DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparison of Extent and Transformation of South Africa's

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by South East Academic Libraries System (SEALS) Research in Action South African Journal of Science 97, May/June 2001 179 remote sensing applications in South Comparison of extent and Africa. This is a hierarchical framework designed to suit South African conditions, transformation of South Africa’s and incorporates known land-cover types that can be identified in a consistent woodland biome from two national and repetitive manner from high- resolution satellite imagery such as Land- databases sat TM and SPOT.The ‘natural’vegetation classes are based on broad, structural M.W. Thompsona*, E.R. Vinka, D.H.K. Fairbanksb,c, A. Ballancea types only, and are not intended to be and C.M. Shackletona,d equivalent to a floristic or ecological vege- tation classification. It is important to understand that a HE RECENT COMPLETION OF THE SOUTH Fairbanks et al.5 combination of both the NLC database’s TAfrican National Land-Cover Database This paper compares the distribution ‘Woodland’ and ‘Thicket, Bushland, and the Vegetation Map of South Africa, and location of woodland and bushveld- Bush-Clump & Tall Fynbos’ land-cover Swaziland and Lesotho, allows for the first type vegetation categories defined within classes were used in the comparison with time a comparison to be made on a national scale between the current and potential the NLC data, and the equivalent the DEAT defined ‘Savanna Biome’. The distribution of ‘natural’ vegetation resources. ‘Savanna Biome’ class defined within the inclusion of the NLC’s ‘Thicket, Bushland This article compares the distribution and DEAT’s ‘VegetationMap’ data. Significant (etc.)’ class was seen as a necessity, since location of woodland-type vegetation catego- boundary discrepancies are reported be- this category also included a significant ries defined within the National Land-Cover tween the two data sets in terms of the component* of the traditional ‘bushveld’ data and the equivalent ‘Savanna-thicket overall woodland/savanna extent. This is regions in northern and eastern South Biomes’ class defined within the Vegetation not (nor was it ever intended to be), a Africa, on the basis of structural appear- Map data. Significant differences were found, measure of inherent mapping accuracies, ance.12 both in terms of the total areal extent, as well as the actual spatial distribution of these two but rather an illustration of boundary Unfortunately, such an approach does data sets. These differences are a measure of delineation distinctions that are a result of not allow a clear separation between true the inherent mapping accuracies of each different raw data sources, mapping thicket (as in the ‘Thicket Biome’), and tall source, but rather an illustration of boundary objectives and final information classes, fynbos communities (as in the ‘Fynbos delineation distinctions that are a result of that must be noted when comparing two Biome’), from the true bushland-type different data sources, mapping objectives essentially similar data sets. vegetation (such as occurs in the ‘Wood- and information classes, that must be noted The results presented are based on a land Biome’), since no separation was when comparing two essentially similar comparison of two specific data sets and made at this sub-class level within the information sets. the characterization of the various vege- original ‘Thicket, Bushland, Bush-Clump tation types contained within them. No & Tall Fynbos’ NLC-defined land-cover Background class. This will have resulted in some un- Large-area land cover maps are needed inference is made, or intended, as to the avoidable overlap between the extent of in many research and management activ- actual validity of these data sets, since, as in the case of the biomes, it is acknowl- NLC-defined Woodland and the ities, concerned with global change1, edged that the Thicket Biome is not uni- DEAT-defined Thicket and Fynbos biodiversity and conservation2,and versally recognized as being separate biomes, especially in the southern and biogeography3. These thematic maps are, 10 Eastern Cape regions. The NLC Forest by design, highly generalized abstrac- from the Savanna Biome. class (equivalent to the DEAT-defined tions of reality, in terms of spatial resolu- ‘Forest Biome’) was excluded from all cal- tion, boundary-line sinuosity, and classifi- Description of primary data culations. Full class definitions for these cation detail. The recent completion of The NLC database is intended to pro- NLC vegetation classes are provided in both the South African National Land- vide national, baseline information on 5 Table 1. Cover Database (NLC)46 and the Depart- land-cover and mappable land-use. The The DEAT’s ‘Vegetation Map’ (and ac- ment of Environment Affairs and Tour- primary objective of the project was to companying booklet) was developed ism’s (DEAT) ‘Vegetation Map of South produce a standardized land-cover data- with the aim of producing a revised vege- Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho’7,8 allows base for all of South Africa, Swaziland and tation map of South Africa, based on vege- for a timely comparison to be made on a Lesotho. The product is designed for tation structure and species composition,8 national scale between the current and 1:250 000 scale mapping applications which provided a broad overview of the potential distribution of ‘natural’ vegeta- (25 ha minimum mapping unit). It was region’s natural plant resources suitable tion resources. This type of exercise was derived (using manual photo-interpreta- for educators and planners.7 The bound- last conducted by Mall and Bossi9 for the tion techniques) from a new series of aries and vegetation types within this Fynbos Biome, with a re-interpretation by 1:250 000 scale geo-rectified ‘SpaceMaps’ (from the CSIR’s Satellite Applications map were delineated manually at work- aEnvironmentek, CSIR, P.O. Box 395, Pretoria, 0001 Centre, 1996), based on seasonally stan- shops by teams of botanists and from a South Africa. dardized, single date Landsat Thematic number of sources, such as geological, bConservation Planning Unit, Department of Zoology and pedological, climatological, remote sens- Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0002 South Mapper (TM) satellite imagery captured Africa. principally during the period 1994–95. cPresently with Percy FitzPatrick Institute, University of Cape Town,Private Bag, Rondebosch, 7701 South Africa. The legend used within the land-cover *9.4% (725 018 ha) of the Fynbos Biome and 40.48% dEnvironmental Science Programme, Rhodes University, database is based on the classification (1 681 753 ha) of the Thicket Biome were classified as Grahamstown, 6140 South Africa. scheme defined within the standard ‘Thicket, Bushland, Bush-Clump & Tall Fynbos’ in the NLC database,5 compared to 43.04% (18 356 631 ha) within the *Author for correspondence. 11 E-mail: [email protected]. framework defined by Thompson for Savanna Biome. 180 South African Journal of Science 97, May/June 2001 Research in Action Table 1. South African National Land-Cover database class definitions. Class name Definition Forest All wooded areas with tree canopy cover greater then 70%, where the canopy is composed of mainly self-supporting, single-stemmed, woody plants >5 m in height. A multi-strata community, with interlocking canopies, composed of canopy, sub-canopy, shrub and herb layers. Composed of mainly indigenous tree species, growing under natural or semi-natural conditions (although it may include some localized areas of self-seeded exotic species). Excludes planted forests (and woodlots). Typically associated with the Forest biome in South Africa. Woodland All wooded areas with tree canopy cover of 9–70%, where the canopy is composed of mainly self-supporting, single-stemmed, woody plants >5 m in height. Essentially a broad open-closed canopy woodland community, typically consisting of a single tree canopy layer and a herb (grass) layer. Composed of mainly indigenous tree species, growing under natural or semi-natural conditions (although it may include some localized areas of self-seeded exotic species). Excludes planted forests (and woodlots). Typically associated with the Savanna biome in South Africa. Thicket, Bushland, Bushclumps and Tall Fynbos Communities typically composed of tall, woody, self-supporting, single and/or multi-stemmed plants (branching at or near the ground), with, in most cases, no clearly definable structure. Total canopy cover >9%, with canopy height of 2–5 m. Essentially indigenous species, growing under natural or semi-natural conditions (although it may include some localized areas of self-seeded exotic species, especially along riparian zones). Typical examples are Valley Bushveld, Mopane bush and many areas traditionally described as ‘bushveld’. Dense bush encroachment areas would be included in this category. Degraded class sub-division Permanent or seasonal, anthropogenic areas of very low vegetation cover (i.e. removal of tree, bush and/or herbaceous cover) compared to the surrounding natural vegetation cover. These classes are sub-divisions of each Level I vegetation classes, i.e. Degraded-Woodland, in order to allow reconstruction of full class-type extent. Typically associated with subsistence level farming and rural population centres, where overgrazing of livestock and/or wood-resource removal has been excessive. Often associated with severe soil erosion. Characterized on satellite imagery by significantly higher overall reflectance levels (i.e. whiter appearance) and lower NDVI values (compared to the surrounding vegetation). ing (e.g. only for ‘Fynbos’ and ‘Thicket’ types that would have potentially containing 25 different vegetation types, biomes), and other relevant cartographic occurred today, were it not for the major which are listed in Table 2. data. anthropogenic transformations such as A comparison of the two data sets The DEAT map differs from both the cultivation, afforestation, urban spread provides an opportunity to assess, at a NLC data and for that matter Acocks’s and dams that have altered the land- national level, the differences in distribu- Veld Types,13 since the vegetation units scape.
Recommended publications
  • Tulbagh Renosterveld Project Report

    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.
  • National Forests Act: List of Protected Tree Species

    National Forests Act: List of Protected Tree Species

    6 No. 37037 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 22 NOVEMBER 2013 GOVERNMENT NOTICES GOEWERMENTSKENNISGEWINGS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHERIES DEPARTEMENT VAN LANDBOU, BOSBOU EN VISSERYE No. 877 22 November 2013 NOTICE OFOF THETHE LISTLIST OFOF PROTECTEDPROTECTED TREE TREE SPECIES SPECIES UNDER UNDER THE THE NATIONAL NATIONAL FORESTS ACT, 19981998 (ACT(ACT NO No. 84 84 OF OF 1998) 1998) By virtue of powers vested in me under Section 15(3) of the National Forests Act, 1998, I, Tina Joemat-Pettersson, Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries hereby publish a list of all protected trees belonging to a particular species under Section 12(1) (d) set out in Schedule below. The effect of this declaration is that in terms of Section 15(1) of the National Forests Act, 1998, no person may cut, disturb, damage or destroy any protected tree or possess, collect, remove, transport, export, purchase, sell, donate or in any other manner acquire or dispose of any protected tree or any forest product derived from a protected tree, except under a licence or exemption granted by the Minister to an applicant and subject to such period and conditions as may be stipulated. Contravention of this declaration is regarded as a first category offence that may result in a person who is found guilty of being sentenced to a fine or imprisonment for a period up to three years, or to both a fine and imprisonment. SCHEDULE A / BYLAE A Botanical Name English Other Common Names National Common Afrikaans (A), Northern SothoTree Names (NS),SouthernSotho (S),Number Tswana (T), Venda (V), Xhosa (X), Zulu (Z) Acacia erioloba Camel thorn Kameeldoring (A) / Mogohlo (NS) / 168 Mogotlho (T) Acacia haematoxylon Grey camel thorn Vaalkameeldoring (A) / Mokholo (T) 169 Adansonia digitata Baobab Kremetart (A) /Seboi (NS)/ Mowana 467 (T) Afzelia quanzensis Pod mahogany Peulmahonie (A) / Mutokota (V) / 207 lnkehli (Z) Balanites subsp.
  • Comparative Wood Anatomy of Afromontane and Bushveld Species from Swaziland, Southern Africa

    Comparative Wood Anatomy of Afromontane and Bushveld Species from Swaziland, Southern Africa

    IAWA Bulletin n.s., Vol. 11 (4), 1990: 319-336 COMPARATIVE WOOD ANATOMY OF AFROMONTANE AND BUSHVELD SPECIES FROM SWAZILAND, SOUTHERN AFRICA by J. A. B. Prior 1 and P. E. Gasson 2 1 Department of Biology, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, London SW7 2BB, U.K. and 2Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3DS, U.K. Summary The habit, specific gravity and wood anat­ of the archaeological research, uses all the omy of 43 Afromontane and 50 Bushveld well preserved, qualitative anatomical charac­ species from Swaziland are compared, using ters apparent in the charred modem samples qualitative features from SEM photographs in an anatomical comparison between the of charred samples. Woods with solitary ves­ two selected assemblages of trees and shrubs sels, scalariform perforation plates and fibres growing in areas of contrasting floristic com­ with distinctly bordered pits are more com­ position. Some of the woods are described in mon in the Afromontane species, whereas Kromhout (1975), others are of little com­ homocellular rays and prismatic crystals of mercial importance and have not previously calcium oxalate are more common in woods been investigated. Few ecological trends in from the Bushveld. wood anatomical features have previously Key words: Swaziland, Afromontane, Bush­ been published for southern Africa. veld, archaeological charcoal, SEM, eco­ The site of Sibebe Hill in northwest Swazi­ logical anatomy. land (26° 15' S, 31° 10' E) (Price Williams 1981), lies at an altitude of 1400 m, amidst a Introduction dramatic series of granite domes in the Afro­ Swaziland, one of the smallest African montane forest belt (White 1978).
  • The Ecology of Large Herbivores Native to the Coastal Lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa

    The Ecology of Large Herbivores Native to the Coastal Lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa

    The ecology of large herbivores native to the coastal lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa by Frans Gustav Theodor Radloff Dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Science (Botany) at Stellenbosh University Promoter: Prof. L. Mucina Co-Promoter: Prof. W. J. Bond December 2008 DECLARATION By submitting this dissertation electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the owner of the copyright thereof (unless to the extent explicitly otherwise stated) and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Date: 24 November 2008 Copyright © 2008 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved ii ABSTRACT The south-western Cape is a unique region of southern Africa with regards to generally low soil nutrient status, winter rainfall and unusually species-rich temperate vegetation. This region supported a diverse large herbivore (> 20 kg) assemblage at the time of permanent European settlement (1652). The lowlands to the west and east of the Kogelberg supported populations of African elephant, black rhino, hippopotamus, eland, Cape mountain and plain zebra, ostrich, red hartebeest, and grey rhebuck. The eastern lowlands also supported three additional ruminant grazer species - the African buffalo, bontebok, and blue antelope. The fate of these herbivores changed rapidly after European settlement. Today the few remaining species are restricted to a few reserves scattered across the lowlands. This is, however, changing with a rapid growth in the wildlife industry that is accompanied by the reintroduction of wild animals into endangered and fragmented lowland areas.
  • National Forests Act: List of Protected Tree Species

    National Forests Act: List of Protected Tree Species

    6 No.33566 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 23 SEPTEMBER 2010 GOVERNMENT NOTICES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FORSTRY AND FISHERIES No. 835 23 September 2010 NOTICE OF THE LIST OF PROTECTED TREE SPECIES UNDER THE NATIONAL FORESTS ACT, 1998 (ACT NO 84 OF 1998) By virtue of powers vested in me under Section 15(3) of the National Forests Act, 1998, I, Tina Joemat-Pe1tersson, Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries hereby publish a list of all protected trees belonging to a particular species under Section 12(1) (d) set out in Schedule below. The effect of this declaration is that in terms of Section 15(1) of the National Forests Act, 1998, no person may cut, disturb, damage or destroy any protected tree or possess, collect, remove, transport, export, purchase, sell, donate or in any other manner acquire or dispose of any protected tree or any forest product derived from a protected tree, except under a licence or exemption granted by the Minister to an applicant and SUbject to such period and conditions as may be stipulated. Contravention of this declaration is regarded as a first category offence that may result in a person who is found guilty of being sentenced to a fine or imprisonment for a period up to three years, or to both a fine and imprisonment. SCHEDULE A I BYLAE A Botanical Name english Other Common Names National Common Afrikaans (A), Northern Sotho Tree Names (NS), Southern Sotho (S), Number Tswana (1), Venda (V), Xhosa 00. Zulu (Z) Acacia eri%ba Camel thorn . Kameeldoring (A) / Mogohlo (NS) / 168 Moa6tlh6 m· Acacia haematoxvlon Grev camel thorn Vaalkameeldoring CA) / Mokholo m 169 Adansonia digitata Baobab Kremetart (A) /Saboi (NS)/ Mowana 467 m Afzelia quanzensis Pod mahogany Peulmahonie (A) / Mutokota M / 207 Inkahli (Z) Ba/anites subsp.
  • The Greater Addo National Park, South Africa: Biodiversity Conservation As the Basis for a Healthy Ecosystem and Human Development Opportunities

    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).
  • ADDENDUM I Priority Areas for Conserving South African Vegetation

    ADDENDUM I Priority Areas for Conserving South African Vegetation

    ADDENDUM I Priority areas for conserving South African vegetation: a coarse-filter approach 185 Addendum l. South African Conservation Areas Priority areas for conserving South African vegetation: a coarse-filter approach B. Reyers", D.H.K. Fairbanks', A.S. van Jaarsveldi.1 and M. Thompson' I Conservation Planning Unit Department of Zoology and Entomology University of Pretoria Pretoria, 0002 South Africa 2 Centre for Environmental Studies University of Pretoria Pretoria, 0002 , Environmentek, CSIR, PO Box 395 Pretoria, 000 I • Corresponding author (Tel) +27-12-4204396 (Fax) +27- 12-4203210 Email: [email protected] Keywords: Coarse-filter, biodiversity conservation, land-cover, vegetation types, road-effects Running title: South African conservation areas In Press: Diversity & Distributions 186 Addendum I. South African Conscrvation Areas Abstract South Africa has an important responsibility to global biodiversity conservation, but a largely inadequate conservation area network for addressing this responsibility. This study employs a coarse-fi lter approach based on 68 potential vegetation units to identify areas that arc largely transformed, degraded or impacted on by road-effects. The assessment highlights broad vegetation types that face high biodiversity losses currently or in the near future due to human impacts. Most vegetation types contain large tracts of natural vegetation, with little degradation, transformation or impacts from road networks. Regions in the grasslands, fynbos and forest biomes are worst affected. V cry few of the vegetation types arc adequately protected according to the IUCN's 10% protected area conservation target, with the fynbos and savanna biomes containing a few vegetation types that do achieve this arbitrary goal.
  • Management of Critically Endangered Renosterveld Fragments in the Overberg, South Africa

    Management of Critically Endangered Renosterveld Fragments in the Overberg, South Africa

    Management of Critically Endangered renosterveld fragments in the Overberg, South Africa Odette Elisabeth Curtis Thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Biological Sciences University of Cape Town April 2013 Supervisor: Prof. William Bond Co-supervisor: Simon Todd PLAGIARISM DECLARATION By submitting this thesis, I acknowledge that I know the meaning of plagiarism and declare that all the work in the thesis, save for that which is properly acknowledged, is my own. _______________________________________ Odette Curtis 2nd April 2013 DECLARATION OF FREE LICENSE I hereby: a) grant the University of Cape Town free license to reproduce the above thesis in whole or in part, for the purpose of research; b) declare that: i) the above thesis is my own unaided work, both in conception and execution, and that apart from the normal guidance from my supervisors, I have received no assistance except as stated below; ii) neither the substance nor any part of this thesis has been submitted in the past, or is being, or is to be submitted for a degree at this University or at any other University. I am now presenting the thesis for examination for the Degree of PhD. _______________________________________ Odette Curtis 2nd April 2013 Copyright © University of Cape Town All Rights Reserved DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to Philip Anthony Hockey (1956 – 2013), who helped me develop the platform on which I have built my academic career, and whose friendship is sorely missed. Drawing by Chris van Rooyen ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to my supervisor, Prof. William Bond, for guidance and patience and time in the field.
  • Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: Descriptions and Maps

    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
  • Geophysical Modelling of the Molopo Farms Complex in Southern Botswana

    Geophysical Modelling of the Molopo Farms Complex in Southern Botswana

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by NERC Open Research Archive GEOPHYSICAL MODELLING OF THE MOLOPO FARMS COMPLEX IN SOUTHERN BOTSWANA: IMPLICATIONS FOR ITS EMPLACEMENT WITHIN THE ~2 GA LARGE IGNEOUS PROVINCES OF SOUTHERN AND CENTRAL AFRICA A.S.D. WALKER British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham, United Kingdom, NG12 5GG e-mail: [email protected] R.M. KEY British Geological Survey, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, EH9 3LA e-mail: [email protected] G. POULIQUEN Geosoft Europe Limited, Wallingford, United Kingdom, OX10 0AD e-mail: [email protected] G. GUNN British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham, United Kingdom, NG12 5GG e-mail: [email protected] J. SHARROCK Gondwana Ventures (Pty) Limited, P.O. Box 20241, Francistown, Botswana e-mail: [email protected] I. McGEORGE MSA Geoservices, P.O. Box 2258, Gaborone, Botswana email: [email protected] M. KOKETSO Department of Geological Survey, Private Bag 14, Lobatse, Botswana e-mail: [email protected] J. FARR Wellfield Consulting Services (Pty) Limited, P.O. Box 1502, Gaborone, Botswana e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The Molopo Farms Complex is an extremely poorly exposed, major, ultramafic-mafic layered intrusion straddling the southern border of Botswana with South Africa. It lies within the south-western part of the ~2.0 Ga large igneous province of southern and central Africa that includes the better known Bushveld Complex. Integrated interpretation of regional gravity data and new high-resolution airborne magnetic data have constrained the geometry of the Molopo Farms Complex in southern Botswana as a strongly faulted, polyphase intrusion compartmentalised by regional ductile shear zones.
  • Wasps and Bees in Southern Africa

    Wasps and Bees in Southern Africa

    SANBI Biodiversity Series 24 Wasps and bees in southern Africa by Sarah K. Gess and Friedrich W. Gess Department of Entomology, Albany Museum and Rhodes University, Grahamstown Pretoria 2014 SANBI Biodiversity Series The South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) was established on 1 Sep- tember 2004 through the signing into force of the National Environmental Manage- ment: Biodiversity Act (NEMBA) No. 10 of 2004 by President Thabo Mbeki. The Act expands the mandate of the former National Botanical Institute to include respon- sibilities relating to the full diversity of South Africa’s fauna and flora, and builds on the internationally respected programmes in conservation, research, education and visitor services developed by the National Botanical Institute and its predecessors over the past century. The vision of SANBI: Biodiversity richness for all South Africans. SANBI’s mission is to champion the exploration, conservation, sustainable use, appreciation and enjoyment of South Africa’s exceptionally rich biodiversity for all people. SANBI Biodiversity Series publishes occasional reports on projects, technologies, workshops, symposia and other activities initiated by, or executed in partnership with SANBI. Technical editing: Alicia Grobler Design & layout: Sandra Turck Cover design: Sandra Turck How to cite this publication: GESS, S.K. & GESS, F.W. 2014. Wasps and bees in southern Africa. SANBI Biodi- versity Series 24. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. ISBN: 978-1-919976-73-0 Manuscript submitted 2011 Copyright © 2014 by South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written per- mission of the copyright owners. The views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of SANBI.
  • The Cape Floristic Region

    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.