Appendix 4a: Heritage Impact Asssessment

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR A FOURTH PROPOSED SAND AND CALCRETE MINE ON LANGEBERG 188/REM, MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT,

Required under Section 38 (8) of the National Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999).

HWC Case No.: 18031905 DMR reference No.: DMR Ref: WC30/5/1/3/2/ 10168MP

Report for:

Amathemba Environmental Management Consulting CC 24 Hiddingh Road, Bergvliet, 7945, Tel: 082 463 6221 Email: [email protected]

On behalf of:

Siyokhana Logistix (Pty) Ltd

Dr Jayson Orton ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd 40 Brassie Street, Lakeside, 7945 Tel: (021) 789 0327 | 083 272 3225 Email: [email protected]

1st draft: 06 May 2018

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Site Name

Anyskop Farm

2. Location

Off the R27, Farm Langeberg 188/remainder, Vredenburg. GPS co-ordinates; S32° 58’ 34.0” E18° 05’ 30.0”

3. Locality Plan

Extract from 1:50 000 mapsheet 3218CC showing the location of the site (purple shaded polygon) relative to the R27, and the West Coast Fossil Park (green polygon). Other projects are as follows: an already approved borrow pit that is currently being mined (BP#1; blue polygon), a borrow pit in the final stages of assessment (BP#2; orange polygon), a borrow pit currently under assessment (BP#4; red polygon) and an approved road currently under construction (black dashed line). The Airforce Base lies to the east. (Mapping information supplied by Chief Directorate: National Geo-Spatial Information. Website: www.ngi.gov.za.)

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 ii 4. Description of Proposed Development

It is proposed to develop a sand and calcrete mine of 5 ha in extent. The mining permit area will be divided into 5 mining blocks, each of 1 ha in extent. The depth of excavation is expected to be 4 to 5 m. The site would be rehabilitated at the end of the lifetime of the mine.

5. Heritage Resources Identified

No archaeological resources were located in the study area, but several fossil bones were found in one of the test pits in the study area. There is thus the potential for significant palaeontological remains to be found below ground during mining, especially in the calcrete. The cultural landscape is also considered to be a heritage resource with the West Coast Fossil Park, a National Heritage Site, being an important component of it.

6. Anticipated Impacts on Heritage Resources

Any archaeological materials or fossils encountered during mining would be damaged or destroyed. The latter applies most especially to materials within the calcrete being targeted for mining. Given the other activity – borrow pits and roadworks – currently underway in the area, no significant impacts to the landscape are anticipated. The site is also partially screened from the R27 by the Anyskop farm complex. The cultural landscape of the West Coast Fossil Park is also not expected to be significantly impacted.

7. Recommendations

Because the impacts to heritage resources are manageable and effective mitigation is readily accomplishable, it is recommended that the proposed mine be allowed to proceed but subject to the following conditions which should be included in the authorisation if the mining permit is granted:

 A professional palaeontologist should be appointed to inspect the mine pit at appropriate intervals. A workplan application should be submitted for approval prior to commencement of mining in order to streamline any mitigatory actions that may become necessary;  A brief training workshop with mine staff should be held at the start of mining to enable workers to better identify and report any fossils they see; and  If any archaeological material, fossils or human burials are uncovered during the course of development then work in the immediate area should be halted. The find would need to be reported to the heritage authorities and may require inspection by an archaeologist or palaeontologist as relevant. Such heritage is the property of the state and may require excavation and curation in an approved institution.

8. Author/s and Date

Heritage Impact Assessment: Jayson Orton, ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd, 06 May 2018 Archaeological specialist study (incorporated in HIA): Jayson Orton, ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd, 06 May 2018 Palaeontological specialist study: Dr Graham Avery, May 2018

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 iii Glossary

Background scatter: Artefacts whose spatial position is conditioned more by natural forces than by human agency

Early Stone Age: Period of the Stone Age extending approximately between 2 million and 200 000 years ago.

Handaxe: A bifacially flaked, pointed stone tool type typical of the Early Stone Age.

Holocene: The geological period spanning the last approximately 10-12 000 years.

Hominid: a group consisting of all modern and extinct great apes (i.e. gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans and humans) and their ancestors.

Later Stone Age: Period of the Stone Age extending over the last approximately 20 000 years.

Middle Stone Age: Period of the Stone Age extending approximately between 200 000 and 20 000 years ago.

Pleistocene: The geological period beginning approximately 2.5 million years ago and preceding the Holocene.

Quaternary: A geological period that encompasses the Pleistocene and Holocene and extends from 2.58 million years ago to the present.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 iv Abbreviations

APHP: Association of Professional Heritage LSA: Later Stone Age Practitioners MSA: Middle Stone Age ASAPA: Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists NEMA: National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998) BAR: Basic Assessment Report NHRA: National Heritage Resources Act (No. CRM: Cultural Resources Management 25) of 1999

DMR: Department of Mineral Resources NID: Notification of Intent to Develop

EAP: Environmental assessment practitioner SAHRA: South African Heritage Resources Agency EMPr: Environmental Management Program SAHRIS: South African Heritage Resources ESA: Early Stone Age Information System

GPS: global positioning system SBM: Municipality

HIA: Heritage Impact Assessment WCFP: West Coast Fossil Park

HWC: Heritage Western Cape

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 v Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1. Project description...... 1 1.1.1. Aspects of the project relevant to the heritage study ...... 2 1.2. Terms of reference ...... 3 1.3. Scope and purpose of the report ...... 3 1.4. The author ...... 3 1.5. Declaration of independence ...... 4 2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION ...... 4 3. METHODS...... 5 3.1. Literature survey and information sources ...... 5 3.2. Field survey ...... 5 3.3. Specialist studies...... 5 3.4. Impact assessment ...... 5 3.5. Grading ...... 6 3.6. Consultation ...... 6 3.7. Assumptions and limitations ...... 6 4. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT ...... 6 4.1. Site context ...... 6 4.2. Site description ...... 6 5. HERITAGE CONTEXT ...... 7 5.1. Archaeological aspects ...... 8 5.2. Built environment ...... 9 6. FINDINGS OF THE HERITAGE STUDY ...... 9 6.1. Archaeology ...... 9 6.2. Palaeontology ...... 10 6.3. Other aspects of heritage ...... 12 6.4. Summary of heritage indicators ...... 14 6.5. Statement of significance and provisional grading ...... 14 7. ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ...... 15 7.1. Impacts to archaeological resources ...... 15 7.1.1. Mitigation ...... 15 7.1.2. Management ...... 15 7.2. Impacts to palaeontological resources ...... 15 7.2.1. Mitigation ...... 16 7.2.2. Management ...... 16 7.3. Impacts to the cultural landscape ...... 17 7.3.1. Mitigation ...... 17 8. EVALUATION OF IMPACTS RELATIVE TO SUSTAINABLE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS ...... 18 9. CONSULTATION WITH HERITAGE CONSERVATION BODIES ...... 18 10. CONCLUSIONS ...... 18

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 vi 11. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 18 12. REFERENCES ...... 19 APPENDIX 1 – Curriculum Vitae ...... 23 APPENDIX 2 – Palaeontological specialist study ...... 25

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 vii 1. INTRODUCTION

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd was appointed by Amathemba Environmental Management Consulting CC on behalf of Siyokhana Logistix (Pty) Ltd to conduct an assessment of the potential impacts to heritage resources that might occur through the proposed mining of sand and calcrete on the remainder of the farm Langeberg 188 near Vredenburg. The site is centred on S32° 58’ 34.0” E18° 06’ 04.0”. Two similar borrow pits have been previously assessed to the east with one already approved and in operation. A fourth is also currently under assessment. A new road is also being built through the area. Figure 1 shows the location of the study area and the other projects mentioned.

0 1 2 3 4 5 km N

R45

R27

Figure 1: Extract from 1:50 000 mapsheet 3218CC showing the location of the site (purple shaded polygon) relative to the R27, R45 and the West Coast Fossil Park (green polygon). Other projects are as follows: an already approved borrow pit that is currently being mined (BP#1; blue polygon), a borrow pit in the final stages of assessment (BP#2; orange polygon), a borrow pit currently under assessment (BP#4; red polygon) and an approved road currently under construction (black dashed line). The Langebaanweg Airforce Base lies to the east. (Mapping information supplied by Chief Directorate: National Geo-Spatial Information. Website: wwwi.ngi.gov.za.)

1.1. Project description

A number of road improvement or upgrading projects are planned, or are in progress, in the Saldanha Bay Municipal area, including one that abuts the present study area. In order to supply

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 1 road construction materials, Siyokhanya Logistix (Pty) Ltd proposes to obtain a mining permit for sand and weathered calcrete. The site is located in transformed farm land (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: Aerial view of the area showing the present study area (red polygon), the Anyskop Farm complex, and the road currently under construction (arrowed).

The proposed mining sequence is as follows:  The mining permit area will be divided into 5 mining blocks, each 1.0 hectare in extent.  Only one block at a time will be mined.  Overburden clearing and stockpiling of topsoil.  Loading of sand and weathered calcrete into trucks using an excavator.  The average estimated depth of the proposed excavation is approximately 4 to 5 metres below the present ground surface.  Recording volumes in trucks; and  Final rehabilitation of slopes to not more than 1:3, levelling the final floor, replacing topsoil, stabilising the soil surface and rehabilitating the area so that it can continue to be used for agricultural purposes

No new road will be constructed to access the site since the road built for the existing borrow pit would be used. It is envisaged that mining will last for up to five years, depending on demand.

1.1.1. Aspects of the project relevant to the heritage study

Since there will be no infrastructure erected on the site and the presence of an excavator and dump trucks would be temporary during times of operation, there will be negligible visual/contextual concerns. The main issue, however, will be the excavation itself which may impact on archaeological and/or palaeontological remains.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 2 1.2. Terms of reference

ASHA Consulting was asked to compile a heritage impact assessment (HIA) that would meet the requirements of Heritage Western Cape (HWC) who, on XXX (still awaiting NID response, the one below is from a previous project) 2018, issued a response to the submitted Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) requesting the following:

It should also be noted, however, that following S.38(3) of the National Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999), even though certain specialist studies may be specifically requested, all heritage resources should be identified and assessed.

1.3. Scope and purpose of the report

An HIA is a means of identifying any significant heritage resources before development begins so that these can be managed in such a way as to allow the development to proceed (if appropriate) without undue impacts to the fragile heritage of . This HIA report aims to fulfil the requirements of the heritage authorities such that a comment can be issued by them for consideration by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) who will review the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) and grant or refuse the mining permit. The HIA report will outline any management and/or mitigation requirements that will need to be complied with from a heritage point of view and that should be included in the conditions of authorisation should this be granted.

1.4. The author

Dr Jayson Orton has an MA (UCT, 2004) and a D.Phil (Oxford, UK, 2013), both in archaeology, and has been conducting Heritage Impact Assessments and archaeological specialist studies in the Western Cape and Northern Cape provinces of South Africa since 2004 (Please see curriculum vitae included as Appendix 1). He has also conducted research on aspects of the Later Stone Age in these provinces and published widely on the topic. He is an accredited heritage practitioner with the Association of Professional Heritage Practitioners (APHP; member #043) and also holds archaeological accreditation with the Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA) CRM section (Member #233) as follows:

 Principal Investigator: Stone Age, Shell Middens & Grave Relocation; and  Field Director: Colonial Period & Rock Art.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 3 1.5. Declaration of independence

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd and its consultants have no financial or other interest in the proposed development and will derive no benefits other than fair remuneration for consulting services provided.

2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION

The National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) No. 25 of 1999 protects a variety of heritage resources as follows:  Section 34: structures older than 60 years;  Section 35: palaeontological, prehistoric and historical material (including ruins) more than 100 years old;  Section 36: graves and human remains older than 60 years and located outside of a formal cemetery administered by a local authority; and  Section 37: public monuments and memorials.

Following Section 2, the definitions applicable to the above protections are as follows:  Structures: “any building, works, device or other facility made by people and which is fixed to land, and includes any fixtures, fittings and equipment associated therewith”;  Palaeontological material: “any fossilised remains or fossil trace of animals or plants which lived in the geological past, other than fossil fuels or fossiliferous rock intended for industrial use, and any site which contains such fossilised remains or trace”;  Archaeological material: a) “material remains resulting from human activity which are in a state of disuse and are in or on land and which are older than 100 years, including artefacts, human and hominid remains and artificial features and structures”; b) “rock art, being any form of painting, engraving or other graphic representation on a fixed rock surface or loose rock or stone, which was executed by human agency and which is older than 100 years, including any area within 10m of such representation”; c) “wrecks, being any vessel or aircraft, or any part thereof, which was wrecked in South Africa, whether on land, in the internal waters, the territorial waters or in the maritime culture zone of the Republic, as defined respectively in sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Maritime Zones Act, 1994 (Act No. 15 of 1994), and any cargo, debris or artefacts found or associated therewith, which is older than 60 years or which SAHRA considers to be worthy of conservation”; and d) “features, structures and artefacts associated with military history which are older than 75 years and the sites on which they are found”;  Grave: “means a place of interment and includes the contents, headstone or other marker of such a place and any other structure on or associated with such place”; and  Public monuments and memorials: “all monuments and memorials a) “erected on land belonging to any branch of central, provincial or local government, or on land belonging to any organisation funded by or established in terms of the legislation of such a branch of government”; or b) “which were paid for by public subscription, government funds, or a public-spirited or military organisation, and are on land belonging to any private individual.”

While landscapes with cultural significance do not have a dedicated Section in the NHRA, they are protected under the definition of the National Estate (Section 3). Section 3(2)(c) and (d) list

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 4 “historical settlements and townscapes” and “landscapes and natural features of cultural significance” as part of the National Estate. Furthermore, Section 3(3) describes the reasons a place or object may have cultural heritage value; some of these speak directly to cultural landscapes.

Section 38(8) of the NHRA states that if an impact assessment is required under any legislation other than the NHRA then it must include a heritage component that satisfies the requirements of S.38(3). Furthermore, the comments of the relevant heritage authority must be sought and considered by the consenting authority prior to the issuing of a decision. Under the National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998; NEMA), as amended, the project is subject to a BAR. The present report provides the heritage component. HWC is required to provide comment on the proposed project in order to facilitate final decision making by the DMR.

3. METHODS

3.1. Literature survey and information sources

A survey of available literature was carried out to assess the general heritage context into which the development would be set. This literature included published material, unpublished commercial reports and online material, including reports sourced from the South African Heritage Resources Information System (SAHRIS). The 1:50 000 map and historical aerial images were sourced from the Chief Directorate: National Geo-Spatial Information.

3.2. Field survey

The site was subjected to a detailed foot survey on 16th March 2018 for the purposes of the archaeological specialist study. This was in late summer when vegetation is typically very low. Ground visibility in the study area was very good as a result. During the survey the positions of finds were recorded on a hand-held GPS receiver set to the WGS84 datum. Photographs were taken at times in order to capture representative samples of both the affected heritage and the landscape setting of the proposed development.

3.3. Specialist studies

A palaeontological specialist study was commissioned for inclusion in the HIA. This was carried out by Dr Graham Avery and is included in full in Appendix 2 of the present report. HWC also requested a specialist assessment of archaeological resources. This aspect was conducted by the author and is included within the main body of the report.

3.4. Impact assessment

For consistency among specialist studies, the impact assessment was conducted through application of a scale supplied by Amathemba Environmental Management Consulting.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 5 3.5. Grading

S.7(1) of the NHRA provides for the grading of heritage resources into those of National (Grade I), Provincial (Grade II) and Local (Grade III) significance. Grading is intended to allow for the identification of the appropriate level of management for any given heritage resource. Grade I and II resources are intended to be managed by the national and provincial heritage resources authorities respectively, while Grade III resources would be managed by the relevant local planning authority. These bodies are responsible for grading, but anyone may make recommendations for grading.

It is intended under S.7(2) that the various provincial authorities formulate a system for the further detailed grading of heritage resources of local significance but this is generally yet to happen. Heritage Western Cape (2016), however, uses a system in which resources of local significance are divided into Grade IIIA, IIIB and IIIC. These approximately equate to high, medium and low local significance, while sites of very low or no significance (and generally not requiring mitigation or other interventions) are referred to as Not Conservation Worthy (NCW).

3.6. Consultation

The draft HIA was submitted to relevant interested and affected parties as required by HWC in their response to the NID application.

3.7. Assumptions and limitations

Although several open test pits were examined, the field study was carried out largely at the surface and hence any completely buried archaeological and or palaeontological resources would not be readily located. Similarly, it is not always possible to determine the depth of archaeological material visible at the surface. The surface was quite open and, although small clumps of bushes were present, visibility was considered to be very good. The palaeontological study was also informed by an inspection of the nearby borrow pit and roadworks thus allowing for fewer assumptions to be made in terms of subsurface geology and fossils.

4. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT

4.1. Site context

The site lies in a rural area dominated by fallow agricultural lands and grazing fields. Existing infrastructure in the broader area includes electrical infrastructure and industrial facilities, while the West Coast Fossil Park (WCFP) and Langebaanweg Airforce Base lie to the north and east respectively. As already mentioned, a borrow pit is currently in operation to the east, while a new road is currently also under construction along the southern boundary.

4.2. Site description

The site itself is flat, fallow agricultural land (Figures 3 & 4). Its surface is very sandy with very sparse vegetation allowing for good surface visibility. No calcrete was seen cropping out, but a few

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 6 small fragments were seen on the surface. Several open test holes showed substrates varying in the amount of red sand and calcrete present (Figures 5 & 6).

Figure 3: Panoramic view towards the south and west from the northern edge of the study area. The trees forming the western border of the farm complex are visible to the right.

Figure 4: View towards the west along the southern boundary of the site with the Anyskop Farm complex in the trees in the background.

Figure 5: View into a calcrete-rich test pit near Figure 6: View into a sandy test pit with the the north-western corner of the study area. calcrete just intersected at the base. It is in the centre of the study area.

5. HERITAGE CONTEXT

This section of the report contains the desktop study and establishes what is already known about heritage resources in the vicinity of the study area. What was found during the field survey may then be compared with what is already known in order to gain an improved understanding of the

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 7 significance of the newly reported resources. Note that the palaeontological review is contained in the appended palaeontological specialist study.

5.1. Archaeological aspects

The broader area around , Saldanha Bay and the Vredenburg Peninsula contains some highly significant archaeological sites. The majority, however, are focused along the shoreline where marine resources served as a steady food supply. Early Stone Age (ESA) material seems to be sparse, with just Anyskop (see below) and Elandsfontein (18 km to the southeast and not discussed further) revealing significant finds. The Middle Stone Age (MSA) is represented by a number of important coastal shell middens (Avery et al. 2008; Berger & Parkington 1995; Churchill et al. 2000; Kyriacou et al. 2015; Stynder et al. 2001; Will et al. 2013; Volman 1978). Bifacial points commonly associated with the MSA period known as “Still Bay” have also been found on the Vredenburg Peninsula (Bateman 1946; Smith 2006).

The Later Stone Age (LSA) is far better represented, however, and, although sites of this period occur widely, they are still focused on the coastline. The entire western and northern coastline of the Vredenburg Peninsula has shell middens and scatters of varying density all around it. These will not be further discussed as they are not relevant here. Closer to the study area, LSA shell middens occur behind the rocky outcrops in the vicinity of Club Mykonos (Hart 2001; Hart and Gribble 1998; Hart & Jerardino 1998), and the northern shores of Saldanha Bay have also revealed a number of sites (e.g. Hart 2003; Kaplan 1994; Orton 2009, 2012). These sites document occupation through the last 6000 years.

Prominent rocky outcrops away from the coast were also frequently occupied. The Kasteelberg hill, located 10 km northwest of Vredenburg is particularly important as a centre of regular settlement (Klein and Cruz-Uribe 1989; Sadr et al. 2003; Smith 2006; Smith et al. 1991; Volman 1978). Other outrcrops at Vredenburg and Honingklip have also revealed archaeological occupation sites (Smith et al. 1991). One site of significance that has been documented in the open lands around Kasteelberg is KFS5 where it was suggested that a kraal was present in the past (Fauvelle-Aymar et al. 2006). Various studies on the flat plains to the east of Saldanha Bay have shown that archaeological material is virtually entirely absent away from the immediate coastline and larger granite outcrops (Hart 2003; Hart & Pether 2008; Kaplan 2007; Orton 2007, 2011; Smith 2011). However, one important site has been located inland. This was in a large deflation hollow on a low hill called Anyskop within the WCFP boundary (about 2.0 km east- northeast of the present study area). In addition to occasional ESA and MSA artefacts, numerous LSA artefacts and burnt stones indicative of hearths have been recorded there (Dietl et al. 2005; Kandel & Conard 2012). Kaplan (2007) also recorded an ephemeral LSA scatter in a shallow blowout to the southeast of Anyskop, while Orton (2017, 2018) found and sampled a small LSA scatter with stone artefacts (including sidescrapers and adzes), marine shells and animal bones from the existing borrow pit site. Orton (2017) also reported a single fragment of precolonial pottery.

The Anyskop Blowout with its large collection is obviously of direct relevance to the present study and is explored in more detail here. The site is located on a low hill which is underlain by calcrete, and 3 to 4 m of unconsolidated red sand (Kandel & Conard 2012). The red sand appears to be of Pleistocene age with deposition close to 200 000 years ago, while the blowout is said to have only formed during the very late Holocene, less than 1000 years ago (Roberts et al. 2011; but see

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 8 Section 6.3 below where it is shown that the blowout dates to the mid-20th century). Interestingly, a large number of ESA artefacts were found, including 24 handaxes (Conard 2003). MSA artefacts were also identified, including ten segments attributable to the period known as the Howiesons Poort. These assemblages are not very large, however, with 193 ESA artefacts and 310 MSA artefacts noted by Kandel and Conard (2012). The total artefact count is given by Conard (2002) as 2244 and it is assumed that the majority are from the LSA. Conard (2001:3) notes that “the silcrete finds often have fresh edges and include abundant LSA forms such as segments, backed blades and bladelets, and backed points.” The LSA material has, to the present author’s knowledge, not been published.

LSA burials are relatively uncommon from this general area (Morris 1992), although as many as six burials were found in Diaz Street Midden in Saldanha Bay town (Dewar 2010).

Historical material is present in various areas with a few sites having been recorded. Kaplan (1996) recorded a shepherd’s hut and collected an associated scatter of late 19th century material about 4.6 km west of the study area, while Orton (2007) found a scatter of late 19th or early 20th century glass and ceramics much closer to Saldanha Bay town. One of the more interesting historical sites is a ruined farm complex located by Kruger (2016) some 7 km southwest of the study area. It included ruined structures, a threshing floor and two middens with historical artefacts. Much closer to the study area, Orton and Avery (2016) documented a series of historical ruined labourers’ cottages and other ruined farm structures some 2.4 km to the southwest of the site.

5.2. Built environment

Significant historical structures are uncommon in this area, although Fransen (2004) reports a number of important heritage structures around Langebaan Lagoon, largely within the West Coast National Park. However, he also lists the house at Was(ch)klip which he estimates to be from about 1860 and to which he assigns a ‘minor monument’ significance rating. Orton (2011) reported a suite of old buildings on the farm Uyekraal (Figure 11) and which lie just across the R27, some 3.2 km southwest of the study area. Three of the structures on this farm, one of them in partial ruin, were suggested to be of Grade IIIB significance. From historical aerial photography Orton and Avery (2016) reported the existence of at least one structure likely to be older than 60 years in each of the Langeberg 187 and Langeberg 188 farm complexes located 2.4 km south- southeast and 0.4 km northeast of the study area respectively. These buildings have yet to be physically examined.

6. FINDINGS OF THE HERITAGE STUDY

This section describes the heritage resources recorded in the study area during the course of the project. The locations of the various finds are mapped in Figure 6.

6.1. Archaeology

No archaeological material of any sort was seen during the site inspection. However, this does not preclude the presence of artefacts and/or bones beneath the surface. This material would likely relate to the MSA, or possibly the ESA. Given the findings of the recent sampling from the existing

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 9 borrow pit (Orton 2018) and the initial subsurface observations from the palaeontologist (G. Avery, pers. comm. 2018), it is most likely that such buried materials would be of low density and associated with the upper surface of the calcrete.

Figure 7: Aerial view of the study area (purple shaded polygon) showing the walk paths created during the survey (yellow lines) and the positions of archaeological material (white symbols).

6.2. Palaeontology

The SAHRIS Palaeosensitivity map indicates the site to lie in an area of very high palaeontological sensitivity (Figure 8). Immediately underlying the loose surface sands is calcrete of the Langebaan Formation which is considered to be of very high sensitivity. The Langebaan Formation will be mined and a palaeontological study was thus required.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 10 West Coast Fossil Park

Figure 8: Extract from the SAHRIS Palaeosensitivity map showing the study area (yellow polygon) to be of very high palaeontological sensitivity (red shading). The low sensitivity areas are Quaternary cover sands while the high sensitivity areas are Langebaan Formation calcrete which extends beneath the Quaternary sand.

Avery (2018) notes that the hard bedrock of the area is Cape Granite Suite. The granite is not fossiliferous. However, overlying the granite are Sandveld Group sediments that are well-known for their fossil content. Especially relevant is the Langebaan Formation whose calcrete would be mined. Fossiliferous sediments beneath the Langebaan Formation would not be reached during mining and are of no further relevance here.

At the surface are pale grey/orange sediments attributed to the Springfontyn Formation. Although not palaeontologically sensitive in this area (hence the low sensitivity mapped in Figure 12), these sediments did produce Pleistocene-aged archaeological material about 1.2 km to the northwest at Anyskop in the WCFP. These sediments are thin in the study area and are not sensitive.

Underlying the Springfontyn Formation and occasionally protruding at the surface is the Langebaan Formation calcrete. This calcrete has, in other areas, yielded many important fossil sites. These include the nearby Langebaanweg (in the WCFP) and Besaansklip further to the west, which had dense accumulations. Many of the industrial developments in the area produced fossils when their foundations were excavated into Langebaan Formation deposits. The distribution and density of fossils can vary greatly with the majority of finds being low density scatters or isolated items. Undoubtedly the most common fossils and probably the least important are snails that occur within the Langebaan Formation calcrete. Isolated bones are found in places, while in others ancient hyena lairs that are rich in fossilised animal bones have been uncovered. These latter can provide extensive scientific data on palaeoenvironments and the animals that lived in the past. An example of the latter was uncovered at Besaansklip. Descriptions of many important fossil occurrences are contained in Avery’s (2018) palaeontological study in Appendix 2.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 11 Avery’s (2018) field study revealed a number of fossils in one of the test pits on site (Figure 9). They were the bones of tortoises and mammals. There is thus clearly a good chance of finding further fossils once excavation of the Borrow Pit commences.

Figure 9: Fossils found by Avery (2018). Source: Avery (2018: fig. 8).

6.3. Other aspects of heritage

Although buildings greater than 60 years of age are present in the general area, including on the farm (Figure 10), none will be affected in any way, either physically (direct impacts) or contextually (indirect impacts). Built heritage is thus not deemed to require any further consideration.

Figure 10: Historical building built of calcrete on the farm. It is likely 19th century, while the shed in the background has been raised using decorative breeze blocks which date the early-mid-20th century. Source: Orton (2017: fig. 14).

There are no known graves in the study area and the locations of unmarked graves can never be predicted. As such, graves are not assessed further.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 12 The cultural landscape is largely an agricultural one comprised of ploughed lands, gum tree lines and farmsteads, but there is an increasingly dominant modern industrial layer being added to the landscape to the west of the R27. Figure 11 shows that little has changed in the vicinity of the study area since the earliest aerial photography was taken in 1938, although a fence line that ran through the site is no longer extant. The site was undeveloped in 1938 and has remained that way. During early 2018 construction of a new road was commenced just to the south of the site and the first borrow pit was opened on the farm. Both these activities are resulting in permanent alteration of the cultural landscape. The WCFP, located just to the north of the site, is an old mining area dating back to the 1960s and which is now an internationally significant palaeontological heritage site. Although Winter and Oberholzer (2013) regarded the WCFP as a Grade II palaeontological landscape (it was a Provincial Heritage Site (PHS) at the time), it was subsequently declared a National Heritage Site (NHS) on 28 November 2014 for its outstanding scientific value. As the most important palaeontological site in the vicinity, the WCFP is a critical part of the local palaeontological landscape. The proposed activity will have no lasting effect on the cultural landscape and will not be visible from the tourist areas of the WCFP. Given the small scale of the operation, the distance to the new WCFP visitor centre (2.7 km), and the high ground between the visitor centre and the proposed borrow pit, dust and noise are unlikely to result in significant impacts to the WCFP as a heritage resource. The only area that the borrow pit would be visible from is the high ground in the extreme south of the Park, especially in the vicinity of the Anyskop site. Although the R27 (in parts) and R45 may be considered scenic routes, the proposed activity will be in keeping with the current activities in the area that have already degraded the aesthetic value of the landscape (see Figure 5). The site is also partially screened from the R27 by the Anyskop farm complex with its many tall gum trees.

Figure 11: Historical aerial photograph from 1938 (left; Job 126, strip 020, photograph 08516) and a modern view (right; Google Earth) of the study area. The only changes visible are the loss of a path/track leading through the site (purple polygon) from the farm complex and the presence of test pits today. The yellow line delimits the south-eastern edge of the West Coast Fossil Park property.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 13 6.4. Summary of heritage indicators

No archaeological material was observed, the chances of any significant archaeology occurring on the site are very slim. Buried resources are most likely to comprise of only isolated artefacts.

Palaeontological resources may occur beneath the surface anywhere in the study area. Their locations cannot be predicted and neither can their density. Given recent finds in the nearby roadworks, it seems fair to assume that fossils might be uncovered in this borrow pit as well.

No graves are known from the area and built environment heritage resources will not be impacted. Neither of these aspects are considered further.

There are two aspects to the cultural landscape. The first is the rural/agricultural landscape which has, in recent years, had an industrial ‘layer’ added to it. Given the further degradation resulting from mining and roadworks, this cultural landscape is not considered significant. The second aspect is the subsurface palaeontological landscape which will vary strongly from place to place. This variability cannot be predicted and thus the entire area is considered to be a sensitive landscape until proven otherwise.

6.5. Statement of significance and provisional grading

Section 38(3)(b) of the NHRA requires an assessment of the significance of all heritage resources. In terms of Section 2(vi), ‘‘cultural significance’’ means aesthetic, architectural, historical, scientific, social, spiritual, linguistic or technological value or significance.

No archaeological resources were seen. Any buried archaeology in the form of isolated artefacts would be graded IIIC or NCW.

The palaeontological resources of the region (including the entire WCFP as a single site) are deemed to have high cultural significance for their scientific value. Although one cannot predict what might be found in the study area, it is clear that the possibility exists to find anything with cultural significance ranging from very low to very high. Potential buried palaeontological resources that might be graded anywhere between Grade IIIC and Grade II, although a higher grade (II or IIIA) is far less likely than a lower one (IIIB or IIIC).

The agricultural/rural cultural landscape is considered to have low significance for its aesthetic and historical values because of the great degree of transformation that it has undergone in recent years. The largely subsurface palaeontological landscape, however, is considered to have high cultural significance for its scientific value. The regional palaeontological cultural landscape is considered to be worthy of at least Grade IIIA (although individual exposures such as Langebaanweg are clearly worthy of higher grades).

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 14 7. ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

7.1. Impacts to archaeological resources

Impacts to archaeological material are most likely to occur during the ‘construction’ phase of the mine when the topsoil is removed. Impacts would be direct and negative because archaeological material, if present, would be physically damaged or destroyed. As a result of the low consequence the significance would be low before mitigation. Mitigation of such material is not feasible because of the likely low density and difficulty of finding it underground. The significance after mitigation thus remains low. There are no fatal flaws in terms of archaeology. Cumulative impacts are difficult to rate because it is completely unknown what impacts would occur and similar activities are sporadic and widely scattered. It is possible, however, that minor cumulative impacts could occur but these would also be of low significance. The impacts are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Archaeological Resources: summary of impact assessment.

Potential impacts on archaeological resources: Nature of impact: Negative and direct Extent of impact: Site specific Consequence of impact: Low Duration of impact: Permanent Probability of occurrence: Possible Confidence: Sure Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Irreversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources: Irreplaceable Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Low Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low

7.1.1. Mitigation

No feasible mitigation measures can be suggested because of the great difficulty in locating and sampling ephemeral materials that lie beneath the cover sands.

7.1.2. Management

Mine staff should be made aware of the potential for uncovering stone artefacts during mining and told what to do in the event that something is found. Training to this effect could be carried out by the palaeontologist (see palaeontological management below). A protocol for reporting artefacts should be included in the Environmental Management Program (EMPr) for the mine.

7.2. Impacts to palaeontological resources

Impacts to palaeontological material are most likely to occur during the operational phase of the mine when calcrete is removed, although some fossils may also be located high enough to be impacted during the clearing of topsoil. Impacts would be direct and negative because palaeontological material would be physically damaged or destroyed. As a result of the medium consequence and permanent duration the significance would be medium before mitigation should

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 15 fossils of only very local importance be found but potentially high before mitigation should fossils that are important at the regional level be found. With mitigation the significance would reduce to low because it is still likely that some fossils will be lost during mining. A positive aspect is that fossils not otherwise accessible to science may be revealed during the operational phase. There are no fatal flaws in terms of palaeontology. Cumulative impacts are difficult to rate because it is completely unknown what impacts would occur and similar activities are sporadic and widely scattered. It is possible, however, that cumulative impacts would be positive and of low-medium significance because any new fossils brought to light would contribute to the reginal understanding of the deep past. The impacts are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2: Palaeontological Resources: summary of impact assessment.

Potential impacts on palaeontological resources: Nature of impact: Negative and direct Extent of impact: Site specific to regional Consequence of impact: Medium Duration of impact: Permanent Probability of occurrence: Definite Confidence: Sure Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Irreversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources: Irreplaceable Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium to high Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low

7.2.1. Mitigation

Although the density of fossils is likely to be low, this cannot be guaranteed based on present knowledge. It is therefore critical that palaeontological monitoring takes place at intervals to be determined between the developer and the appointed palaeontologist. Inspections should take place at times when the most information stands to be gained and while the mine is active. These might, for example, be bi-weekly in order to establish a baseline for the area and then perhaps less regularly as mining progresses. Visible fossils may be recorded and collected as appropriate.

If many fossils turn out to be present then it may be necessary to have far more regular monitoring and, in the event that a dense accumulation is found, it might be necessary to conduct rescue excavations to create a detailed record and collection of the occurrence. This could occur in one part of the mine while mining continues elsewhere on site.

It is suggested by Avery (2018) that the appointed monitoring palaeontologist apply for a workplan approval prior to the start of mining so that there would be no delays in the event that some sort of collection is required on site. As such it would be necessary to appoint a palaeontologist some two months before the commencement of mining.

7.2.2. Management

Although professional palaeontological monitoring is recommended, it is neither feasible nor warranted to have this on a full time basis. As such, it will be important that the mine staff be made aware of the potential for uncovering fossils and that they know what to do in the event that something is found. A brief training meeting should be arranged at the start of the project in

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 16 which a palaeontologist explains what to look out for and provides images to assist with orientation. A protocol for reporting fossils should be included in the Environmental Management Program (EMPr) for the mine.

7.3. Impacts to the cultural landscape

Impacts to the cultural landscape would occur throughout the lifetime of the project. Impacts would be indirect (contextual) and negative because the landscape would be visually disturbed. Although the site is openly visible to northbound travellers on the R27, this road is not particularly scenic in this area due to ongoing development. The site is screened from the WCFP and the subsurface palaeontological landscape cannot easily be evaluated. As such, the consequence of this impact is deemed to be very low. The site-specific extent and medium term duration of the impact mean that the overall significance rating is low before mitigation. After mitigation the rating would reduce to very low. There are no fatal flaws in terms of landscape impacts, especially given the already approved road and borrow pit that are currently under construction and being actively mined respectively. Cumulative impacts to the landscape are of relatively little significance in this instance because there will be very little physical alteration of the broader landscape compared to what has already happened: the area to the west is already highly degraded through industrial development, the huge berm surrounding the WCFP has created a significant unnatural aspect to the local landscape and an existing borrow pit and road project have resulted in visual degradation of the immediate context of the site. The impacts are summarised in Table 3.

Table 3: Cultural Landscape: summary of impact assessment.

Potential impacts on the cultural landscape:

Nature of impact: Negative and indirect Extent of impact: Site specific Consequence of impact: Low Duration of impact: Medium term Probability of occurrence: Definite Confidence: Certain Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Reversible Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources: Replaceable Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Low Significance rating of impact after mitigation Very low

7.3.1. Mitigation

The only mitigation measure that can be suggested is to ensure that dust is retarded during operation so as to reduce the visibility of the mine in the landscape. This is especially significant in light of the fact that the prevailing southerly winds would blow dust directly towards the WCFP, a National Heritage Site.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 17 8. EVALUATION OF IMPACTS RELATIVE TO SUSTAINABLE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS

Section 38(3)(d) requires an evaluation of the impacts on heritage resources relative to the sustainable social and economic benefits to be derived from the development. The project will not create much work directly but the region is an economic hub that is experiencing much development. It has been stated that the aim of the project is to supply the road construction and maintenance industry. At this point there are no known heritage resources that are more significant than the economic development needs of the region, but the potential for important buried fossils to be discovered is acknowledged.

9. CONSULTATION WITH HERITAGE CONSERVATION BODIES

In fulfilment of the requirement to consult with the local municipality and registered heritage conservation bodies, the draft HIA was submitted to both the Saldanha Bay Municipality and the WCFP for comment on 22 May 20181.

To be completed.

10. CONCLUSIONS

This assessment has focussed on archaeology and palaeontology as requested by HWC, although other aspects of heritage were also noted to be relevant to the broader area. The study revealed no archaeological material, but the very small possibility of locating buried materials was noted. No fossils were seen in the study area, but there is the potential for important fossils to be uncovered during mining. Occasional mineralised bones have already been noted in the existing mine to the southeast and also in the roadworks to the southwest but higher density finds can be very localised and cannot be predicted. Regular monitoring will be key to understanding the fossil potential, especially during the early stages of mining. The cultural landscape (including the palaeontological landscape) is also considered a heritage resource but impacts are expected to be insignificant.

11. RECOMMENDATIONS

Because the impacts to heritage resources are manageable and effective mitigation is readily accomplishable, it is recommended that the proposed mine be allowed to proceed but subject to the following conditions which should be included in the authorisation if the mining permit is granted:

 A professional palaeontologist should be appointed to inspect the mine pit at appropriate intervals. A workplan application should be submitted for approval prior to

1 Please see original email submitted electronically with this report.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 18 commencement of mining in order to streamline any mitigatory actions that may become necessary;  A brief training workshop with mine staff should be held at the start of mining to enable workers to better identify and report any stone artefacts and fossils they see; and  If any archaeological material, fossils or human burials are uncovered during the course of development then work in the immediate area should be halted. The find would need to be reported to the heritage authorities and may require inspection by an archaeologist or palaeontologist as relevant. Such heritage is the property of the state and may require excavation and curation in an approved institution.

12. REFERENCES

Avery, G. 2018. Palaeontological assessment: proposed sand and calcrete Borrow Pit (BP#4: DMR WC30/5/1/3/2/ 10168MP), Farm Anyskop, Rem. Farm Langeberg 188, Vredenburg, Western (1:50 000 3218 CA and CC ). Unpublished report prepared for ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd. : Graham Avery.

Avery, G., Halkett, D., Orton, J., Steele, T. & Klein, R. 2008. The Ysterfontein 1 Middle Stone Age Rockshelter and the evolution of coastal foraging. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series 10: 66-89.

Bateman, P. 1946. Archaeological notes on the Saldanha Bay district. South African Archaeological Bulletin 1: 41-45.

Berger, L.R. & Parkington, J.E. 1995. A new hominid-bearing Pleistocene locality at Hoedjiespunt, South Africa. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 98: 601-609.

Churchill, S.E., Berger, L.R. and Parkington, J.E. 2000. A Middle Pleistocene human tibia from Hoedjiespunt, Western Cape, South Africa. South African Journal of Science 96:367-368.

Conard, N.J. 2001. Stone Age Research at the Anyskop Blowout, Langebaanweg (Western Cape Province, R. S. A.) Report on the 2001 Field Season. Unpublished report.

Conard, N.J. 2002. Stone Age Research at the Anyskop Blowout, Langebaanweg (Western Cape Province, R. S. A.) Report on the 2002 Field Season. Unpublished report.

Conard, N.J., 2003. Handaxes on the landscape and the reconstruction of Paleolithic settlement patterns. In: Burdukiewicz, J.M., Fiedler, L., Heinrich, W.-D., Justus, A., Brühl, E. (Eds) Erkenntnisjäger: Kultur und Umwelt des frühen Menschen. Festschrift für Dietrich Mania, vol. 57: 123-144. Halle: Veröffentlichungen des Landesamt für Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt.

Dewar, G. 2010. Late Holocene burial cluster at Diaz Street Midden, Saldanha Bay, Western Cape, South Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin 65: 26-34.

Dietl, H., Kandel, A.W. & Conard, N.J. 2005. Middle Stone Age settlement and land use at the open-air sites of Geelbek and Anyskop, South Africa. Journal of African Archaeology 3: 233- 244.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 19

Fauvelle-Aymar, F.-X., Sadr, K., Bon, F. & Gronenborn, D. 2006. The visibility and invisibility of herders’ kraals in southern Africa, with reference to a possible early contact period Khoekhoe kraal at KFS5, Western Cape. Journal of African Archaeology 4:253-271.

Fransen, H. 2004. The old buildings of the Cape. Johannnesburg & Cape Town: Jonathan Ball Publishers.

Hart, T. 2001. Phase 2 mitigatory archaeological excavations at Leentjiesklip 3 Club Mykonos, Langebaan. Unpublished report prepared for Club Mykonos, Langebaan. University of Cape Town, Archaeology Contracts Office.

Hart, T. 2003. Heritage impact assessment of a portion of the farm Pienaars Poort owned by National Port Authority (NPA), Saldanha Bay. Unpublished report prepared for Philip Rosenthal, Environmental Engineer. Archaeology Contracts Office, University of Cape Town.

Hart, T.J. G and Gribble J. 1998. Phase 2 archaeological sampling of Late Stone Age middens, Leentjiesklip 2, Langebaan. Unpublished report prepared for Langebaan Waterfront Pty Ltd. ACO. UCT.

Hart, T.J.G. & Jerardino, A.M. 1998. Phase 2 archaeological sampling of Late Stone Age archaeological sites at Paradise Beach, Club Mykonos. Unpublished report prepared for CML Developers. ACO. UCT.

Hart, T. & Pether, J. 2008. Phase 2 expansion of the Sishen - Saldanha Iron Ore Export Corridor, Saldanha Bay, Western Cape: heritage impact assessment (part 1), palaeontological impact assessment (part 2). Unpublished report prepared for Transnet. University of Cape Town: Archaeology Contracts Office.

Heritage Western Cape. 2016. Grading: purpose and management implications. Document produced by Heritage Western Cape. 16 March 2016.

Kandel, A.W. & Conard, N.J. 2012. Settlement patterns during the Earlier and Middle Stone Age around Langebaan Lagoon, Western Cape (South Africa). Quaternary International 270: 15- 29.

Kaplan, J. 1994. Saldanha Steel Project Phase 2 Environmental Impact Assessment – Archaeological Study. Report prepared for CSIR Environmental Services. : Agency for Cultural Resource Management.

Kaplan, J. 1996. Report on archaeological surface collection and test excavation Saldanha Steel Mini Mill. Report prepared for Saldanha Steel (Pty) Ltd. Riebeek West: Agency for Cultural Resource Management.

Kaplan, J. 2007. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development Gavin’s Farm Farm 1195, 187/4, 1891/1 and 188, Saldanha. Unpublished report prepared for CK Rumboll and Partners. Riebeek West: Agency for Cultural Resource Management.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 20 Kruger, N. 2016. Vortum Energy (Pty) Ltd: proposed combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power plant on a portion the remainder of the farm Langeberg 188 and associated infrastructure across a number of farm portions in the Saldanha Bay Local Municipality, West Coast District Municipality, Western Cape Province. Archaeological Impact Assessment. Unpublished report prepared for Vortum Energy (Pty) Ltd. Pretoria: Exigo 3.

Kyriacou, K., Parkington, J.E., Will, M., Kandel, A.W. & Conard, N.J. 2015. Middle and Later Stone Age shellfish exploitation strategies and coastal foraging at Hoedjiespunt and Lynch Point, Saldanha Bay, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 57: 197–206.

Morris, A.G. 1992. A master catalogue: Holocene human skeletons from South Africa. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.

Orton, J. 2007. Archaeological and palaeontological assessment of two portions of a road alignment near Langebaan and Saldanha Bay, Vredenburg and Hopefield Magisterial Districts. Unpublished report prepared for The Environmental Partnership. University of Cape Town: Archaeology Contracts Office.

Orton, J. 2009. Rescue excavation at Diaz Street Midden, Saldanha Bay, South Africa. Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 44: 107-120.

Orton, J. 2011. Heritage impact assessment for the proposed Uyekraal Wind Energy Facility, Hopefield Magisterial District, Western Cape. Unpublished report prepared for Savannah Environmental. University of Cape Town, Archaeology Contracts Office.

Orton, J. 2012. Heritage impact assessment for the proposed West Coast District Municipality desalination plant, Vredenburg Magisterial District, Western Cape. Unpublished report prepared for CSIR. St James: ACO Associates cc.

Orton, J. 2017. Heritage Impact Assessment for a proposed sand and calcrete mine on Langeberg 188/Rem, Vredenburg Magisterial District, Western Cape. Unpublished report prepared for Amathemba Environmental Management Consulting CC. Lakeside: ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd.

Orton, J. 2018. Workplan Report: Archaeological mitigation for a borrow pit on farm Langeberg 188/Rem, Vredenburg Magisterial District, Western Cape. Unpublished report prepared for Tip Trans Logistix (Pty) Ltd. Lakeside: ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd.

Orton, J. & Avery, G. 2016. Heritage Impact Assessment for proposed power lines and substations near Saldanha Bay, Hopefield and Vredenburg Magisterial Districts, Western Cape. Unpublished report prepared for Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd. Muizenberg: ASHA Consulting.

Roberts, D.L., Matthews, T., Herries, A.I.R., Boulter, C., Scott, L., Dondo, C., Mtembi, P., Browning, C., Smith, R.M.H., Haarhoff, P., Bateman, M.D., 2011. Regional and global context of the Late Cenozoic Langebaanweg (LBW) palaeontological site: West Coast of South Africa. Earth Science Reviews 106: 191214.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 21 Sadr, K., Smith, A., Plug, I., Orton, J. & Mutti, B. 2003. Herders and foragers on Kasteelberg: interim report on excavations 1999-2002. South African Archaeological Bulletin 58: 27 – 32.

Smith, A.B. 2006. Excavations at Kasteelberg and the origins of the Khoekhoen in the Western Cape, South Africa. Oxford: BAR International Series 1537.

Smith, A.B. 2011. Archaeological report: proposed new warehouse shed for the Exarro Namakwa Sands Smelter, on Portion 3 Yzervarkensrug 129 Saldanha Bay. Unpublished report prepared for SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd.

Smith, A.B., Sadr, K., Gribble, J. & Yates, R. 1991. Excavations in the South-Western Cape, South Africa, and the archaeological identity of prehistoric hunter-gatherers within the last 2000 years. South African Archaeological Bulletin 46: 71-91.

Stynder, D., Moggi-Cecchi, J., Berger, L.R. & Parkington, J.E. 2001. Human mandibular incisors from the Late Middle Pleistocene locality of Hoedjiespunt 1, South Africa. Journal of Human Evolution 41: 369-383.

Volman, T.P. 1978. Early Archeological Evidence for Shellfish Collecting. Science 201: 911-913.

Will, M., Parkington, J.E. Kandel, A.W. & Conard, N.J. 2013. Coastal adaptations and the Middle Stone Age lithic assemblages from Hoedjiespunt 1 in the Western Cape, South Africa. Journal of human Evolution 64: 518-537.

Winter, S. & Oberholzer, B. 2013. Heritage and Scenic Resources: Inventory and Policy Framework for the Western Cape. Report prepared for the Provincial Government of the Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. Sarah Winter Heritage Planner, and Bernard Oberholzer Landscape Architect / Environmental Planner, in association with Setplan.

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 22 APPENDIX 1 – Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae

Jayson David John Orton

ARCHAEOLOGIST AND HERITAGE CONSULTANT

Contact Details and personal information:

Address: 40 Brassie Street, Lakeside, 7945 Telephone: (021) 789 0327 Cell Phone: 083 272 3225 Email: [email protected]

Birth date and place: 22 June 1976, Cape Town, South Africa Citizenship: South African ID no: 760622 522 4085 Driver’s License: Code 08 Marital Status: Married to Carol Orton Languages spoken: English and

Education:

SA College High School Matric 1994 University of Cape Town B.A. (Archaeology, Environmental & Geographical Science) 1997 University of Cape Town B.A. (Honours) (Archaeology)* 1998 University of Cape Town M.A. (Archaeology) 2004 University of Oxford D.Phil. (Archaeology) 2013

*Frank Schweitzer memorial book prize for an outstanding student and the degree in the First Class.

Employment History:

Spatial Archaeology Research Unit, UCT Research assistant Jan 1996 – Dec 1998 Department of Archaeology, UCT Field archaeologist Jan 1998 – Dec 1998 UCT Archaeology Contracts Office Field archaeologist Jan 1999 – May 2004 UCT Archaeology Contracts Office Heritage & archaeological consultant Jun 2004 – May 2012 School of Archaeology, University of Oxford Undergraduate Tutor Oct 2008 – Dec 2008 Associate, Heritage & archaeological ACO Associates cc Jan 2011 – Dec 2013 consultant Director, Heritage & archaeological ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd Jan 2014 – consultant

Memberships and affiliations:

South African Archaeological Society Council member 2004 – Assoc. Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA) member 2006 – ASAPA Cultural Resources Management Section member 2007 – UCT Department of Archaeology Research Associate 2013 – Heritage Western Cape APM Committee member 2013 – UNISA Department of Archaeology and Anthropology Research Fellow 2014 – Fish Hoek Valley Historical Association 2014 –

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 23 Professional Accreditation:

Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA) membership number: 233 CRM Section member with the following accreditation:  Principal Investigator: Coastal shell middens (awarded 2007) Stone Age archaeology (awarded 2007) Grave relocation (awarded 2014)  Field Director: Rock art (awarded 2007) Colonial period archaeology (awarded 2007)

Association of Professional Heritage Practitioners (APHP)  Accredited Professional Heritage Practitioner

Fieldwork and project experience:

Extensive fieldwork as both Field Director and Principle Investigator throughout the Western and Northern Cape, and also in the western parts of the Free State and Eastern Cape as follows:

Phase 1 surveys and impact assessments:  Project types o Notification of Intent to Develop applications (for Heritage Western Cape) o Heritage Impact Assessments (largely in the Environmental Impact Assessment or Basic Assessment context under NEMA and Section 38(8) of the NHRA, but also self-standing assessments under Section 38(1) of the NHRA) o Archaeological specialist studies o Phase 1 test excavations in historical and prehistoric sites o Archaeological research projects  Development types o Mining and borrow pits o Roads (new and upgrades) o Residential, commercial and industrial development o Dams and pipe lines o Power lines and substations o Renewable energy facilities (wind energy, solar energy and hydro-electric facilities)

Phase 2 mitigation and research excavations:  ESA open sites o Duinefontein, Gouda  MSA rock shelters o Fish Hoek, , Cederberg, Namaqualand  MSA open sites o , Bushmanland, Namaqualand  LSA rock shelters o Cederberg, Namaqualand, Bushmanland  LSA open sites (inland) o Swartland, Franschhoek, Namaqualand, Bushmanland  LSA coastal shell middens o Melkbosstrand, Yzerfontein, Saldanha Bay, Paternoster, , Infanta, Knysna, Namaqualand  LSA burials o Melkbosstrand, Saldanha Bay, Namaqualand, Knysna  Historical sites o Franschhoek (farmstead and well), Waterfront (fort, dump and well), Noordhoek (cottage), variety of small excavations in central Cape Town and surrounding suburbs  Historic burial grounds o Green Point (Prestwich Street), V&A Waterfront (Marina Residential), Paarl

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 24 APPENDIX 2 – Palaeontological specialist study

ASHA Consulting (Pty) Ltd | Reg. no.: 2013/220482/07 25