Feature Challenges of Biodiversity Importance, Threats, Status and Conservation Challenges of Biodiversity in Northern Cape
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Physical Impact of Grazing by Sheep on the Dynamics of Nama Karoo Subshrub/Grass Vegetation in South Africa
South African Journal of Animal Science 2011, 41 (no. 3) Physical impact of sheep grazing on arid Karoo subshrub/grass rangeland, South Africa G.vanN. du Toit1, H.A. Snyman# & P.J. Malan Animal, Wildlife and Grassland Sciences, University of the Free State, P.O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa Copyright resides with the authors in terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 South African Licence. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/za Condition of use: The user may copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the work, but must recognise the authors and the South African Journal of Animal Science. ________________________________________________________________________________ Abstract Grazing levels and rotational schemes need to be tailored to each individual farm or pasture, and more studies are needed on the resilience of rangelands and on separating the effects of grazing and climate. The direct short-term impact of three rates of stocking (4, 8 and 16 Small Stock Units-SSU/ha) was quantified in terms of composition and cover of arid Nama Karoo vegetation (subshrub/grass). Mature Merino wethers grazed in one hectare plots during May in 1995 and 1996 (the plots were not subjected to grazing at any other time). The basal cover of the Karoo bushes (shrubs) showed a decrease at the highest stocking rate only, with the species Phymaspermum parvifolium the most sensitive to intensive grazing. An increase in stocking rate caused a significant decrease in both canopy cover and canopy-spread cover. The canopy cover of palatable Karoo bushes such as Felicia muricata, Salsola calluna and Walafrida geniculata decreased most. -
Tulbagh Renosterveld Project Report
BP TULBAGH RENOSTERVELD PROJECT Introduction The Cape Floristic Region (CFR) is the smallest and richest floral kingdom of the world. In an area of approximately 90 000km² there are over 9 000 plant species found (Goldblatt & Manning 2000). The CFR is recognized as one of the 33 global biodiversity hotspots (Myers, 1990) and has recently received World Heritage Status. In 2002 the Cape Action Plan for the Environment (CAPE) programme identified the lowlands of the CFR as 100% irreplaceable, meaning that to achieve conservation targets all lowland fragments would have to be conserved and no further loss of habitat should be allowed. Renosterveld , an asteraceous shrubland that predominantly occurs in the lowland areas of the CFR, is the most threatened vegetation type in South Africa . Only five percent of this highly fragmented vegetation type still remains (Von Hase et al 2003). Most of these Renosterveld fragments occur on privately owned land making it the least represented vegetation type in the South African Protected Areas network. More importantly, because of the fragmented nature of Renosterveld it has a high proportion of plants that are threatened with extinction. The Custodians of Rare and Endangered Wildflowers (CREW) project, which works with civil society groups in the CFR to update information on threatened plants, has identified the Tulbagh valley as a high priority for conservation action. This is due to the relatively large amount of Renosterveld that remains in the valley and the high amount of plant endemism. The CAPE program has also identified areas in need of fine scale plans and the Tulbagh area falls within one of these: The Upper Breede River planning domain. -
Eskom Transmission Proposed Gamma Sub-Station
ESKOM TRANSMISSION PROPOSED GAMMA SUB-STATION EIA: 12/12/20/873 VEGETATION ASSESSMENT Report prepared for: Report prepared by: Eskom Transmission Centre for African Conservation Ecology PO Box 1091 Department of Botany Johannesburg P O Box 77000 0001 Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University 6031 and Port Elizabeth ACER (Africa) Environmental Management Consultants P O Box 503 Mtunzini 3867 June 2007 ESKOM TRANSMISSION PROPOSED GAMMA SUB-STATION SUMMARY The vegetation of the proposed Gamma Sub-station site on Uitvlugfontein falls in the Nama-Karoo Biome, more specifically in the Upper Karoo Bioregion. The Acocks (1988) Veld Type is Central Upper Karoo (Acocks Veld Type 27). White (1983) mapped the vegetation as Highveld/Karoo Transition in the Kalahari-Highveld Phytochorion while Low and Rebelo (1996) list the Vegetation Type to be Upper Nama- Karoo (Vegetation Type 50). The most recent vegetation map (Mucina et al., 2005) classifies it as Eastern Upper Karoo. The Eastern Upper Karoo Vegetation Type is Hardly Protected but it has an ecosystem status of Least Threatened (Mucina et al., 2005). The National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (Rouget et al., 2004) classified the area proposed for the Sub-station as being poor in threatened plant species and moderate in endemics. The site has the lowest level of irreplaceability for vegetation (0.2 = lowest level of conservation importance) and it ranks in the lowest category for vulnerability (Rouget et al., 2004). Overall the Vegetation Type ranks low for conservation value (Rouget et al., 2004) and the use of less than 0.004% of the Eastern Upper Karoo for a Sub-station will not jeopardize any conservation plans for the Vegetation Type. -
Chapter 7 Plant Diversity in the Hantam
Chapter 7 Plant diversity in the Hantam-Tanqua-Roggeveld, Succulent Karoo, South Africa: Diversity parameters Abstract Forty Whittaker plots were surveyed to gather plant diversity data in the Hantam-Tanqua- Roggeveld subregion of the Succulent Karoo. Species richness, evenness, Shannon’s index and Simpson’s index of diversity were calculated. Species richness ranged from nine to 100 species per 1000 m² (0.1 ha) with species richness for the Mountain Renosterveld being significantly higher than for the Winter Rainfall Karoo, which in turn was significantly higher than for the Tanqua Karoo. Evenness, Shannon and Simpson indices were found not to differ significantly between the Mountain Renosterveld and Winter Rainfall Karoo, however, these values were significantly higher than for the Tanqua Karoo. Species richness for all plot sizes <0.1 ha were significantly lower for the Tanqua Karoo than for the other two vegetation groups, which did not differ significantly from each other. Only at the 1000 m² scale did species richness differ significantly on the vegetation group level between the Mountain Renosterveld and the Winter Rainfall Karoo. A Principal Co-ordinate Analysis (PCoA) of species richness data at seven plot sizes produced three distinct clusters in the ordination. One cluster represented the sparsely vegetated, extremely arid Tanqua Karoo which has a low species richness, low evenness values and low Shannon and Simpson indices. Another cluster represented the bulk of the Mountain Renosterveld vegetation with a high vegetation cover, high species richness, high evenness values and high Shannon and Simpson indices. The third cluster was formed by the remaining Mountain Renosterveld plots as well as the Winter Rainfall Karoo plots with intermediate values for the diversity parameters. -
Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook 2017
WESTERN CAPE BIODIVERSITY SPATIAL PLAN HANDBOOK Drafted by: CapeNature Scientific Services Land Use Team Jonkershoek, Stellenbosch 2017 Editor: Ruida Pool-Stanvliet Contributing Authors: Alana Duffell-Canham, Genevieve Pence, Rhett Smart i Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook 2017 Citation: Pool-Stanvliet, R., Duffell-Canham, A., Pence, G. & Smart, R. 2017. The Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook. Stellenbosch: CapeNature. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The compilation of the Biodiversity Spatial Plan and Handbook has been a collective effort of the Scientific Services Section of CapeNature. We acknowledge the assistance of Benjamin Walton, Colin Fordham, Jeanne Gouws, Antoinette Veldtman, Martine Jordaan, Andrew Turner, Coral Birss, Alexis Olds, Kevin Shaw and Garth Mortimer. CapeNature’s Conservation Planning Scientist, Genevieve Pence, is thanked for conducting the spatial analyses and compiling the Biodiversity Spatial Plan Map datasets, with assistance from Scientific Service’s GIS Team members: Therese Forsyth, Cher-Lynn Petersen, Riki de Villiers, and Sheila Henning. Invaluable assistance was also provided by Jason Pretorius at the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, and Andrew Skowno and Leslie Powrie at the South African National Biodiversity Institute. Patricia Holmes and Amalia Pugnalin at the City of Cape Town are thanked for advice regarding the inclusion of the BioNet. We are very grateful to the South African National Biodiversity Institute for providing funding support through the GEF5 Programme towards layout and printing costs of the Handbook. We would like to acknowledge the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan Steering Committee, specifically Mervyn Lotter, for granting permission to use the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan Handbook as a blueprint for the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook. -
The Greater Addo National Park, South Africa: Biodiversity Conservation As the Basis for a Healthy Ecosystem and Human Development Opportunities
CHAPTER 39 The Greater Addo National Park, South Africa: Biodiversity Conservation as the Basis for a Healthy Ecosystem and Human Development Opportunities Graham I. H. Kerley, André F. Boshoff, and Michael H. Knight INTRODUCTION The recognition that ecosystem health is strongly linked to human welfare, and that many ecosystems have been heavily degraded under human domination — resulting in reduced capacity to support human populations — is a dominant feature of the environmental debate (e.g., Rapport et al., 1998). This has led to a search for ecosystem management strategies to maintain ecosystem health, ranging from water pollution management to disease control and sustainable resource utilization. To some extent this process has been hampered by the inability to look beyond con- ventional management strategies in order to recognize and develop new opportunities for extracting resources from ecosystems, while maintaining these systems in a healthy and functional state. This deficit is particularly apparent in rangeland ecosystems that traditionally have been used for domestic herbivore production through pastoralism, despite considerable evidence of the threats to ecosystem health that this strategy imposes (e.g., Fleischner, 1994). We present here the background of ecosystem degradation and loss of ecosystem resources due to pastoralism in the Eastern Cape Province (hereafter “Eastern Cape”) in South Africa (Figure 39.1), an area of spectacular biodiver- sity, and assess the consequences of alternate management strategies. We show how an initiative to address these problems, based on the recognition that biodiversity conservation yields tangible human development opportunities that include the full range of ecosystem services, is developing. DESERTIFICATION OF THE THICKET BIOME The Thicket Biome, one of the seven terrestrial biomes in South Africa (Low and Rebelo, 1996), is largely confined to the hot, dry valleys of the Eastern Cape, hence its alternative name of Valley Bushveld (Acocks, 1975). -
Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps
Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps DRAFT May 2009 South African National Biodiversity Institute Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Contents List of tables .............................................................................................................................. vii List of figures............................................................................................................................. vii 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8 2 Criteria for identifying threatened ecosystems............................................................... 10 3 Summary of listed ecosystems ........................................................................................ 12 4 Descriptions and individual maps of threatened ecosystems ...................................... 14 4.1 Explanation of descriptions ........................................................................................................ 14 4.2 Listed threatened ecosystems ................................................................................................... 16 4.2.1 Critically Endangered (CR) ................................................................................................................ 16 1. Atlantis Sand Fynbos (FFd 4) .......................................................................................................................... 16 2. Blesbokspruit Highveld Grassland -
The Cape Floristic Region
Ecosystem Profile THE CAPE FLORISTIC REGION SOUTH AFRICA Final version December 11, 2001 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 THE ECOSYSTEM PROFILE 3 THE CORRIDOR APPROACH TO CONSERVATION 4 BACKGROUND 4 CONSERVATION PLANNING IN THE CAPE FLORISTIC REGION: THE CAPE ACTION PLAN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (CAPE) 5 BIOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE OF THE CFR 7 LEVELS OF BIODIVERSITY AND ENDEMISM 7 LEVELS OF PROTECTION FOR BIODIVERSITY 9 STATUS OF PROTECTED AREAS IN THE CAPE FLORISTIC REGION 10 SYNOPSIS OF THREATS 11 LAND TRANSFORMATION 11 ECOSYSTEM DEGRADATION 12 INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS TO CONSERVATION ACTION 13 LACK OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN CONSERVATION 14 SYNOPSIS OF CURRENT INVESTMENTS 14 MULTILATERAL DONORS 16 NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS 17 POTENTIAL INVESTMENT IN CAPE IMPLEMENTATION AND PROPOSED COMPLEMENTARITY WITH CEPF FUNDING 17 GOVERNMENT 18 NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS 19 CEPF NICHE FOR INVESTMENT IN THE REGION 21 CEPF INVESTMENT STRATEGY AND PROGRAM FOCUS 22 SUPPORT CIVIL SOCIETY INVOLVEMENT IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PROTECTED AREAS AND MANAGEMENT PLANS IN CFR BIODIVERSITY CORRIDORS 24 PROMOTE INNOVATIVE PRIVATE SECTOR AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN CONSERVATION IN LANDSCAPES SURROUNDING CFR BIODIVERSITY CORRIDORS 25 SUPPORT CIVIL SOCIETY EFFORTS TO CREATE AN INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT THAT ENABLES EFFECTIVE CONSERVATION ACTION 26 ESTABLISH A SMALL GRANTS FUND TO BUILD CAPACITY AMONG INSTITUTIONS AND INDIVIDUALS WORKING ON CONSERVATION IN THE CFR 27 SUSTAINABILITY 27 CONCLUSION 28 LIST OF ACRONYMS 29 2 INTRODUCTION The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is designed to better safeguard the world's threatened biodiversity hotspots in developing countries. It is a joint initiative of Conservation International (CI), the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank. -
South Africa Contracting Party
Please provide the following details on the origin of this report. South Africa Contracting Party: National Focal Point Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Full name of the institution: Ms Maria Mbengashe Chief Director: Biodiversity Name and title of contact officer: and Heritage Private Bag X 447 Mailing address: Pretoria Rep of South Africa 09 27 12 3103707 Telephone: 09 27 12 3226287 Fax: [email protected] E-mail: Contact officer for national report (if different) Ms Wilma Lutsch Deputy Director: Biodiversity Name and title of contact officer: Planning Private Bag X447 Mailing address: Pretoria Rep of South Africa 09 27 12 3103694 Telephone: 09 27 12 3226287 Fax: [email protected] E-mail: Submission Signature of officer responsible for submitting national report: Date of submission: Please provide summary information on the process by which this report has been prepared, including information on the types of stakeholders who have been actively involved in its preparation and on material which was used as a basis for the report. A wide range of other stakeholders was consulted by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, including the following: Nine provincial authorities of South Africa dealing with the environment Botanical Society of South Africa Agricultural Research Council (Plant Protection Research Institute) South African Environmental Observatory Network (SAEON) of the National Research Foundation Mountain Club Ukuvuka Campaign Working for Water National Botanical Institute Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Mountain Ecosystems 1. What is the relative priority your country accords to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity in mountain ecosystems? x a) High b) Medium c) Low 2. -
Grassland Ecosystem Guidelines Landscape Interpretation for Planners and Managers Citation: SANBI
Grassland Ecosystem Guidelines Landscape interpretation for planners and managers Citation: SANBI. 2013. Grasslands Ecosystem Guidelines: landscape interpretation for planners and managers. Compiled by Cadman, M., de Villiers, C., Lechmere-Oertel, R. and D. McCulloch. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. 139 pages. ISBN: 978-1-919976-88-4 Production management by: Aimee Ginsburg Design by: Ideaology: Design. Advertising. Digital Pty LTD Printed by: Typo Colour Specialists cc Paper: Printed on environmentally friendly Triple Green Print Silk recycled paper Copyright: © South African National Biodiversity Institute Grasslands Programme. 2013. Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorised without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Photo credits: Grateful thanks go to the many people and organisations whose photographs bring life to the pages of this report. Cover: Steve Germishuizen Inside: Jocelyn Adamson, Bill Bainbridge, De Beers, Cobus Botha, Mark Botha, Angus Burns, John Burrows, Mike Cadman, Peter Chadwick, Elna de Beer, John Dini, Freyni du Toit, Peter Farrington, Albert Froneman, Claire Fulton, Steve Germishuizen, Aimee Ginsburg, Graham Grieve, Lisle Gwynn, Peta Hardy, Kyle Harris, Dominic Henry, Dave Hoare, iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority, Isabel Johnson, Steve -
The BIOTA Biodiversity Observatories in Africa—A Standardized Framework for Large-Scale Environmental Monitoring
Environ Monit Assess DOI 10.1007/s10661-011-1993-y The BIOTA Biodiversity Observatories in Africa—a standardized framework for large-scale environmental monitoring Norbert Jürgens · Ute Schmiedel · Daniela H. Haarmeyer · Jürgen Dengler · Manfred Finckh · Dethardt Goetze · Alexander Gröngröft · Karen Hahn · Annick Koulibaly · Jona Luther-Mosebach · Gerhard Muche · Jens Oldeland · Andreas Petersen · Stefan Porembski · Michael C. Rutherford · Marco Schmidt · Brice Sinsin · Ben J. Strohbach · Adjima Thiombiano · Rüdiger Wittig · Georg Zizka Received: 4 August 2010 / Accepted: 23 February 2011 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V 2011 Abstract The international, interdisciplinary bio- BIOTA Biodiversity Observatories, that meet the diversity research project BIOTA AFRICA ini- following criteria (a) enable long-term monitor- tiated a standardized biodiversity monitoring ing of biodiversity, potential driving factors, and network along climatic gradients across the relevant indicators with adequate spatial and tem- African continent. Due to an identified lack of poral resolution, (b) facilitate comparability of adequate monitoring designs, BIOTA AFRICA data generated within different ecosystems, (c) developed and implemented the standardized allow integration of many disciplines, (d) allow Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10661-011-1993-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. N. Jürgens · U. Schmiedel (B) · D. H. Haarmeyer · A. Koulibaly J. Dengler · M. Finckh · J. Luther-Mosebach · Laboratoire de Production et Amélioration Végétales, G. Muche · J. Oldeland U.F.R. Sciences de la Nature, Université Biodiversity, Evolution and Ecology of Plants, d’Abobo-Adjamé, URES Daloa, 02, Biocentre Klein Flottbek and Botanical Garden, BP 150 Daloa 02, Côte d’Ivoire University of Hamburg, Ohnhorststr. -
LAND USE and ITS IMPACT on the SUCCULENT KAROO. Zuziwe
LAND USE AND ITS IMPACT ON THE SUCCULENT KAROO. Zuziwe Jonas Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of a degree of Masters of Science SUPERVISORS: Prof. Timm HOFFMAN. Dr. Mathieu ROUGET. Botany Department Leslie Hill Institute for Plant Conservation University of Cape Town Rondebosch 7701 February 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................................................................IV ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................VI CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE SUCCULENT KAROO BIOME.................... 1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY.................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 3 PLANT BIODIVERSITY OF THE SUCCULENT KAROO BIOME ....................................................... 4 HISTORY OF LAND USE PRACTICES IN THE SK BIOME .............................................................. 5 LAND USE PRACTICES IN THE SK BIOME.................................................................................. 6 Urban settlement ................................................................................................................6 Mining ................................................................................................................................ 6 Agriculture (cropland and livestock production)..............................................................