asper Caryophyllaceae Spergularia sp. Poaceae Stipagrostis ciliata var. capensis LC Fabaceae Indigofera alternans var. alternans LC Aizoaceae Galenia pubescens LC Acanthaceae Justicia incana Asteraceae Eriocephalus microphyllus var. microphyllus LC Aizoaceae Chasmatophyllum stanleyi LC Asteraceae Gorteria alienata Lamiaceae Salvia disermas LC Asparagaceae Asparagus mucronatus LC Fabaceae Lessertia inflata LC Asteraceae Osteospermum scariosum var. scariosum NE Cyperaceae Cyperus longus var. tenuiflorus NE Poaceae Themeda triandra LC Apiaceae Annesorhiza filicaulis EN Potamogetonaceae Zannichellia palustris LC Santalaceae Thesium sonderianum DD Acanthaceae Barleria stimulans LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 57

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Scrophulariaceae Manulea karrooica LC Poaceae Tragus koelerioides LC Plantaginaceae Veronica persica NE Pteridaceae Cheilanthes hirta var. brevipilosa Poaceae Panicum maximum LC Scrophulariaceae Selago rigida LC Fabaceae Lessertia pauciflora Verbenaceae Chascanum pumilum LC Asparagaceae Asparagus laricinus LC Asteraceae Kleinia longiflora LC Poaceae Ehrharta dura LC Poaceae Tenaxia disticha Aizoaceae Malephora thunbergii LC Lobeliaceae Lobelia erinus LC Fabaceae Melolobium canescens LC Hyacinthaceae Veltheimia capensis LC Poaceae Cenchrus ciliaris LC Boraginaceae Heliotropium supinum Brassicaceae Sisymbrium burchellii var. burchellii LC Scrophulariaceae Selago albida LC Solanaceae Lycium oxycarpum LC Pteridaceae Pellaea calomelanos var. calomelanos LC Cyperaceae Isolepis setacea LC Fabaceae Indigofera alternans Asteraceae Crassothonna capensis LC Malvaceae Hermannia grandiflora LC Malvaceae Hermannia paucifolia LC Asteraceae Felicia lasiocarpa LC Asteraceae Berkheya spinosa LC Scrophulariaceae Selago saxatilis LC Cyperaceae Bulbostylis humilis LC Rubiaceae Kohautia caespitosa subsp. brachyloba LC Poaceae Helictotrichon sp. Grubbiaceae Grubbia rosmarinifolia subsp. rosmarinifolia NE Asteraceae Vellereophyton niveum LC Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia cordobensis Verbenaceae Chascanum pinnatifidum var. pinnatifidum LC Asteraceae Berkheya glabrata LC Melianthaceae Melianthus comosus LC Papaveraceae Papaver aculeatum LC Malvaceae Hermannia filifolia var. filifolia NE Poaceae Bromus catharticus NE Poaceae Eragrostis chloromelas LC Apocynaceae Microloma armatum var. armatum LC Poaceae Fingerhuthia sesleriiformis LC Asparagaceae Asparagus exuvialis forma exuvialis NE

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 58

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Asphodelaceae Bulbine lagopus LC Asteraceae Pentzia globosa LC Solanaceae Nicotiana glauca Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum splendens subsp. pentagonum Asteraceae Felicia muricata subsp. muricata LC Solanaceae Withania somnifera LC Acanthaceae Blepharis mitrata LC Caryophyllaceae Spergularia media Thymelaeaceae Passerina obtusifolia LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium tragacanthoides LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium aridum LC Asteraceae Pegolettia retrofracta LC Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia cernua LC Polygalaceae Polygala leptophylla var. leptophylla LC Solanaceae Lycium schizocalyx LC Poaceae Melica racemosa LC Hyacinthaceae Ornithogalum juncifolium LC Anacardiaceae Searsia pyroides Asteraceae Ursinia nana subsp. nana LC Aizoaceae Ruschia intricata LC Poaceae Eragrostis lehmanniana var. lehmanniana LC Asteraceae Cirsium vulgare Fabaceae Indigofera exigua LC Aizoaceae Delosperma sp. Asteraceae Gazania krebsiana Aizoaceae Trichodiadema sp. Malvaceae Hermannia stipulacea LC Anacardiaceae Searsia pyroides var. pyroides LC Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata LC Poaceae Aristida diffusa subsp. diffusa LC Juncaceae Juncus punctorius LC Rubiaceae Anthospermum rigidum subsp. pumilum LC Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea Anacardiaceae Searsia longispina LC Menispermaceae Cissampelos capensis LC Asparagaceae Asparagus racemosus LC Polygalaceae Polygala ephedroides LC Santalaceae Lacomucinaea lineata Poaceae Tragus racemosus LC Orchidaceae Eulophia hians var. nutans LC Hyacinthaceae Daubenya marginata LC Asteraceae Oedera spinescens Cyperaceae Cyperus bellus LC Asteraceae Gazania krebsiana subsp. serrulata LC Lamiaceae Lamium amplexicaule Scrophulariaceae Nemesia cynanchifolia LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 59

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Solanaceae Lycium hirsutum LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium abrotanifolium LC Asteraceae Helichrysum cerastioides var. cerastioides LC Juncaceae Juncus capensis LC Hyacinthaceae Ledebouria apertiflora LC Asteraceae Tragopogon dubius Asteraceae Helichrysum rugulosum LC Malvaceae Melhania rehmannii LC Geraniaceae Monsonia camdeboensis LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum junceum Scrophulariaceae Nemesia sp. Asteraceae Pentzia quinquefida LC Apocynaceae Huernia thuretii LC Caryophyllaceae Polycarpon tetraphyllum Asteraceae Arctotis dimorphocarpa LC Amaranthaceae Salsola calluna LC Asteraceae Othonna eriocarpa LC Poaceae Enneapogon cenchroides LC Kewaceae Kewa salsoloides LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum noctiflorum subsp. stramineum Geraniaceae Pelargonium minimum LC Juncaceae Juncus dregeanus subsp. dregeanus LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum geniculiflorum Poaceae Tragus berteronianus LC Crassulaceae Crassula corallina subsp. corallina LC Boraginaceae Anchusa sp. Apocynaceae Huernia humilis LC Asteraceae Pentzia lanata LC Poaceae Lolium rigidum NE Cyperaceae Cyperus capensis LC Rubiaceae Nenax microphylla LC Pteridaceae Cheilanthes hirta var. hirta LC Aizoaceae Galenia africana LC Fabaceae Dichilus gracilis LC Lamiaceae Stachys cuneata LC Crassulaceae Adromischus maculatus LC Fabaceae Vachellia karroo LC Scrophulariaceae Chaenostoma archeri LC Asteraceae Senecio angustifolius LC Poaceae Cynodon dactylon LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia peplus NE Iridaceae Gladiolus permeabilis subsp. edulis LC Alliaceae Tulbaghia nutans LC Zygophyllaceae Roepera incrustata Amaranthaceae Salsola aphylla LC Orobanchaceae Harveya sp.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 60

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Iridaceae Moraea unguiculata LC Leucobryaceae Campylopus introflexus Polygonaceae Rumex crispus Solanaceae Solanum burchellii LC Santalaceae Thesium junceum var. junceum LC Asteraceae Felicia ovata LC Lythraceae Nesaea anagalloides LC Asteraceae Gnaphalium confine LC Convolvulaceae Convolvulus dregeanus LC Aizoaceae Drosanthemum parvifolium LC Acanthaceae Justicia orchioides subsp. glabrata LC Brassicaceae Lepidium africanum subsp. africanum LC Scrophulariaceae Jamesbrittenia sp. Apiaceae Deverra denudata subsp. aphylla LC Malvaceae Hermannia pulchella LC Asteraceae Osteospermum calendulaceum LC Amaryllidaceae Gethyllis villosa LC Asteraceae Euryops lateriflorus LC Rutaceae Agathosma cerefolium LC Juncaceae Juncus oxycarpus LC Scrophulariaceae Selago acocksii LC Gentianaceae Sebaea natalensis LC Asphodelaceae Trachyandra karrooica LC Poaceae Melica decumbens LC Asteraceae Helichrysum pumilio subsp. pumilio LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia serpens NE Cyperaceae Cyperus marginatus LC Scrophulariaceae Chaenostoma halimifolium LC Aizoaceae Tetragonia arbuscula LC Aizoaceae Ruschia sp. Lamiaceae Stachys linearis LC Poaceae Eragrostis bicolor LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium glutinosum LC Lentibulariaceae Utricularia bisquamata LC Scrophulariaceae Buddleja glomerata LC Cyperaceae Schoenoxiphium sp. Aizoaceae Tetragonia spicata LC Solanaceae Solanum nigrum Acanthaceae Blepharis capensis LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia stellispina LC Scrophulariaceae Selago centralis LC Crassulaceae Crassula capitella subsp. thyrsiflora LC Crassulaceae Adromischus humilis LC Plantaginaceae Veronica anagallis-aquatica LC Asteraceae Helichrysum dregeanum LC Apiaceae Notobubon ferulaceum LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 61

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Asteraceae Cineraria vagans EN Scrophulariaceae Buddleja salviifolia LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia rhombifolia LC Aizoaceae Trichodiadema obliquum DD Scrophulariaceae Jamesbrittenia filicaulis LC Apocynaceae Huernia barbata subsp. barbata LC Polygonaceae Rumex lanceolatus LC Asteraceae Berkheya pinnatifida subsp. pinnatifida LC Amaryllidaceae Gethyllis longistyla LC Amaranthaceae Amaranthus schinzianus LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium pseudofumarioides LC Fabaceae Indigofera sessilifolia LC Malvaceae Anisodontea malvastroides LC Cyperaceae Ficinia ramosissima LC Asteraceae Arctotis microcephala LC Asteraceae Helichrysum lineare LC Santalaceae Viscum hoolei LC Malvaceae Hermannia coccocarpa LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum stenandrum LC Apocynaceae Xysmalobium gomphocarpoides var. gomphocarpoides LC Solanaceae Lycium bosciifolium LC Poaceae Eragrostis procumbens LC Asteraceae Senecio reptans LC Lamiaceae Salvia stenophylla Aizoaceae Hereroa concava DD Aizoaceae Ruschia spinosa LC Asteraceae Vellereophyton dealbatum LC Boraginaceae Lobostemon stachydeus LC Lobeliaceae Lobelia thermalis LC Asteraceae Senecio striatifolius LC Apocynaceae Asclepias sp. Asteraceae Osteospermum scariosum var. integrifolium NE Hyacinthaceae Albuca suaveolens LC Boraginaceae Anchusa riparia LC Malvaceae Hermannia filifolia var. grandicalyx NE Asteraceae Ifloga glomerata LC Asphodelaceae Astroloba sp. Aizoaceae Tetragonia glauca LC Malvaceae Anisodontea scabrosa LC Solanaceae Lycium cinereum LC Asteraceae Felicia filifolia subsp. schaeferi LC Asteraceae Osteospermum spinescens LC Amaranthaceae Atriplex semibaccata Fabaceae Trifolium africanum var. africanum NE Juncaceae Juncus exsertus LC Asteraceae Gazania serrata LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 62

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Caryophyllaceae Pollichia campestris LC Asteraceae Pteronia adenocarpa LC Poaceae Fingerhuthia africana LC Hypoxidaceae Empodium gloriosum LC Poaceae Schismus barbatus LC Scrophulariaceae Zaluzianskya sp. Achariaceae Guthriea capensis LC Aizoaceae Galenia fruticosa LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium alternans subsp. alternans LC Asphodelaceae Bulbine sp. Poaceae Hyparrhenia hirta LC Scrophulariaceae Chaenostoma sp. Aizoaceae Galenia secunda LC Caryophyllaceae Silene burchellii subsp. modesta LC Malvaceae Hermannia cuneifolia var. glabrescens LC Asteraceae Athanasia microcephala LC Asteraceae Gazania krebsiana subsp. arctotoides LC Asteraceae Cineraria lobata subsp. lobata LC Aizoaceae Galenia glandulifera LC Molluginaceae Pharnaceum confertum var. brachyphyllum LC Ruscaceae Eriospermum corymbosum LC Cyperaceae Isolepis expallescens VU Asteraceae Senecio articulatus Rubiaceae Kohautia cynanchica LC Asteraceae Tarchonanthus minor LC Asteraceae Helichrysum zeyheri LC Poaceae Festuca scabra LC Asteraceae Helichrysum pentzioides LC Iridaceae Moraea sp. Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia hypogaea LC Oxalidaceae Oxalis pes-caprae var. pes-caprae LC Asteraceae Leysera tenella LC Poaceae Sorghum sp. Scrophulariaceae Cromidon decumbens LC Asteraceae Geigeria obtusifolia LC Crassulaceae Cotyledon cuneata LC Asteraceae Felicia filifolia subsp. filifolia LC Malvaceae Hermannia cuneifolia var. cuneifolia LC Asteraceae Cotula microglossa LC Poaceae Eragrostis obtusa LC Asteraceae Senecio asperulus LC Asteraceae Senecio sp. Fabaceae Lessertia frutescens subsp. microphylla LC Asteraceae Oedera oppositifolia Fabaceae Melolobium candicans LC Fabaceae Melolobium obcordatum LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 63

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Asteraceae Oncosiphon grandiflorus LC Ebenaceae Diospyros lycioides subsp. lycioides LC Asteraceae Senecio burchellii LC Asteraceae Garuleum bipinnatum LC Malvaceae Hermannia vestita LC Aizoaceae Pleiospilos compactus subsp. canus LC Hyacinthaceae Drimia anomala LC Poaceae Aristida diffusa subsp. burkei LC Solanaceae Solanum retroflexum LC Poaceae Stipagrostis obtusa LC Asteraceae Lactuca inermis LC Anacardiaceae Searsia undulata LC Peraceae Clutia sp. Apocynaceae Duvalia maculata LC Asteraceae Symphyotrichum squamatum Asteraceae Chrysocoma obtusata LC Aizoaceae Drosanthemum floribundum LC Brassicaceae Erucastrum strigosum LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia inaequilatera LC Aizoaceae Trichodiadema intonsum LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium ramosissimum LC Lamiaceae Stachys rugosa LC Linaceae Linum thunbergii LC Scrophulariaceae Chaenostoma macrosiphon LC Capparaceae Cadaba aphylla LC Scrophulariaceae Chaenostoma pauciflorum LC Asteraceae Oncosiphon piluliferus LC Amaranthaceae Chenopodium schraderianum Pedaliaceae Sesamum capense LC Scrophulariaceae Selago gracilis LC Asteraceae Crassothonna protecta LC Asteraceae Senecio cordifolius LC Asteraceae Euryops anthemoides subsp. anthemoides LC Asphodelaceae Kniphofia uvaria LC Rutaceae Ruta graveolens Boraginaceae Amsinckia menziesii Apocynaceae Schizoglossum bidens subsp. atrorubens LC Asteraceae Athanasia linifolia LC Asparagaceae Asparagus capensis var. capensis LC Asteraceae Senecio cotyledonis LC Asteraceae Cineraria mollis LC Asteraceae Senecio achilleifolius LC Solanaceae Solanum capense LC Poaceae Cymbopogon dieterlenii LC Amaranthaceae Dysphania carinata Asteraceae Berkheya carlinifolia

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 64

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Fabaceae Indigofera sp. Pteridaceae Pellaea rufa LC Asteraceae Arctotis perfoliata LC Asteraceae Mantisalca salmantica Plumbaginaceae Limonium sinuatum subsp. sinuatum Hyacinthaceae Ornithogalum flexuosum LC Dipsacaceae Scabiosa columbaria LC Aizoaceae Drosanthemum lique LC Cyperaceae Afroscirpoides dioeca Brassicaceae Sisymbrium capense LC Asteraceae Osteospermum sinuatum Acanthaceae Acanthopsis hoffmannseggiana DD Iridaceae Moraea miniata LC Crassulaceae Crassula pubescens subsp. pubescens LC Malvaceae Hermannia burkei LC Asteraceae Cuspidia cernua subsp. annua LC Crassulaceae Crassula subaphylla var. subaphylla LC Acanthaceae Justicia spartioides Asteraceae Eriocephalus eximius LC Asteraceae Euryops imbricatus LC Scrophulariaceae Gomphostigma virgatum LC Malvaceae Hermannia sp. Cucurbitaceae Cucumis africanus LC Asteraceae Cineraria aspera LC Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia capillacea subsp. capillacea LC Apiaceae Notobubon laevigatum LC Asteraceae Euryops empetrifolius LC Scrophulariaceae Aptosimum procumbens LC Poaceae Stipagrostis namaquensis LC Brassicaceae Heliophila sp. Asparagaceae Asparagus striatus LC Anacardiaceae Searsia lancea LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium nervifolium LC Hyacinthaceae Massonia echinata LC Asteraceae Pentzia punctata LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium griseum LC Apiaceae Berula thunbergii LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum oubergense LC Gisekiaceae Gisekia pharnaceoides Asteraceae Pteronia staehelinoides LC Scrophulariaceae Diascia sp. Oxalidaceae Oxalis heterophylla LC Scrophulariaceae Manulea chrysantha LC Asphodelaceae Trachyandra acocksii LC Asteraceae Chrysocoma ciliata LC Caryophyllaceae Dianthus namaensis var. dinteri LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 65

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Asteraceae Conyza scabrida Scrophulariaceae Cromidon sp. Asteraceae Geigeria filifolia LC Asteraceae Chrysocoma sp. Poaceae Enneapogon scaber LC Juncaceae Juncus rigidus LC Asteraceae Troglophyton capillaceum subsp. capillaceum LC Lycopodiaceae Lycopodium clavatum LC Malvaceae Hermannia erodioides LC Poaceae Digitaria argyrograpta LC Aizoaceae Stomatium sp. Convolvulaceae Convolvulus sagittatus LC Peraceae Clutia thunbergii LC Malvaceae Anisodontea sp. Crassulaceae Crassula rupestris subsp. rupestris LC Hyacinthaceae Albuca exuviata LC Asteraceae Lasiopogon glomerulatus LC Asteraceae Helichrysum lucilioides LC Zygophyllaceae Augea capensis LC Loranthaceae Moquiniella rubra LC Aizoaceae Trichodiadema barbatum LC Asteraceae Oedera humilis Amaranthaceae Suaeda inflata LC Poaceae Eragrostis homomalla LC Poaceae Bromus pectinatus LC Poaceae Digitaria sanguinalis NE Poaceae Eragrostis cilianensis LC Aizoaceae Galenia pallens DD Aizoaceae Tetragonia fruticosa LC Asparagaceae Asparagus burchellii LC Asteraceae Curio hallianus LC Anacampserotaceae Anacampseros ustulata LC Santalaceae Thesium disciflorum LC Polygalaceae Muraltia macrocarpa LC Poaceae Eragrostis curvula LC Poaceae Hordeum capense LC Asparagaceae Asparagus retrofractus LC Aizoaceae Aizoon glinoides LC Scrophulariaceae Hebenstretia glaucescens LC Asteraceae Senecio incomptus LC Aizoaceae Ruschia pauciflora DD Asteraceae Osteospermum leptolobum LC Asteraceae Eriocephalus microcephalus LC Poaceae Ehrharta erecta var. erecta LC Solanaceae Lycium horridum LC Aizoaceae Pleiospilos compactus subsp. compactus LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 66

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Anacardiaceae Searsia burchellii LC Asteraceae Eriocephalus brevifolius LC Asteraceae Pentzia incana LC Iridaceae Tritonia karooica LC Fabaceae Lotononis carnosa subsp. carnosa LC Ophioglossaceae Ophioglossum polyphyllum var. polyphyllum LC Geraniaceae Geranium dregei LC Asteraceae Pseudognaphalium undulatum LC Urticaceae Urtica urens Poaceae Ehrharta calycina LC Brassicaceae Heliophila suavissima LC Colchicaceae Ornithoglossum dinteri LC Scrophulariaceae Chaenostoma revolutum LC Asteraceae Phymaspermum aciculare LC Hyacinthaceae Dipcadi ciliare LC Poaceae Sporobolus fimbriatus LC Polygalaceae Polygala sp. Iridaceae Babiana bainesii LC Amaranthaceae Kyphocarpa angustifolia LC Aizoaceae Malephora purpureo-crocea LC Aizoaceae Tetragonia sarcophylla LC Amaranthaceae Suaeda fruticosa LC Asteraceae Senecio madagascariensis LC Malvaceae Grewia robusta LC Scrophulariaceae Selago sp. Asteraceae Dimorphotheca cuneata LC Asphodelaceae Aloe grandidentata LC Asteraceae Othonna furcata LC Asteraceae Euryops oligoglossus subsp. oligoglossus LC Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia nodosa LC Malvaceae Hermannia desertorum LC Malvaceae Anisodontea capensis LC Colchicaceae Colchicum melanthoides Anacampserotaceae Anacampseros albidiflora LC Scrophulariaceae Diascia capsularis LC Scrophulariaceae Selago magnakarooica LC Hyacinthaceae Drimia sp. Ranunculaceae Clematis brachiata LC Thymelaeaceae Passerina corymbosa LC Amaranthaceae Bassia salsoloides LC Asteraceae Eriocephalus tenuifolius LC Asteraceae Pseudognaphalium luteoalbum LC Fabaceae Lotononis azureoides LC Scrophulariaceae Jamesbrittenia tysonii LC Geraniaceae Erodium cicutarium Geraniaceae Monsonia crassicaulis LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 67

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Poaceae Cymbopogon prolixus LC Hyacinthaceae Albuca prasina Poaceae Tricholaena capensis subsp. capensis LC Thymelaeaceae Lasiosiphon deserticola LC Araliaceae Cussonia paniculata subsp. paniculata LC Asteraceae Sonchus tenerrimus LC Crassulaceae Crassula natans var. minus LC Asteraceae Dicerothamnus rhinocerotis Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum tetragonum Malvaceae Anisodontea triloba LC Ricciaceae Riccia albovestita Asteraceae Helichrysum trilineatum LC Achariaceae Kiggelaria africana LC Limeaceae Limeum aethiopicum var. intermedium NE Asteraceae Pteronia membranacea LC Scrophulariaceae Aptosimum spinescens LC Fabaceae Aspalathus acicularis subsp. acicularis LC Zygophyllaceae Roepera foetida Asteraceae Geigeria ornativa subsp. ornativa LC Molluginaceae Pharnaceum detonsum LC Brassicaceae Heliophila minima LC Poaceae Chaetobromus involucratus subsp. dregeanus LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum sp. Asteraceae Phymaspermum thymelaeoides Malvaceae Abutilon sonneratianum LC Amaranthaceae Atriplex lindleyi subsp. inflata Polygonaceae Polygonum aviculare Scrophulariaceae Nemesia fruticans LC Poaceae Eragrostis mexicana subsp. virescens NE Brassicaceae Lepidium englerianum Bignoniaceae Rhigozum obovatum LC Crassulaceae Adromischus hemisphaericus LC Oxalidaceae Oxalis setosa DD Poaceae Pennisetum sphacelatum LC Asteraceae Oedera glandulosa Zygophyllaceae Roepera lichtensteiniana Asteraceae Euryops oligoglossus subsp. racemosus LC Asteraceae Phymaspermum parvifolium LC Iridaceae Lapeirousia plicata subsp. foliosa Crassulaceae Crassula montana subsp. quadrangularis LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia spartaria LC Scrophulariaceae Peliostomum leucorrhizum LC Poaceae Pentameris airoides subsp. airoides LC Amaranthaceae Atriplex nummularia subsp. nummularia Asteraceae Euryops subcarnosus subsp. vulgaris LC Asphodelaceae Aloe claviflora LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 68

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Geraniaceae Pelargonium senecioides LC Aizoaceae Mestoklema tuberosum LC Apocynaceae Duvalia angustiloba LC Rubiaceae Anthospermum dregei subsp. dregei LC Poaceae Sporobolus tenellus LC Polygalaceae Polygala hottentotta LC Scrophulariaceae Limosella grandiflora LC Asparagaceae Asparagus aethiopicus LC Aizoaceae Galenia sarcophylla LC Bryaceae Bryum alpinum Fabaceae Melilotus indicus NE Apocynaceae Gomphocarpus filiformis LC Asteraceae Felicia hirsuta LC Aizoaceae Stomatium suaveolens LC Poaceae Tribolium purpureum LC Asphodelaceae Haworthiopsis fasciata Poaceae Hordeum murinum subsp. glaucum NE Crassulaceae Crassula tetragona subsp. tetragona LC Cucurbitaceae Cucumis zeyheri LC Scrophulariaceae Diascia alonsooides LC Crassulaceae Crassula natans Iridaceae Romulea atrandra var. esterhuyseniae LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia sp. Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum coriarium Fabaceae Lotononis pungens LC Poaceae Phragmites australis LC Funariaceae Funaria hygrometrica Fabaceae Argyrolobium sp. Plantaginaceae Plantago major Asteraceae Eriocephalus ericoides subsp. ericoides LC Zygophyllaceae Tetraena chrysopteron Ebenaceae Diospyros austro-africana var. austro-africana LC Boraginaceae Trichodesma africanum LC Fabaceae Lessertia frutescens subsp. frutescens LC Loranthaceae Septulina glauca LC Colchicaceae Colchicum burkei LC Cyperaceae Pseudoschoenus inanis LC Asteraceae Amellus tridactylus subsp. olivaceus LC Fabaceae Listia heterophylla LC Celastraceae Gymnosporia buxifolia LC Asteraceae Arctotis leiocarpa LC Scrophulariaceae Selago geniculata LC Aspleniaceae Asplenium cordatum LC Asteraceae Leysera gnaphalodes LC Asphodelaceae Astroloba congesta LC Cyperaceae Cyperus laevigatus LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 69

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Caryophyllaceae Silene undulata subsp. undulata LC Aizoaceae Drosanthemum subcompressum LC Zygophyllaceae Tetraena microcarpa Crassulaceae Crassula garibina subsp. glabra LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia clavarioides LC Poaceae Ehrharta delicatula LC Asteraceae Berkheya sp. Asteraceae Macledium spinosum LC Asteraceae Cineraria lobata subsp. lasiocaulis LC Pteridaceae Cheilanthes induta LC Gentianaceae Chironia palustris subsp. palustris LC Caryophyllaceae Silene burchellii subsp. pilosellifolia Apiaceae Conium chaerophylloides LC Hyacinthaceae Albuca virens subsp. arida LC Asparagaceae Asparagus suaveolens LC Urticaceae Forsskaolea candida LC Fabaceae Aspalathus aciphylla LC Brassicaceae Heliophila trifurca LC Asteraceae Helichrysum rosum var. arcuatum LC Asteraceae Eriocephalus decussatus LC Salicaceae Salix mucronata subsp. mucronata LC Asteraceae Berkheya spinosissima subsp. spinosissima LC Apocynaceae Carissa bispinosa LC Brassicaceae Lepidium desertorum LC Aizoaceae Mestoklema arboriforme LC Poaceae Tetrachne dregei LC Caryophyllaceae Dianthus micropetalus LC Fabaceae Indigofera heterophylla LC Poaceae Digitaria eriantha LC Ranunculaceae Ranunculus multifidus LC Malvaceae Malva parviflora var. parviflora Apiaceae Apium graveolens Hyacinthaceae Ledebouria revoluta LC Alliaceae Tulbaghia leucantha LC Colchicaceae Ornithoglossum undulatum LC Bignoniaceae Rhigozum trichotomum LC Gisekiaceae Gisekia pharnaceoides var. pharnaceoides LC Poaceae Agrostis lachnantha var. lachnantha LC Brassicaceae Heliophila crithmifolia LC Asteraceae Pteronia glaucescens LC Asteraceae Euryops abrotanifolius LC Fabaceae Lotononis falcata LC Poaceae Pentameris aristifolia LC Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia mauritanica LC Amaranthaceae Sericocoma avolans LC Asteraceae Hertia cluytiifolia LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 70

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Potamogetonaceae Potamogeton pusillus LC Euphorbiaceae Ricinus communis var. communis NE Fabaceae Indigastrum niveum Malvaceae Hermannia spinosa LC Cyperaceae Cyperus usitatus LC Solanaceae Solanum tomentosum Lamiaceae Ballota africana LC Pteridaceae Cheilanthes eckloniana LC Malvaceae Hermannia abrotanoides LC Asteraceae Senecio pinnulatus LC Malvaceae Radyera urens LC Salicaceae Populus nigra var. italica Aizoaceae Drosanthemum hispidum LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum LC Poaceae Polypogon monspeliensis NE Malvaceae Hermannia althaeifolia LC Apiaceae Heteromorpha arborescens var. arborescens LC Poaceae Lolium perenne NE Crassulaceae Crassula corallina subsp. macrorrhiza LC Asphodelaceae Haworthia semiviva LC Apiaceae Chamarea longipedicellata LC Malvaceae Hermannia pulverata LC Lamiaceae Mentha longifolia subsp. capensis LC Colchicaceae Colchicum asteroides LC Iridaceae Moraea ciliata LC Poaceae Panicum sp. Rosaceae Rubus ludwigii subsp. ludwigii LC Hyacinthaceae Dipcadi viride LC Hyacinthaceae Drimia intricata LC Pteridaceae Adiantum capillus-veneris LC Aizoaceae Trichodiadema densum LC Asteraceae Centaurea melitensis Malvaceae Hermannia linearifolia LC Aizoaceae Plinthus cryptocarpus LC Poaceae Setaria verticillata LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium articulatum LC Scrophulariaceae Jamesbrittenia atropurpurea subsp. atropurpurea LC Fabaceae Lotononis caerulescens LC Asteraceae Pteronia glauca LC Poaceae Heteropogon contortus LC Amaranthaceae Amaranthus deflexus Zygophyllaceae Tribulus terrestris LC Fabaceae Medicago sativa NE Ebenaceae Diospyros austro-africana var. microphylla LC Geraniaceae Monsonia salmoniflora LC Rubiaceae Galium capense subsp. capense LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 71

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Scrophulariaceae Jamesbrittenia atropurpurea Scrophulariaceae Selago divaricata LC Asteraceae Pteronia paniculata LC Santalaceae Viscum rotundifolium LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum emarcidum Lamiaceae Teucrium trifidum LC Hyacinthaceae Albuca sp. Hyacinthaceae Drimia platyphylla LC Asteraceae Caputia tomentosa LC Asteraceae Othonna pavonia LC Asteraceae Senecio niveus LC Scrophulariaceae Nemesia linearis LC Oleaceae Menodora juncea LC Aizoaceae Chasmatophyllum maninum DD Scrophulariaceae Aptosimum indivisum LC Apocynaceae Stapelia grandiflora var. grandiflora LC Colchicaceae Colchicum albomarginatum LC Crassulaceae Cotyledon papillaris LC Asphodelaceae Bulbine frutescens LC Ebenaceae Euclea crispa subsp. ovata LC Asteraceae Cotula coronopifolia LC Fabaceae Lotononis rabenaviana LC Asteraceae Pentzia sp. Poaceae Sporobolus fourcadii LC Aizoaceae Plinthus karooicus LC Apocynaceae Gomphocarpus fruticosus subsp. fruticosus LC Aizoaceae Trichodiadema setuliferum LC Asteraceae Cichorium intybus subsp. intybus Colchicaceae Colchicum striatum LC Thymelaeaceae Gnidia meyeri LC Asteraceae Pteronia viscosa LC Scrophulariaceae Chaenostoma rotundifolium LC Cyperaceae Fuirena coerulescens LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium odoratissimum LC Amaranthaceae Atriplex vestita var. appendiculata LC Poaceae Setaria sphacelata var. torta LC Poaceae Lolium multiflorum NE Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia cylindrica LC Malvaceae Hermannia comosa LC Asteraceae Felicia rogersii LC Aizoaceae Drosanthemum archeri LC Asphodelaceae Gonialoe variegata LC Limeaceae Limeum aethiopicum var. aethiopicum NE Crassulaceae Crassula muscosa var. muscosa NE Scrophulariaceae Gomphostigma incomptum LC Oxalidaceae Oxalis psilopoda LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 72

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Poaceae Aristida adscensionis LC Asteraceae Eriocephalus spinescens LC Aizoaceae Mesembryanthemum crystallinum LC Poaceae Cymbopogon nardus LC Boraginaceae Lappula heteracantha Crassulaceae Crassula deltoidea LC Geraniaceae Pelargonium multicaule subsp. multicaule LC Ranunculaceae Ranunculus trichophyllus LC Aizoaceae Stomatium villetii LC Malvaceae Hermannia bicolor LC Lamiaceae Salvia verbenaca LC Hypoxidaceae Empodium elongatum LC Cucurbitaceae Cucumis myriocarpus subsp. leptodermis LC Asteraceae Rhynchopsidium sessiliflorum LC Urticaceae Urtica dioica Hyacinthaceae Albuca glandulosa LC Cyperaceae Isolepis karroica LC Crassulaceae Cotyledon orbiculata var. oblonga LC Aizoaceae Galenia squamulosa LC Polygalaceae Polygala ericaefolia LC Polygalaceae Polygala asbestina LC Aizoaceae Drosanthemum sp. Asteraceae Pteronia glomerata LC Asteraceae Osteospermum microphyllum LC Asteraceae Eriocephalus sp. Santalaceae Viscum continuum LC Ditrichaceae Ceratodon purpureus subsp. stenocarpus Cucurbitaceae Citrullus lanatus LC Asteraceae Lasiopogon muscoides LC Poaceae Paspalum dilatatum NE Asteraceae Dicoma capensis LC Poaceae Cynodon incompletus LC Scrophulariaceae Zaluzianskya venusta LC Poaceae Brachypodium bolusii LC Fabaceae Lessertia annularis LC Poaceae Leptochloa fusca LC Caryophyllaceae Cerastium capense LC Asphodelaceae Haworthia marumiana var. marumiana NE Caryophyllaceae Silene undulata Lobeliaceae Lobelia dregeana LC Poaceae Oropetium capense LC Asteraceae Eumorphia corymbosa LC

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 73

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 74

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

10 ANNEX 2. LIST OF MAMMALS

List of mammals which are likely to occur in the broad vicinity of the Nuweveld Grid Corridor. Records are based on the MammalMap Database from the ADU (http://mammalmap.adu.org.za), while conservation status is from the IUCN Red Lists 2016. Species in bold are those confirmed present or observed at the site.

Family Scientific name Common name Red list Records

Bathyergidae Cryptomys hottentotus Southern African Mole-rat Least Concern 3 Bovidae Antidorcas marsupialis Springbok Least Concern 978 Bovidae Oreotragus oreotragus Klipspringer Least Concern 503 Bovidae Pelea capreolus Vaal Rhebok Near Threatened 357 Bovidae Raphicerus campestris Steenbok Least Concern 76 Bovidae Redunca fulvorufula Mountain Reedbuck Near Threatened 91 Bovidae Sylvicapra capra Common Duiker Least Concern 18 Bovidae Tragelaphus strepsiceros Greater Kudu Least Concern 624 Canidae Canis mesomelas Black-backed Jackal Least Concern 51 Canidae Otocyon megalotis Bat-eared Fox Least Concern 12 Canidae Vulpes chama Cape Fox Least Concern 4 Cercopithecidae Chlorocebus pygerythrus Vervet Monkey Least Concern 1 Cercopithecidae Papio ursinus Chacma Baboon Least Concern 57 Chrysochloridae Chlorotalpa sclateri Sclater's Golden Mole Least Concern 14 Felidae Caracal caracal Caracal Least Concern 2 Felidae Felis nigripes Black-footed Cat Vulnerable 17 Felidae Felis silvestris Wildcat Least Concern 3 Spectacled African Gliridae Graphiurus ocularis Least Concern 1 Dormouse Herpestidae Atilax paludinosus Marsh Mongoose Least Concern 2 Herpestidae Cynictis penicillata Yellow Mongoose Least Concern 6 Herpestidae Herpestes pulverulentus Cape Gray Mongoose Least Concern 7 Herpestidae Suricata suricatta Meerkat Least Concern 5 Hyaenidae Hyaena brunnea Brown Hyena Near Threatened 2 Hyaenidae Proteles cristata Aardwolf Least Concern 4 Hystricidae Hystrix africaeaustralis Cape Porcupine Least Concern 4 Leporidae Bunolagus monticularis Riverine Rabbit Critically Endangered 11 Leporidae Lepus capensis Cape Hare Least Concern 2 Leporidae Lepus saxatilis Scrub Hare Least Concern 3 Macroscelides Macroscelididae Short-eared Elephant Shrew Least Concern 6 proboscideus

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 75

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Muridae Aethomys granti Grant's Rock Mouse Least Concern 2 Muridae Aethomys namaquensis Namaqua Rock Mouse Least Concern 29 Muridae Desmodillus auricularis Cape Short-tailed Gerbil Least Concern 2 Muridae Gerbilliscus paeba Paeba Hairy-footed Gerbil Least Concern 13 Muridae Mastomys coucha Southern African Mastomys Least Concern 1 Muridae Mastomys natalensis Natal Mastomys Least Concern 6 Muridae Otomys unisulcatus Karoo Bush Rat Least Concern 12 Muridae Parotomys brantsii Brants's Whistling Rat Least Concern 2 Muridae Rhabdomys pumilio Xeric Four-striped Grass Rat Least Concern 51 Mustelidae Ictonyx striatus Striped Polecat Least Concern 3 Mustelidae Mellivora capensis Honey Badger Least Concern 3 Large-eared African Desert Nesomyidae Malacothrix typica Least Concern 2 Mouse Nesomyidae Petromyscus collinus Pygmy Rock Mouse Least Concern 2 Southern African Pouched Nesomyidae Saccostomus campestris Least Concern 15 Mouse Orycteropodidae Orycteropus afer Aardvark Least Concern 3 Procaviidae Procavia capensis Cape Rock Hyrax Least Concern 13 South African Ground Sciuridae Xerus inauris Least Concern 1 Squirrel Soricidae Myosorex varius Forest Shrew Least Concern 13 Viverridae Genetta genetta Common Genet Least Concern 2

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 76

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

11 ANNEX 3. LIST OF REPTILES

List of reptiles which are likely to occur in the broad vicinity of the Nuweveld Grid Corridor, based on records from the SARCA database, conservation status is from Bates et al. 2013. Species in bold are those confirmed present or observed at the site.

Family Scientific name Common name Red list Records

Agamidae Agama aculeata aculeata Common Ground Agama Least Concern 7 Agamidae Agama atra Southern Rock Agama Least Concern 8 Agamidae Agama hispida Spiny Ground Agama Least Concern 1 Eastern Cape Dwarf Chamaeleonidae Bradypodion ventrale Least Concern 6 Chameleon Colubridae Crotaphopeltis hotamboeia Red-lipped Snake Least Concern 3 Colubridae Dasypeltis scabra Rhombic Egg-eater Least Concern 2 Colubridae Dipsina multimaculata Dwarf Beaked Snake Least Concern 2 Cordylidae Cordylus cordylus Cape Girdled Lizard Least Concern 8 Cordylidae Karusasaurus polyzonus Karoo Girdled Lizard Least Concern 2 Pseudocordylus microlepidotus Cordylidae Nuweveldberg Crag Lizard Least Concern 12 namaquensis Elapidae Aspidelaps lubricus lubricus Coral Shield Cobra 2 Elapidae Naja nivea Cape Cobra Least Concern 3 Chondrodactylus angulifer Common Giant Ground Gekkonidae Least Concern 2 angulifer Gecko Gekkonidae Chondrodactylus bibronii Bibron's Gecko Least Concern 16 Gekkonidae Goggia braacki Braack's Pygmy Gecko Near Threatened 10 Gekkonidae Pachydactylus capensis Cape Gecko Least Concern 4 Gekkonidae Pachydactylus kladaroderma Thin-skinned Gecko Least Concern 8 Gekkonidae Pachydactylus maculatus Spotted Gecko Least Concern 1 Gekkonidae Pachydactylus mariquensis Marico Gecko Least Concern 2 Gekkonidae Pachydactylus oculatus Golden Spotted Gecko Least Concern 4 Gekkonidae Pachydactylus purcelli Purcell's Gecko Least Concern 1 Gekkonidae Ptenopus garrulus maculatus Spotted Barking Gecko Least Concern 8 Gerrhosauridae Tetradactylus tetradactylus Cape Long-tailed Seps Least Concern 3 Lacertidae Meroles suborbitalis Spotted Desert Lizard Least Concern 2 Lacertidae Nucras livida Karoo Sandveld Lizard Least Concern 1 Lacertidae Pedioplanis burchelli Burchell's Sand Lizard Least Concern 5 Lacertidae Pedioplanis laticeps Karoo Sand Lizard Least Concern 1 Pedioplanis lineoocellata Lacertidae Spotted Sand Lizard Least Concern 1 lineoocellata Pedioplanis lineoocellata Lacertidae Common Sand Lizard Least Concern 7 pulchella Lacertidae Pedioplanis namaquensis Namaqua Sand Lizard Least Concern 6 Lamprophiidae Boaedon capensis Brown House Snake Least Concern 1 Lamprophiidae Homoroselaps lacteus Spotted Harlequin Snake Least Concern 2

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 77

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Lamprophiidae Lamprophis guttatus Spotted House Snake Least Concern 1 Lamprophiidae Prosymna sundevallii Sundevall's Shovel-snout Least Concern 2 South African Marsh Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata Not evaluated 2 Terrapin Scincidae Acontias meleagris Cape Legless Skink Least Concern 2 Scincidae Trachylepis capensis Cape Skink Least Concern 1 Scincidae Trachylepis homalocephala Red-sided Skink Least Concern 2 Scincidae Trachylepis occidentalis Western Three-striped Skink Least Concern 1 Scincidae Trachylepis sulcata sulcata Western Rock Skink Least Concern 7 Scincidae Trachylepis variegata Variegated Skink Least Concern 5 Testudinidae Chersina angulata Angulate Tortoise Least Concern 3 Testudinidae Homopus femoralis Greater Padloper Least Concern 2 Psammobates tentorius Testudinidae Karoo Tent Tortoise 5 tentorius Testudinidae Psammobates tentorius verroxii Verrox's Tent Tortoise 4 Testudinidae Stigmochelys pardalis Leopard Tortoise Least Concern 18 Varanidae Varanus albigularis albigularis Rock Monitor Least Concern 3 Viperidae Bitis arietans arietans Puff Adder Least Concern 2

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 78

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

12 ANNEX 4. LIST OF AMPHIBIANS

List of amphibians which are likely to occur in in the broad vicinity of the Nuweveld Grid Corridor. Habitat notes and distribution records are based on Du Preez and Carruthers (2009), while conservation status is from the Minter et al. 2004.

Number Family Scientific name Common name Red list of

Bufonidae Poyntonophrynus vertebralis Southern Pygmy Toad Least Concern 1

Bufonidae Sclerophrys capensis Raucous Toad Least Concern 1 Vandijkophrynus gariepensis Karoo Toad (subsp. Bufonidae Least Concern 26 gariepensis gariepensis) Hyperoliidae Kassina senegalensis Bubbling Kassina Least Concern 1

Pipidae Xenopus laevis Common Platanna Least Concern 10

Pyxicephalidae Amietia fuscigula Cape River Frog Least Concern 22

Pyxicephalidae Amietia poyntoni Poynton's River Frog Least Concern 5

Pyxicephalidae Cacosternum boettgeri Common Caco Least Concern 22

Pyxicephalidae Cacosternum karooicum Karoo Caco Least Concern 4

Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalus adspersus Giant Bull Frog Near Threatened 1

Pyxicephalidae Strongylopus grayii Clicking Stream Frog Least Concern 2

Pyxicephalidae Tomopterna delalandii Cape Sand Frog Least Concern 3

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 79

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

13 ANNEX 5. SITE VERIFICATION REPORT

Government Notice No. 320, dated 20 March 2020, includes the requirement that an Initial Site Sensitivity Verification Report must be produced for a development footprint. The outcome of the Initial Site Verification must be recorded in the form of a report that-

(a) Confirms or disputes the current use of the land and environmental sensitivity as identified by the national web based environmental screening tool; (b) Contains a motivation and evidence of either the verified or different use of the land and environmental sensitivity; (c) Is submitted together with the relevant reports prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

This report has been produced specifically to consider the terrestrial biodiversity, animal species and plant species themes and addresses the content requirements of (a) and (b) above. The report will be appended to the respective specialist study included in the BA Report produced for the project.

Site sensitivity based on the terrestrial biodiversity, animal species and plant species themes included in the Screening Tool and specialist assessment

Based on the terrestrial biodiversity theme, the site contains areas of very high sensitivity due to the presence of CBAs, FEPAs and/or ESAs. The remaining area within the development footprint is deemed to be of low sensitivity (Figure 1). In terms of the plant species theme, the corridor contains areas of low and medium sensitivity (Figure 2) and the areas of high sensitivity shown in the animal species theme are for areas utilised by the Verreaux’s eagle and Riverine Rabbit (Figure 3).

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 80

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 1. DEA Screening Tool outcome for the terrestrial biodiversity theme

Figure 2. DEA Screening Tool outcome for the plant species theme

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 81

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 3. DEA Screening Tool outcome for the animal species theme

Based on the above outcomes, the specialist disputes the environmental sensitivities identified on site. The findings of the dispute have been informed by a site visit undertaken by Mr Simon Todd over several days. The site was visited on three occasions for the current study, from 13-15 June 2019, 17-19 September 2019 and 10-12 October 2019 and early in 2020. The initial site visit included a helicopter flight along the power line alignment as well as across the wind farm area. During the site visits, the power line route was investigated in the field. Potentially sensitive features within the corridor were investigated, validated and characterised in the field including any pans, rocky outcrops and major drainage features that were observed in the field or from satellite imagery of the site. In addition to the current site visits, the wind farm area was also visited in August 2013 for a screening study for a previous wind farm development in the area. Apart from the above site visits, the vegetation of the veld and riparian areas at various locations in the study area was sampled by the consultant in 2018 as part of EWT- lead research into veld condition and Riverine Rabbit habitat assessment. Thus the consultant has a very good understanding of the site which has been developed over the years from 2013 to present.

The figure below shows the corridor’s environmental sentivity, based on the assessment undertaken.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 82

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Figure 4. Environmental sensitivity map produced by the terrestrial specialist

Given that the DEA Screening Tool identified High sensitivity areas within the Animal Species Theme, Very High for the Terrestrial Biodiversity Combined Theme and medium for the Plant Species, the tool triggers the associated detailed assessment protocols of the fauna, plants and biodiversity features present as detailed in Annex 6-7. Although the specialist identified additional species and areas of high sensitivity within the site, this does not substantially alter the required protocols as the DEA Screening Tool had already indicated that the highest level of assessment is required.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 83

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

14 ANNEX 6. Criteria for the Assessment and Reporting of Impacts on Terrestrial Animal Species for Activities Requiring Environmental Authorisation

The table below provides the Protocol for the Assessment and Reporting of Environmental Impacts on Terrestrial Animal Species – as published in the Government Gazette no. 42946 (2020).

Very High Sensitivity RATING – for 1. General Information terrestrial animal species 1.1 An applicant, intending to undertake an activity as identified in the 1. Critical habitat for range restricted scope of this protocol on a site identified as being of “very high”, species of conservation concern that “high” or “medium” sensitivity for terrestrial animal species on the have a global range of less than 10 km2. national web based environmental screening tool must submit a 2. Species of conservation concern Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Assessment Report. listed on the IUCN Red List of 1.2 However, where the information gathered from the initial site Threatened Species1 or South Africa’s sensitivity verification identified in section 2 of this protocol or the National Red List website2 as Critically specialist assessment differs from the designation of “very high”, Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable “high”, or “medium” terrestrial animal species sensitivity from the according to the IUCN Red List 3.1. national web based environmental screening tool and it is found to Categories and Criteria or listed as be of a “low” sensitivity, then a Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Nationally Rare. These areas are Assessment is not required. irreplaceable in terms of species of 1.3 Should paragraph 1.2 apply, a Terrestrial Animal Species conservation concern. Compliance Statement must be submitted. An environmental assessment practitioner or a suitably qualified taxon relevant HIGH SENSITIVITY RATING – specialist, registered with the South African National Council for for terrestrial animal species Natural Scientific Professionals (SACNASP), must append to the Terrestrial Animal Species Compliance Statement a motivation 1. Confirmed habitat for species of and evidence (e.g. photographs) of the different terrestrial animal conservation concern. species sensitivity. 2. Species of conservation concern listed on the IUCN Red List of 2. Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Assessment Threatened Species or South Africa’s National Red List website as Critically 2.1 The assessment must be undertaken by a suitably qualified taxon Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable relevant SACNASP registered specialist aligned with the taxa according the IUCN Red List 3.1. identified in the report generated from the national web based Categories and Criteria. These areas environmental screening tool on the site being submitted as the are unsuitable for development due to a preferred development site. very likely impact on species of 2.2 The Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Assessment must include conservation concern. the results of a site assessment undertaken on the preferred development site. MEDIUM SENSITIVITY RATING 2.3 The Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Assessment must be – for terrestrial animal species undertaken in accordance with the Species Environmental Assessment Best Practice Guidelines3 and must identify the 1. Suspected habitat for species of following: conservation concern based either on 2.3.1 The species of conservation concern which were found on there being records for this species site; collected in the past prior to 2002 or 2.3.2 The distribution, location, viability (ability to survive and being a natural area included in a reproduce in future) and detailed description of population habitat suitability model. size of the species of conservation concern identified on the 2. Species of conservation concern preferred development site; listed on the IUCN Red List of 2.3.3 The nature and the extent of the potential impact of the Threatened Species or South Africa’s proposed development on the species of conservation National Red List website as Critically concern on the proposed development site; Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable 2.3.4 The importance of the conservation of the population of the species of special concern identified on the proposed

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 84

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

according to the IUCN Red List 3.1. development site based on information available in national Categories and Criteria. and international databases including the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, South African Red List of Species, and/or other relevant databases; 2.3.5 The potential impact of the proposed development on the habitat of the species of conservation concern; 2.3.6 Any dynamic ecological processes occurring within the site and its surrounds that might be disrupted by the proposed development and resulting impact on the identified species of conservation concern; for example, fires in fire-prone systems; 2.3.7 Any potential impact of ecological connectivity (on site, and in relation to the broader landscape) and resulting impact on the identified species of conservation concern; 2.3.8 Buffer distances as per the Species Environmental Assessment Best Practice Guidelines used for the population of each species of conservation concern; 2.3.9 The likelihood of other threatened species, undescribed species or highly localised endemics, migratory species, or species of conservation concern, occurring in the vicinity; and 2.3.10 Identify any alternative development footprints within the preferred development site which would be of “low” sensitivity as identified by the national web based environmental screening tool and verified through the initial site sensitivity verification.

3. The findings of the Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Assessment must be written up in a Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Assessment Report.

This report must include as a minimum the following information:

3.1. Contact details and curriculum vitae of the specialist including SACNASP registration number and fields of expertise; 3.2. A signed statement of independence by the specialist; 3.3. Duration, date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment; 3.4. A description of the methodology used to undertake the impact assessment and site inspection, including equipment and modelling used where relevant; 3.5. A description of the assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge or data as well as a statement of the timing and intensity of site inspection observations; 3.6. Areas not suitable for development, to be avoided during construction and operation where relevant; 3.7. Additional environmental impacts expected from the proposed development based on those already evident on the site and a discussion on the cumulative impacts; and 3.8. Impact management actions and impact management outcomes proposed by the specialist for inclusion in the Environmental Management Programme (EMPr); 3.9. A reasoned opinion, based on the findings of the specialist assessment, regarding the acceptability or not of the proposed development and if the proposed development should receive approval or not, and any conditions to which the opinion is subjected;

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 85

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

3.10. A motivation must be provided if there were development footprints identified as per paragraph 2.3.10 above that were identified as having a “low” terrestrial animal species sensitivity and were not considered appropriate.

4. The findings of the Terrestrial Animal Impact Assessment must be incorporated into the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) or the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), including the mitigation and monitoring measures as identified, which must be incorporated into the EMPr. A signed copy of the assessment must be appended to the BAR or EIAR.

LOW SENSITIVITY RATING – for 1. General Information terrestrial animal species 1.1 An applicant, intending to undertake an activity as identified in the 1. Areas where no natural habitat scope of this protocol, on a site identified as being of “low remains. sensitivity” for terrestrial animal species on the national web based 2. Natural areas where there is no environmental screening tool must submit a Terrestrial Animal suspected occurrence of species of Species Compliance Statement, unless conservation concern. 1.1.1 the information gathered from the initial site sensitivity verification identified in section 2 of this protocol differs from that identified as having a “low” terrestrial animal species sensitivity by the national web based environmental screening tool and it is found to be of a “very high” “high” and/or “medium” sensitivity.

1.2 Should 1.1.1 apply, a Terrestrial Animal Species Impact Assessment is to be undertaken and a report should be prepared in accordance with the requirements of a Terrestrial Animal Impact Assessment.

2. Terrestrial Animal Species Compliance Statement

2.1 The Terrestrial Animal Species Compliance Statement must be prepared by a suitably qualified, taxon relevant SACNASP registered specialist, on the site being submitted as the preferred development site and must verify: 2.1.1 That the site is of “low” sensitivity for terrestrial animal species; and 2.1.2 Whether or not the proposed development will have any impact on the terrestrial animal species.

3. The Terrestrial Animal Species Compliance Statement, must contain, as a minimum, the following information:

3.1 Contact details and curriculum vitae of the specialist including SACNASP registration number and field of expertise; 3.2 A signed statement of independence by the specialist; 3.3 Methodology used to undertake the site survey and prepare the compliance statement, including equipment and modelling used where relevant; 3.4 Where required, proposed impact management outcomes or any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr; 3.5 A description of the assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge or data as well as a statement of the timing and intensity of site inspection observations; and 3.6 Any conditions to which the statement is subjected.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 86

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

4. A signed copy of the full Terrestrial Animal Species Compliance Statement must be appended to the BAR or EIAR.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 87

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

15 ANNEX 7. CRITERIA FOR THE ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING OF IMPACTS ON TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY FOR ACTIVITIES REQUIRING ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION

The table below provides the Protocol for the Assessment and Reporting of Environmental Impacts on Terrestrial Biodiversity – as published in the Government Gazette no. 45421 (2019).

TABLE 1: REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING OF IMPACTS ON TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY FOR ACTIVITIES REQUIRING ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION

VERY HIGH SENSITIVITY RATING - for terrestrial biodiversity features 1 General Information

1.1 An applicant intending to undertake an activity identified in the Scope of this Protocol, on a site identified as being of “very high sensitivity” for terrestrial biodiversity on the national web based environmental screening tool must submit a Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment. 1.2 However, where the information gathered from the Initial Site Sensitivity Verification identified in section 2.1 of this Protocol or the specialist assessment differs from the designation of “very high” terrestrial biodiversity sensitivity from the national web based environmental screening tool and it is found to be of a “low” sensitivity, then a terrestrial biodiversity impact assessment is not required. 1.3 Should paragraph 1.2 apply, a Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Statement is to be provided. An Environmental Assessment Practitioner or a suitably qualified and SACNASP registered specialist, must append to the Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Statement a motivation and evidence (e.g. photographs) of the changed Terrestrial Biodiversity sensitivity.

2 The Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment

2.1 The assessment must be undertaken by a SACNASP registered specialist, on the preferred development site. 2.2 Description of the preferred site - the following aspects, as a minimum, must be considered in the baseline description: 2.2.1 A description of the ecological drivers/processes of the system and how the proposed development will impact these; 2.2.2 Ecological functioning and ecological processes (e.g. fire, migration, pollination, etc.) that operate within the proposed development site; 2.2.3 The ecological corridors that the development would impede including migration and movement of flora and fauna; 2.2.4 The description of any significant landscape features (including rare or important flora/faunal associations, presence of Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSAs) or Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (FEPA) sub catchments; 2.2.5 A description of terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystems on the proposed development site, including – a) Main vegetation types; b) Threatened ecosystems, including Listed Ecosystems as well as locally important habitat types identified;

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 88

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

c) Ecological connectivity, habitat fragmentation, ecological processes and fine-scale habitats; and d) Species, distribution, important habitats (e.g. feeding grounds, nesting sites, etc.) and movement patterns identified. 2.3 Identify any alternative development footprints within the preferred development site which would be of a “low” sensitivity as identified by the national web based environmental screening tool and verified through the Initial Site Sensitivity Verification; 2.4 The Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment must be based on the results of a site inspection undertaken on the preferred development site and must identify:

2.5 Terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs), including: 2.5.1 The reasons why an area has been identified as a CBA; 2.5.2 An indication of whether or not the development is consistent with maintaining the CBA in a natural or near natural state or in achieving the goal of rehabilitation; 2.5.3 The impact on species composition and structure of vegetation with an indication of the extent of clearing activities; 2.5.4 The impact on ecosystem threat status; 2.5.5 The impact on explicit subtypes in the vegetation; 2.5.6 The impact on overall species and ecosystem diversity of the site; and 2.5.7 The impact on populations of species of special concern in the CBA. 2.6 Terrestrial Ecological Support Areas, including; 2.6.1 The impact on the ecological processes that operate within or across the site; 2.6.2 The extent the development will impact on the functionality of the ESA; and 2.6.3 Loss of ecological connectivity (on site, and in relation to the broader landscape) due to the degradation and severing of ecological corridors or introducing barriers that impede migration and movement of flora and fauna. 2.7 Protected Areas as defined by the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2004 including: 2.7.1 An opinion on whether the proposed development aligns with the objectives/purpose of the Protected Area and the zoning as per the Protected Area Management Plan; 2.8 Priority Areas for Protected Area Expansion, including: 2.8.1 The way in which in which the development will compromise or contribute to the expansion of the protected area network. 2.9 Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSA) including: 2.9.1 The impact(s) on the terrestrial habitat of a Strategic Water Source Area, and 2.9.2 The impacts of the development on the SWSA water quality and quantity (e.g. describing potential increased runoff leading to increased sediment load in water courses). 2.10 Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area (FEPA) sub catchments, including: 2.10.1 The impacts of the development on habitat condition and/or species in the FEPA sub catchment. 2.11 Indigenous Forests, including: 2.11.1 Impact on the ecological integrity of the forest; 2.11.2 Extent of natural or near natural indigenous forest area lost.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 89

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

3 The findings of the Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment must be written up in a Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report.

This report must include as a minimum the following information: 3.1 Contact details and curriculum vitae of the specialist including SACNASP registration number and field of expertise and their curriculum vitae; 3.2 A signed statement of independence by the specialist; 3.3 Duration, date and season of the site inspection and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment; 3.4 A description of the methodology used to undertake the impact assessment and site inspection, including equipment and modelling used where relevant; 3.5 A description of the assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge or data as well as a statement of the timing and intensity of site inspection observations; 3.6 Areas not suitable for development, to be avoided during construction and operation (where relevant); 3.7 Additional environmental impacts expected from the proposed development based on those already evident on the site and a discussion on the cumulative impacts;

3.8 Impact management actions and impact management outcomes proposed by the specialist for inclusion in the EMPr; and 3.9 A motivation where the development footprint identified as per section 2.3 in this Table were not considered stating reasons why these were not being not considered. 3.10 A reasoned opinion, based on the findings of the specialist assessment, regarding the acceptability or not of the development and if the development should receive approval or not, and any conditions to which the statement is subjected.

4 The findings of the Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment must be incorporated into the Basic Assessment Report or the Environmental Impact Assessment Report, including the mitigation and monitoring measures as identified, which must be incorporated into the EMPr. A signed copy of the Assessment must be appended to the Basic Assessment Report or Environmental Assessment Report.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 90

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

LOW SENSITIVITY RATING – for terrestrial biodiversity features 1 General Information

1.1 An applicant, intending to undertake an activity identified in the Scope of this Protocol, on a site identified as being of “low sensitivity” for terrestrial biodiversity on the national web based environmental screening tool must submit a Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Statement to the competent authority, unless: 1.1.1 The information gathered from the Initial Site Sensitivity Verification differs from that identified as having a “low” terrestrial biodiversity sensitivity by the national web based environmental screening tool and it is found to be of a “very high” sensitivity. 1.2 Should paragraph 1.1.1 apply, a Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment is to be undertaken and a report should be prepared in accordance with the requirements of a Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment.

2 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Statement

2.1 The Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Statement, must be prepared by a suitably qualified specialist in the field of ecological sciences, on the site being submitted as the preferred development site and must verify:

2.1.1 That the site is of “low” sensitivity for terrestrial biodiversity; and 2.1.2 Whether or not the proposed development will have any impact on the biodiversity feature.

3 The Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Statement, must contain, as a minimum, the following information:

3.1 Contact details and curriculum vitae of the specialist including SACNASP registration number and field of expertise; 3.2 A signed statement of independence by the specialist; 3.3 Baseline profile description of biodiversity and ecosystems, including the duration, date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment; 3.4 Methodology used to verify the sensitivities of the terrestrial biodiversity on the national web based environmental screening; 3.5 Methodology used to undertake the site survey and prepare the Compliance Statement, including equipment and modelling used where relevant; 3.6 Where required, proposed impact management outcomes or any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr;

3.7 A description of the assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge or data as well as a statement of the timing and intensity of site inspection observations; and 3.8 Any conditions to which the statement is subjected.

4 A signed copy of the full Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Statement must be appended to the Basic Assessment Report or Environmental Impact Assessment Report.

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 91

RedCap Nuweveld Grid Connection

Terrestrial Fauna and Flora Study 92