HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED PLATREEF MINING PROJECT ON THE FARMS BULTONGFONTEIN 866 LR, TURFSPRUIT 241 KR, MACALACASKOP 243 KR AND RIETFONTEIN 2 KS IN MOKOPANE, LIMPOPO PROVINCE
PLATREEF RESOURCES (PTY) LTD
OCTOBER 2013
______Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd. Co. Reg. No. 1999/05985/07. Fern Isle, Section 10, 359 Pretoria Ave Randburg Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125, South Africa Tel: +27 11 789 9495, Fax: +27 11 789 9498, [email protected], www.digbywells.com ______Directors: A Sing, AR Wilke, LF Koeslag, PD Tanner (British)*, AJ Reynolds (Chairman) (British)*, J Leaver*, GE Trusler (C.E.O) *Non-Executive ______
p:\projects\platreef\pla1677_esia\9_specialist_studies\hrm\6_hia\3. sahra submission\pla1677_hia_final.docx Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
This document has been prepared by Digby Wells Environmental Report Title: Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province Project Number: PLA1677
Name Responsibility Signature Date
Natasha Higgitt Specialist and 11 October Assistant Heritage report writer 2013 Consultant
Shahzaadee Karodia Assistant Heritage 11 October Consultant: Specialist 2013 Palaeontological Specialist
Justin du Piesanie 11 October 1st Reviewer 2013 Archaeology Consultant
Johan Nel 11 October Final Reviewer HRM Unit Manager 2013
This report is provided solely for the purposes set out in it and may not, in whole or in part, be used for any other purpose without Digby Wells Environmental prior written consent.
ii Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Digby Wells Environmental (Digby Wells) was requested by Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd (Platreef) to conduct an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), public consultation process and specialist studies for the proposed Platreef Project in accordance with the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No.28 of 2002) (MPRDA), National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), and National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) (NEMWA) for submission to the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) in support of a Mining Right Application (MRA). The Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was conducted as part of the specialist studies required for the compilation of the ESIA. A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was completed, informed by a primarily desktop-based Heritage Statement. The Heritage Statement was summarised and submitted in support of a Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) in terms of Section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No 25 of 1999) (NHRA) and in compliance with requirements for an ESIA in terms of the MPRDA, NEMA and NEMWA in support of the Mining Right Application (MRA). Terms of Reference from the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA), based on the submitted Heritage Statement, state a HIA be conducted inclusive of Archaeological resources, Palaeontological resources, Burial grounds and graves, and Intangible Heritage. Additionally, SAHRA has requested that given the proximity (20km) of the mine to the National and World Heritage Site of Makapan, SAHRA recommends that the possible impact of the mine on this site be assessed. This assessment must also consider the likely visual impact. Through a literature review, field survey and assessment, a total of three archaeological sites, 55 burial grounds and one historical werf were identified within the Project area. All of these heritage resources will be impacted on by the Platreef Project. During the field survey, no surface fossils were identified in the project area, specifically in the areas overlying the rocks of the Duitschland Formation and the Malmani Supergroup of the Chuniespoort Group. Fossils may exist beneath the surface but their existence can only be verified through monitoring excavations. In this sense, the impact of construction activities such as excavations is positive for palaeontology, provided that efforts are made to monitor and rescue fossils. No visual, air quality and noise impacts will be experienced at the Makapan WHS as shown by the various specialists’ reports conducted as part of the ESIA and therefore no mitigation measures are recommended.
iii Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Impact Impact Assessment: Recommended Heritage Resource Resource Assessment Value before Suggested Field Rating Heritage ID Type after project project Mitigation mitigation mitigation Iron Age Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.35-006 10 103 32 Smelting Site General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-023 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-025 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Iron Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.35-027 Age/Historical 10 103 32 General destruction settlement Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-028 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-029 Burial Ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-030 Burial Ground 9 74 23 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-031 Burial Ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-032 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-033 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-034 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-035 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-036 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-037 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-038 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-039 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-040 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-041 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-042 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-043 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-044 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-045 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-046 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-047 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-048 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-049 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-050 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-051 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-052 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-053 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-054 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction
iv Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Impact Impact Assessment: Recommended Heritage Resource Resource Assessment Value before Suggested Field Rating Heritage ID Type after project project Mitigation mitigation mitigation Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-055 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-056 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-058 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-059 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-060 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-061 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-062 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-063 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-064 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-065 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-066 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-067 Burial Ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-068 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-069 Single grave 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-070 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Iron Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.35-071 Age/Historical 9 91 30 General destruction settlement Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-072 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-073 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-074 Burial ground 9 74 23 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-075 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-076 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-078 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-079 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-080 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-081 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-082 Burial ground 9 91 30 General destruction Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.34-083 Historical werf 9 91 30 General destruction Formal Field Rating IV A - Mitigation before PLA1677/S.36-085 9 91 30 cemetery General destruction National heritage World Heritage Makapan 18 24 6 Grade I - National nomination; Site conservation
v Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Potential impacts on the archaeological sites may be avoided through the implementation of feasible mitigation measures related to project design and planning. If this is not feasible, archaeological mitigation must be conducted by a qualified archaeologist to adequately investigate and record the sites. Mitigation measures include archaeological excavation, sample excavations such as shovel test pits and intensive mapping. It is recommended that the historical werf be avoided to reduce negative impact to the site. If project mitigation measures cannot be implemented, the site should undergo a Built Environment Assessment by a qualified historical architect to accurately determine the significance value of the resources and provide appropriate mitigation measures. Potential impacts on the burial grounds may be avoided though the implementation of feasible mitigation measures related to project design and planning. The burial grounds may therefore be preserved in situ ensuring protection during development and the long-term. Project-related mitigation measures and site managements should be implemented to reduce the magnitude of the impacts. These measures include: ■ The burial grounds should be protected and conserved in perpetuity. Access to the burial grounds should be negotiated with communities in the immediate area; ■ A perimeter fence should be built around the burial grounds and placed two meters away from the perimeter. The perimeter fences should include an entry gate to allow visits from relatives and family friends. The mine should be responsible for the maintenance of these fences; and ■ The Environmental Control Officer (ECO) should be present on site when these fences are being erected around the burial grounds. ■ Detailed project design should ensure that there is a 100 m buffer between the perimeter fence and the proposed infrastructure areas. If the above measures cannot be implemented, grave relocation is to take place. A Grave Relocation Plan (GRP) must be drafted and implemented in accordance with Section 36 of the NHRA and NHRA Regulations. Grave relocation will be necessary for the Operational area as this is the area for which the MRA is being considered. Graves will be negatively impacted on due to a permanent loss of access and a high probability of damage. In future, other areas within the broader lease area of the Platreef Project will undergo grave relocation as the lease area (not yet determined) will be fenced off to prevent residential encroachment. Grave located within the lease area will be negatively impacted on due to the loss of access and a probability of damage. Although the location and number of graves have not been confirmed, the lease area will be systematically surveyed in a phased approach and community consultation and grave relocation will occur as necessary. A Conservation Management Plan (CMP) will be drawn up in the interim for all heritage resources that are to be impacted on by the proposed development. The aim of the CMP is to monitor and manage the in-situ conservation of the heritage resources before mitigation
vi Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
can take place while activities such as prospecting and bulk sampling are to occur. Monitoring will occur on a monthly basis and reports will be submitted to SAHRA for review. Sub-surface heritage resources may be present within the project area and Chance Finds Procedures should be adhered to during the ground clearance and construction phase of the project if additional heritage resources are uncovered.
vii Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS AND TERMS
BIC Bushveld Igneous Complex CA Competent Authorities CFP Chance Finds Procedure CMP Conservation Management Plan CSG Chief Surveyor General ECO Environmental Control Officer ESA Early Stone Age ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment GRP Grave Relocation Plan HIA Heritage Impact Assessment HSR Heritage Statement Report ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites IFC International Finance Corporation LIHRA Limpopo Heritage Resource Authority LSA Later Stone Age MJS Major Jackson Series MPRDA The Minerals and Petroleum Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002) MRA Mining Right Application MSA Middle Stone Age NAAIRS National Automated Archival Information Retrieval System NEMA The National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) NEMWA National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) NHRA National Heritage Resources Act, Act No.25 of 1999 NID Notice of Intent to Develop PGM Platinum group metals PPP Public Participation Process SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency SAHRIS South African Heritage Resources Information System SoW Scope of Work STP Shovel Test Pits THP Traditional Health Practitioner ToR Terms of Reference TSF Tailings Storage Facility UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization WHCA World Heritage Convention Act WHS World Heritage Site
viii Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT ...... 1
2.1 REPORT TYPE: HIA ...... 1
2.2 CLIENT, CONSULTANT AND LAND OWNER CONTACT DETAILS ...... 4 3 TERMS OF REFERENCE ...... 5
3.1 CLIENT TERM OF REFERENCE ...... 5
3.2 STATUTORY COMMENT TERMS OF REFERENCE ...... 7
3.3 SCOPE OF WORK ...... 8
3.4 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ...... 8
3.5 EXPERTISE OF SPECIALIST ...... 8 4 METHODOLOGY...... 9
4.1 DESKTOP AND TEXT-BASED DATA COLLECTION ...... 9
4.2 FIELD-BASED DATA COLLECTION ...... 10
4.3 EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANCE ...... 11
4.4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 11
4.5 MITIGATION ...... 12 5 DESCRIPTION OF CULTURAL LANDSCAPE/ RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ...... 13
5.1 SITE CONDITIONS AND LOCATION DATA ...... 13
5.2 DETAILS OF AREA SURVEYED ...... 18
5.3 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 19
5.4 RESULTS OF STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS ...... 23 6 RESTRICTIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND KNOWLEDGE GAPS ...... 30
7 DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTED HERITAGE RESOURCES ...... 30
7.1 TSF OPTION 2 ...... 31
7.2 TSF OPTION 3 ...... 39
7.3 OPERATIONAL AREA ...... 47
7.4 ALTERNATIVE PLANT AREA ...... 57
7.5 TSF OPTION 2 PIPELINE OPTIONS ...... 70
ix Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.6 TSF OPTION 3 PIPELINES ...... 74 8 MAKAPAN WORLD HERITAGE SITE ...... 83
8.1 STATEMENT OF VALUE ...... 84
8.2 RATING OF IMPACT (PRE-MITIGATION) ...... 84
8.3 RATING OF IMPACT (POST-MITIGATION) ...... 85
8.4 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 85 9 DISCUSSION ...... 85
10 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 87
11 REFERENCES ...... 89
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 5-1: General site conditions within the Operational Area ...... 16 Figure 5-2: General view of TSF Option 1. Approximately 95% of the project area is covered by agricultural fields...... 16 Figure 5-3: General view of the TSF Option 2 ...... 17 Figure 5-4: General view of TSF Option 3...... 17 Figure 5-5: General view of the Alternative Plant area...... 18 Figure 5-6: Consultation with Machikiri Community elders regarding Intangible Heritage .... 26 Figure 5-7: Tsotsodi mountain on which rain-making rituals are still performed today ...... 27 Figure 5-8: Consultation with Tshamahansi Elders regarding Intangible Heritage ...... 28 Figure 7-1: Examples of Middle Stone Age lithics identified within the TSF Option 2 at S.35- 004 ...... 31 Figure 7-2: Example of lower grinding stone identified within the TSF Option 2 at S.35-009 32 Figure 7-3: Example of stone walling identified at S.35-007 within the TSF Option 2 ...... 32 Figure 7-4: General view of S.35-006 ...... 35 Figure 7-5: General view of main smelting site identified at S.35-006 with slag runoff down the slope ...... 36 Figure 7-6: Decorated potsherds identified at S.35-006 ...... 36 Figure 7-7: Midden at S.35-006 where slag fragments were identified ...... 37
x Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-8: Surface artefacts found at S.35-006: a. undiagnostic potsherds; b. faunal remains; and c. slag fragments identified ...... 37 Figure 7-9: Decorated and undecorated potsherds identified at S.35-014 in TSF option 3 .. 40 Figure 7-10: Example of a lower grinding stone identified within TSF Option 3 at S.35-016 40 Figure 7-11: Decorated potsherds identified at S.35-088 within TSF Option 3 at S.35-018 . 41 Figure 7-12: Undiagnostic potsherds and possible tuyere fragment (centre) identified at S.35-019 within TSF Option 3 ...... 41 Figure 7-13: Examples of Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35-020 within TSF Option 3 ...... 42 Figure 7-14: Undiagnostic potsherds and Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35-021 ... 42 Figure 7-15: Examples of Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35-024 within TSF Option 3...... 43 Figure 7-16: General view of Grave S.36-023 located within TSF Option 3 ...... 45 Figure 7-17: Detail of Grave S.36-023 located within the TSF Option 3 ...... 45 Figure 7-18: Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35-026 within Operational Area ...... 48 Figure 7-19: General view of S.35-027 ...... 50 Figure 7-20: Stone pathways within the S.35-027 ...... 51 Figure 7-21: Circular stone foundations identified within S.35-027 ...... 51 Figure 7-22: Rectangular stone foundations identified within S.35-027 ...... 52 Figure 7-23: Example of stone dressed burial grounds identified in the Operational Area ... 55 Figure 7-24: Example of formal burial identified within the Operational Area ...... 55 Figure 7-25: General view of S.35-071 ...... 59 Figure 7-26: Example of rectangular stone foundations identified within S.35-071 ...... 60 Figure 7-27: Example of circular stone foundations with sun-baked bricks identified within S.35-071 ...... 60 Figure 7-28: Decorated and undecorated potsherds identified near burial S.35-073 ...... 61 Figure 7-29: Decorated potsherds located adjacent to the burials at S.36-076 ...... 61 Figure 7-30: Monolithic stone walling identified within S.35-071 ...... 62 Figure 7-31: Parallel stone walls leading into the main rectangular stone structure identified within S.35-071 ...... 62 Figure 7-32: Entrance to main rectangular stone structure identified within S.35-071. Note raised stone platforms indicated by the arrows and circular stone foundation indicated by the stippled line...... 63
xi Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-33: Circular stone foundations located within the rectangular stone structure identified at S.35-071 ...... 63 Figure 7-34: One of the raised platforms located to the north of the main rectangular structure identified at S.35-071 ...... 64 Figure 7-35: Resounding or “gong rock” identified within S.35-071 ...... 64 Figure 7-36: Main area of cortex removal on the “gong rock” identified at S.35-071 ...... 65 Figure 7-37: Example of stone dressed burial located within the Alternative Plant area ...... 68 Figure 7-38: Example of formal burial located within the Alternative Plant area...... 68 Figure 7-39: Rough stone walling identified at S.35-077 within the TSF Option 2 pipeline .. 71 Figure 7-40: Undiagnostic potsherds identified at S.35-084 within TSF Option 3 ...... 75 Figure 7-41: Partial view of the main residence located at S.34-083 ...... 76 Figure 7-42: Outbuilding located as part of the farmstead complex located at S.34-083 ..... 77 Figure 7-43: Olifants River Water Resources Development Project installing water pipes through the farmstead complex located at S.34-083 ...... 77 Figure 7-44: General view of the formal cemetery identified at S.36-085 within the buffer- zone of the TSF Option 3 pipeline ...... 80 Figure 7-45: Signboard outside formal cemetery S.36-085 ...... 81
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Summary of proposed Platreef development ...... 2 Table 2-2: NEMA Listed Activities and NHRA Triggers ...... 3 Table 2-3: Client contact details ...... 4 Table 2-4: Consultant contact details ...... 5 Table 2-5: Land owner contact details ...... 5 Table 3-1: Legal framework for the Platreef Project ...... 6 Table 3-2: SAHRIS case references for the Platreef Project ...... 8 Table 5-1: Species with cultural used identified within the project area ...... 14 Table 5-2: Location Data ...... 18 Table 5-3: Results of stakeholder analysis for the Platreef Project ...... 24 Table 5-4: I&APs consulted and the comments pertaining to heritage resources that were raised during the SEP ...... 25
xii Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 5-5: Traditional plants and items for traditional medicinal use identified within the Operational Area as indicated by the Traditional Healer ...... 29 Table 7-1: Summary of PLA1677/S.35-006 ...... 34 Table 7-2: Summary of Site S.36-023 ...... 44 Table 7-3: Summary of PLA1677/S.35-027 ...... 49 Table 7-4: Summary of burial grounds identified within the Operational Area ...... 54 Table 7-5: Summary of PLA1677/S.35-071 ...... 58 Table 7-6: Summary of burial grounds identified in Alternative Plant area ...... 67 Table 7-7: Summary of burial grounds identified within TSF Option 2 pipelines ...... 72 Table 7-8: Summary of Site S.34-083 ...... 75 Table 7-9: Summary of Site S.36-085 ...... 79 Table 8-1: Summary of the Makapan WHS ...... 83
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Specialist Appendix B: Impact Assessment Methodology Appendix C: Location and Site Maps Appendix D: Registered Stakeholders Appendix E: Intangible Heritage meeting attendance registers Appendix F: Identified Heritage Resources Appendix G: Impact Assessment Appendix H: Chance Find Procedures
xiii Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
1 INTRODUCTION Digby Wells Environmental (Digby Wells) was requested by Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd (Platreef) to conduct an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), public consultation process and specialist studies for the proposed Platreef Project in accordance with the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No.28 of 2002) (MPRDA), National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), and National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) (NEMWA) for submission to the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) in support of a Mining Right Application (MRA). The Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was conducted as part of the specialist studies required for the compilation of the ESIA.
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT Platreef is a subsidiary of Ivanplats who legally obtained the exclusive prospecting rights for base and precious metals on the farms Turfspruit 241 KR and Macalacaskop 243 KR in February 1998 and was granted a five-year New Order Prospecting Right for the two farms in 2006 (Prospecting Right LP30/5/111/2/872PR). Platreef are investigating the construction and operation of an underground platinum mine on the above mentioned farms (see Appendix C for plans). Following the prospecting activities, a Mining Right Application (MRA) was submitted on 06 June 2013 in accordance with Section 39 of the MPRDA. In support of a MRA, as well as the associated Environmental Authorisations, a Scoping Report was compiled and submitted for authorisation by the relevant Competent Authorities (CA).
2.1 Report type: HIA Digby Wells was requested by Platreef to conduct an HIA for the Platreef Project in compliance with requirements for the ESIA in terms of the MPRDA, NEMA and NEMWA. The ESIA will be submitted in support of the MRA.
2.1.1 Type of development Platreef are proposing the development of an underground mine that intends to mine platinum group metals (PGMs) that include minerals as listed in Table 2-1. The Life of Mine (LoM) is planned to be 30 years, with the possibility to extend this further.
1 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 2-1: Summary of proposed Platreef development
Type of mineral The target minerals are: Platinum Group Metals (PGM’s) Platinum (Pt), Palladium (Pd), Rhodium (Rh), Iridium (Ir), Ruthenium (Ru), and Osmium (Os) All Other Associated Metals and Minerals, including but not limited to: Gold (Au), Silver (Ag), Nickel (Ni), Copper (Cu), Cobalt (Co) and Chrome (Cr).
Locality (Direction and The nearest town is Mokopane, located 10 km south of the Platreef distance from nearest Project area in the Limpopo Province. town)
Extent of the area required Total area is 7 841.264 ha. for mining
Extent of the area required Approximately 2 247 ha. for infrastructure, roads, servitudes etc.
Depth of the mineral below The reef outcrops and dips to a depth of approximately 1 100 m below surface surface.
Geological formation The Platreef Project is located on the Bushveld Igneous Complex (BIC). The BIC consists of a lower sequence of layered mafic and ultramafic rocks known as the Rustenburg Layer Suite (RLS) and an overlying unit of granites known as the Lebowa Granite Suite. These layered rocks occur in four areas known as the Western, Northern, Eastern, and Bethal Limbs. The project is located in the Northern Limb, on the reef known as the Platreef which has unique geological characteristics as defined in section 4.3 below.
Detailed descriptions of proposed project activities are provided in the Platreef ESIA (Wessels, 2013), and are summarised here with specific reference to activities that are relevant to heritage resources management. In addition to existing infrastructure, support facilities will need to be constructed. These facilities will require environmental authorisations in terms of identified Listed Activities associated with the construction and operation of the infrastructure. The construction also triggers heritage management requirements in terms of Section 38 of the NHRA. The Listed Activities are provided in Table 2-2. The support facilities that will be constructed include waste management infrastructure, surface water management infrastructure, storage, power-lines, conveyors, service and haul roads, Tailings Storage Facility (TSF), offices, control rooms, workshops, wash bays, production shafts, ventilations shafts, 4 MTPA Processing plant, water reservoir and HV/MV and LV Substations.
2 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 2-2: NEMA Listed Activities and NHRA Triggers
LA NHRA trigger Regulation Description No.
38(1)(a) the construction of a Construction of sewage, bulk water and 9 linear development or barrier storm water pipelines exceeding 300m in length
38 (1) (c) any development or GN R. 544, For the construction of tailings storage other activity which will change the 12 18 June facility (TSF). character of a site- 2010 (i) exceeding 5 000 m2 in extent
Access roads to the mine and internal haul 38(1)(a) the construction of a roads within the project area with a linear development or barrier 22 reserve wider than 13.5 m will be exceeding 300m in length constructed.
The project area currently consists of 38 (1) (d) the re-zoning of a site formal and informal housing, as well as exceeding 10 000 m2 in extent subsistence farming and grazing. Thus, 15 undeveloped land will be altered for mining infrastructure construction and operation. GN R. 545, 18 June The construction of above ground 38(1)(a) the construction of a 2010 9 conveyors will be done within the project linear development or barrier area. exceeding 300m in length
To accommodate the construction of 38 (1) (c) any development or surface infrastructure, internal roads and other activity which will change the 13 waste storage facilities, clearance of character of a site- indigenous vegetation will be required. (i) exceeding 5 000 m2 in extent
3 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
The proposed Platreef Project will extract mineral resources through underground mining using a sublevel blast hole stoping method. In order to access the mineral deposits it will be necessary to construct a production and service shaft (Shaft No. 1). This shaft will have a diameter of 7.25 m and a depth of 1 250 m. Three additional ventilation shafts will also be constructed – Shaft Nos. 2, 3, and 4. Primary ore processing will occur below surface. Ore will be removed from stopes by a diesel-powered Load-Haul-Dumper (LHD) and dumped in nearby orepass from where it will be hauled by trucks to ore bins located near the production shaft. It will be fed from the ore bins to a crusher located below the 1100 Level. The crusher discharges the ore into a fine ore bin. The ore will then be fed onto a conveyor located on the 1200 Level that transfers it to a skip loading station at the Shaft No 1.
2.1.2 Rezoning and/or land subdivision The properties are currently zoned for residential and agricultural purposes. Rezoning for mining will be required.
2.2 Client, Consultant and Land Owner Contact Details This section summarises information regarding contact details of the client consultant and land owner in Table 2-3, Table 2-4 and Table 2-5. Table 2-3: Client contact details
ITEM COMPANY CONTACT DETAILS
Company: Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd
Contact person: Gerick Mouton
Tel no: 011 088 4300
Fax no: 086 687 2018
Cell no: 083 708 0999
Email address [email protected]
Postal address PO Box 782078, Sandton, 2146
4 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 2-4: Consultant contact details
ITEM COMPANY CONTACT DETAILS
Company/Institution: Digby Wells Environmental
Contact person: Barbara Wessels
Tel no: (011) 789 9495
Fax no: (011) 789 9498
E-mail address: [email protected]
Postal address: Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125
Table 2-5: Land owner contact details
ITEM CONTACT DETAILS
Title Deed Owner: National Government of the Republic of South Africa
Contact person: Moduku Khwene
Tel no: 015 297 3539
Fax no: 015 297 4988
E-mail address: [email protected]
Postal address: Private Bag X9312, Polokwane, 0700
3 TERMS OF REFERENCE
3.1 Client Term of Reference The Terms of Reference (ToR) included the undertaking of specialist heritage studies as part of the Platreef ESIA required for the MRA. To ensure compliance with the agreed ToR, deliverables and tasks were completed in line with a legal framework comprising relevant national and international requirements. The ToR need to be understood within context of the legal framework as shown in Table 3-1.
5 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 3-1: Legal framework for the Platreef Project
Legal Description Application framework
National The National Section 2(4)a(iii) requires that the nation’s cultural framework Environmental heritage must be protected and conserved, and where Management Act, 1998 this is not possible, impacts are minimised and remedied (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA)
The National Heritage To conserve, preserve and manage South Africa’s natural Resources Act, 1999 and cultural heritage for future generations (Act No. 25 of 1999) (NHRA)
The Minerals and Section 5(4) states that no person may mine or Petroleum Development commence with any work incidental thereto on any area Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of without an approved environmental management 2002) (MPRDA) programme or approved environmental management plan
The World Heritage The objectives of the Act are provide for the cultural and Convention Act, (Act No. environmental protection and sustainable development 49 of 1999) (WHCA) of, and related activities within, World Heritage Sites
Constitution Of The According to the Constitution, everyone has the right to Republic Of South Africa use their language and to participate in the cultural life of (No. 108 of 1996) their choice and no person may not be denied the right to enjoy their culture, practise their religion and use their language to form, join and maintain cultural, religious and linguistic associations and other organs of civil society
Provincial Limpopo Environmental Section 70 (2) states that no person may alter the natural framework Management Act (Act atmosphere of a cave in any manner No. 7 of 2003)
International World Bank Operational This policy assists countries to avoid or mitigate adverse framework Policy for Cultural impacts on physical cultural resources from development Resources (OP4.11) projects that are financed through the World Bank
Equator Principles To ensure that projects financed by Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EPFIs) are developed in a manner that is socially responsible and reflect sound environmental management practices
6 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
International Finance To promote the equitable sharing of benefits from the use Corporation (IFC) of cultural heritage and to protect cultural heritage from Performance Standard 8: the adverse impacts of project activities and support its Cultural Heritage preservation
UNESCO World Heritage To ensure that effective and active measures are taken Convention, 1972 for the protection, conservation and presentation of the cultural and natural heritage situated within a country as appropriate for each country
ICOMOS Charter For As archaeological heritage is a fragile and non-renewable The Protection And cultural resource, land use must therefore be controlled Management Of The and developed in order to minimise the destruction of the Archaeological Heritage archaeological heritage (1990)
ICOMOS Guidance on This framework offers guidance on the process of Heritage Impact commissioning HIA’s for World Heritage (WH) properties Assessments for Cultural in order to evaluate effectively the impact of potential World Heritage development on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) Properties of properties
3.2 Statutory Comment Terms of Reference A Heritage Statement Report (HSR) and Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) were submitted online to the (SAHRA) and the Limpopo Heritage Resources Authority (LIHRA) through the (SAHRIS). These documents were submitted on 18 June 2013. Subsequently, case reference numbers and officers were assigned to the Platreef Project, listed in in Table 3-2 below. Statutory Comment on the HSR and NID were issued on the HSR and NID in terms of Section 38(2) of the NHRA received on Wednesday, 21 August 2013. SAHRA required that a HIA be undertaken, inclusive of the following: ■ Archaeological resources; ■ Palaeontological resources; ■ Burial grounds and graves; and ■ Intangible Heritage. Additionally, SAHRA has requested that given the proximity (20km) of the mine to the National and World Heritage Site of Makapan, SAHRA recommends that the possible impact of the mine on this site be assessed. This assessment must also consider the likely visual impact. Appropriate project-related mitigation and mitigation of heritage resources (Phase 2 heritage assessments) must be recommended as required. The Statutory Comment formed the basis of the Terms of Reference for the HIA.
7 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 3-2: SAHRIS case references for the Platreef Project
Item Description
Case Reference: PLA1677_Platreef_Platinum_Project
Case ID: 566
Case officer: Mariagrazia Galimberti
Official reference: 9/2/224/0001
3.3 Scope of Work As part of the ESIA and Terms of Reference (ToR) received from SAHRA, the Scope of Work (SoW) for the heritage component of the project consisted of the compilation of an HIA report that included the aims and objectives discussed below. This report constitutes the specialist HIA component of the final ESIA report to be submitted in accordance with the NEMA, NEM:WA and MPRDA for the project.
3.4 Aims and Objectives The HIA aimed to identify, record and document heritage resources that may be present in the Platreef Project area and recommend appropriate measures to manage such resources. In order to achieve this aim, the following tasks (objectives) were completed: ■ Undertaking reconnaissance surveys of proposed infrastructure footprint areas where heritage resources were identified, recorded and; ■ Focus group consultation to record potential intangible heritage that may be associated with tangible heritage within the Platreef Project area; ■ Evaluating identified heritage resources in terms of criteria contained in the NHRA for inclusion into the National Estate; ■ Assessing levels of change to (impacts on) identified heritage resources that may result from project activities in relation to their value; ■ Providing recommendations to ensure continued conservation of identified heritage resources through project-related mitigation and management measures; and ■ Providing recommendations to mitigate heritage resources where complete or partial conservation may not be possible.
3.5 Expertise of Specialist Natasha Higgitt has completed a BA Honours degree in Archaeology at the University of Pretoria. She currently holds the position of Archaeology Consultant at Digby Wells, where
8 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
she has worked for over two years with experience in HIA’s in Limpopo and Mpumalanga. She has experience in international heritage and social projects in Liberia. Shahzaadee Karodia has completed a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in archaeology and anthropology, a Bachelor of Science (BSc) Honours degree in palaeontology, and a Master of Science (MSc) degree in archaeology at the University of the Witwatersrand. She currently holds the position of Archaeology Consultant at Digby Wells. Justin du Piesanie has completed an MSc degree in archaeology at the University of the Witwatersrand. He currently holds the position of Archaeology Consultant at Digby Wells. Johan Nel has completed a BA degree in archaeology and anthropology and a BA Honours degree in archaeology at the University of Pretoria. Johan holds the position of Unit Manager for HRM in the Social Science Department at Digby Wells The curriculum vitas of the specialists are located in Appendix A.
4 METHODOLOGY
4.1 Desktop and text-based data collection Data collection was aimed at information gathering relating to known heritage resources within and surrounding the proposed area for development. Information was obtained through intensive research using a variety of primary and secondary sources such as academic journals, textbooks and records, national and provincial websites, archaeological field guides, national guidelines, maps, photographs and plans.
4.1.1 Relevant databases and collections The archival and database survey was conducted by consulting the following resources: ■ Chief Surveyor General (CSG); ■ Genealogical Society of South Africa; ■ Geological Society of South Africa; ■ National Automated Archival Information Retrieval System (NAAIRS); ■ South African Heritage Resources Information System (SAHRIS); and ■ Wits Archaeology Site Database.
4.1.2 Desktop cartographic survey A desktop cartographic survey was conducted in order to determine the potential of sites to exist within the project area and surrounding region, as well as relative age based on the dates of the maps. Surveys of historical aerial photographs, historical maps, topographical maps and satellite imagery were undertaken to plot potential sites. Some older maps such as the Major Jackson Series (MJS) maps of the early 20th century were also consulted and
9 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
integrated into the HIA where applicable. These are invaluable resources as they often include features and information not recorded on later maps
4.2 Field-based data collection Field work for the HIA was completed from 27 August to the 1 September 2013 and from the 3 September to the 5 September 2013, with final consultation with local community on the 12 September 2013. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected during field surveys.
4.2.1 Quantitative data collection: extensive reconnaissance surveys Quantitative data collection adopted an adaptive, non-intrusive approach by conducting (archaeological) reconnaissance surveys1 of proposed infrastructure footprint areas. Reconnaissance surveys were extensive2 foot surveys that included ground-truthing of possible sites identified during in the Heritage Statement Report. These foot surveys were recorded using GPS track logging technology. Identified sites were recorded using handheld GPSs and documented through photographs and detailed notes. Sites identified during the survey were named by using the Digby Wells project number, followed by the map sheet number and the relevant NHRA section suffixed with the site number: PLA1677/2428BB /S.35-001 or PLA1677/2429AA/S.35-001. This number is abbreviated in tables and/or on plans or maps using the NHRA reference number suffixed with the site number: S.35-001.
4.2.2 Qualitative data collection: focus group consultation Qualitative data was collected through focus group consultation with members of the surrounding communities. The consultation process followed semi-structured interviews guided by a questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed to collect information regarding living and intangible heritage. Questions were informed by and based on definitions of intangible and living heritage contained in the NHRA and other sources. Relevant stakeholders were identified through stakeholder analysis that built on the existing stakeholder database compiled as part of the PPP. Stakeholders and their roles in relation to heritage resources were identified and ranked according to their relevance. The results of the analysis are presented in Section 5.4. Stakeholders were identified during the Social Impact Assessment and the Social Baseline.
1 Reconnaissance survey refers to a broad range of techniques involved in the location of tangible heritage resources such as surface survey and recording of surface artefacts and features. Archaeological reconnaissance refers to systematic methods that attempt to locate, identify, and record the distribution of archaeological sites on the ground by looking at areas' contrasts in geography and environment. 2 Extensive (as opposed to intensive) surveys are designed to target the identification of sites across a large area characterised by a low-resolution approach to gain a representative sample of sites within the project area.
10 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
4.3 Evaluation of significance The value of heritage resources located within the proposed Platreef Project will be determined based on criteria contained in Section 3(3) of the NHRA. These criteria have been summarised into four dimensions – aesthetic, scientific, historic, and/or social value. The value of heritage resources will be determined by assigning an importance rating to each dimension taking into account the resources’ integrity and authenticity. The assigned ratings will be based on credible information sources, building on information collected for the Heritage Statement report and field based data collection. The methodology that will be used in evaluating heritage significance is summarised in the following formula: The following formula therefore applies:
Value = Importance x Integrity where Importance = average sum of Aesthetic + Historic + Scientific + Social Significance
The evaluation will be done using a heritage value matrix specifically designed by Digby Wells to ensure that values are assigned as objectively as possible. In addition, the methodology aims to allow ratings to be reproduced independently should it be required, provided that the same information sources are used. The rationale behind the heritage value matrix takes into account the fact that a heritage resource’s value is a direct indication of its sensitivity to change (impacts). Value therefore needs to be determined prior to the completion of any assessment of impacts. The matrix further provides field ratings or grading’s as required in terms of Section 7 of the NHRA and the SAHRA Minimum Standards for Heritage Impact Assessments.
4.4 Impact assessment Assessment of impacts on heritage resources will take into consideration accepted levels of change to resources in relation to the assigned values. Impacts will be quantified and ranked using a standard environmental impact matrix. The matrix has however been adapted to include heritage value. Please refer to Appendix B for impact assessment methodology. Impacts will be rated in terms of the spatial scale, duration and intensity of changes in relation to the value of heritage resources. This will accordingly provide a consequence rating. The consequence of impacts/changes will then be considered relative to the confidence or probability of impacts/changes occurring to provide an impact magnitude. The methodology is summarised in the following formula:
11 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Magnitude = Consequence x Probability Where Consequence = (Spatial Scale + Duration + Intensity) x Heritage Significance Value
The magnitude will then be applied to pre- and post-mitigation scenarios with the intention of removing all impacts on heritage resources. Where project related mitigation does not avoid or sufficiently reduce negative changes/impacts on heritage resources with high values, mitigation of these resources may be required. This may include alteration, restoration or demolition of structures under a permit issued by LIHRA and/or SAHRA.
4.5 Mitigation The ultimate goal of heritage resources management is to ‘promote good management of the national estate, and to enable and encourage communities to nurture and conserve their legacy so that it may be bequeathed to future generations’, stipulated in the Preamble to the NHRA. Proposed mitigation and management measures must therefore comply with the General Principles contained in Section 5 of the NHRA. Proposals need to take into account all relevant cultural values and indigenous knowledge systems, material or cultural heritage value and involve the least possible alteration or loss of it. In addition, recommendations need to promote the use and enjoyment of, and access to, heritage resources, in a way consistent with their cultural significance and conservation needs and contribute to social and economic development. Mitigation measures must also safeguard the options of present and future generations with regards to heritage resources: requiring comprehensive research, documentation and recording. In order to comply with these General Principles, mitigation measures are divided into two categories: project-related mitigation and mitigation of sites/heritage resources. Depending on the value of a resource (field rating/grading) certain prescribed site mitigation measures must then be implemented. Project-related mitigation aims to ensure conservation of heritage resources by avoiding or reducing impacts. Project-related mitigation may include: ■ Implementation of feasible mitigation measures related to the project design and planning to avoid negative changes to resources; or ■ Site preservation that is essentially a no-development recommendation Mitigation of heritage resources may be necessary where project-related mitigation will not conserve or preserve heritage resources, thus resulting in partial or complete changes (including destruction) to a resource. Such resources need to be mitigated to ensure that they are fully recorded, documented and researched before any negative change occurs. This may require mitigation such as:
12 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
■ Intensive detailed recording of sites through various non-intrusive techniques to create a documentary record of the site; ■ Intrusive recording and sampling such as shovel test pits (STPs) and excavations, relocation (usually burial grounds and graves, but sites may be relocated), restoration and alteration. Any form of intrusive mitigation is a regulated permitted activity for which permits need to be issued by the relevant heritage authorities. Such mitigation may result in a reassessment of the value of a resource that could require conservation measures to be implemented. Alternatively, an application for a destruction permit may be made if the resource has been sufficiently sampled; and ■ Where resources have negligible significance the specialist may recommend that no further mitigation is required and the site may be destroyed.
5 DESCRIPTION OF CULTURAL LANDSCAPE/ RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT This section describes the affected properties and receiving environment of the study and project areas. The project area was defined as the boundaries supplied by Platreef at the time of the survey for the proposed infrastructure areas. The study area allowed inferences to be made of potential sites that could exist within the project area based on certain sources of information such as previously completed relevant heritage studies.
5.1 Site Conditions and Location Data The project area is situated within the Savannah biome, which is the largest biome in Southern Africa. It consists of a grassy ground layer and a woody plant upper layer. It is known as Shrubveld when the woody layer is close the grass layer and as Bushveld in any intermediate phases. The environmental factors for this biome include altitude ranges from sea level to 2 000 m; rainfall varies from 235 to 1 000 mm per year; frost may occur from 0 to 120 days per year; and virtually every major geological and soil type. Factors that delimit this biome include sufficient rainfall, fires and grazing of animals (SANBI, 2011). Three vegetation types can be found within the project area: Clay thorn Bushveld, Mixed Bushveld and Waterberg (moist) mountain Bushveld (Low & Rebelo, 1996; Mucina, Rutherford, & Powrie, 2006). From the list of plant species identified during the field surveys there are 53 species that have cultural uses. Medicinal plants are important to many people and have been used traditionally for centuries to cure many ailments. Plants have also been used traditionally for other cultural uses, such as building material, and for spiritual uses such as charms (Greffrath, 2013). The following culturally important plant species and items have been identified within the project and summarised in Table 5-1.
13 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 5-1: Species with cultural used identified within the project area
Uses Species Name Common Name Cultural tradition and ritual purposes Herbs Bidens pilosa Black Jack Mind and mood plant Euclea crispa Blue guarri Tarconanthus
Mind and mood plant camphoratus Camphor bush Mind and mood plant Lannea discolor Live Long Lannea Skills and Techniques Dyes Aloe cryptopoda Geelaalwyn Dyes Aloe marlothii Mountain aloe Dyes and tanning Acacia caffra Common hook thorn Dyes and tanning Acacia karroo Sweet thorn Dyes and tanning Ficus glumosa Hairy rock fig Dyes, tanning, fruits and drinks Ficus sycamorus Sycamore fig Thatching Hyparrhenia hirta Common thatching grass Traditional cotton Gossypium herbaceum Wild cotton Utility timber Albizia versicolor False thorn Weaving and edible roots Phragmites australis Common reed Weaving Grewia flava Velvet Raisin Indigenous Knowledge Systems Dental care and perfumes Heteropyxis natalensis Lavendar tree Dental care, dyes and tans Diospyros lycioides Star apple Dental care, mind and mood Euclea divinorum Magic guarri plant Dental care, mind and mood Euclea natalensis Natal guarri plant Dental care, perfumes Croton gratissimus Lavender feverberry Edible roots Commiphora neglecta Sweet-root corkwood Edible roots Cussonia paniculata Highveld cabage tree Firewood Combretum hereroense Russet bushwillow Firewood Combretum imberbe Leadwood Fruits Carica papaya Pawpaw tree Englerophytum
Fruits magaliesmontanum Stemfruit Fruits Mangifera indica Mango Tree Fruits Opuntia ficus-indica Prickley pear Fruits Pappea capensis Jacket plum Fruits Persea americana Avocado Tree Fruits and women’s health Rhoicissus tridentata Bushmans grape Fruits, beverages and utility Sclerocarya birrea Marula timber
14 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Fruits and fire making Grewia flava Velvet Raisin Fruits, medicinal uses and Syzigium cordatum Water berry dyes Fruits, treats toothache Carissa bispinosa Forest Num num Fruits, utility timbers, Berchemia zeyheri Red Ivory
Fruits and women’s health Lannea discolor Live Long Lannea
Maize Zea mays Mielies Medical uses Catharanthus roseus Periwinkle Medicinal uses Dodonaea angustifolia Sand Olive Gymnosporia
Medicinal uses senegalensis Red spike thorn Medicinal uses and utility Olea europaea Wild olive timber subsp.africana Medicinal uses, dental care, Dichrostachys cinerea Sickle bush firewood Nuts Sterculia rogersii Star Chestnut Poison Euphorbia ingens Candelabra tree Repellent Tagetes minuta Tall khakhi weed Seed oil Ricinus communis Castor oil plant Seed oil Sesamum triphyllum Wild sesame Vegetable Asparagus laricinus Wild asapragus Vegetable, medical uses Centella asiatica Pennywort Vegetables Phaseoulus vulgaris Common green bean Witgat coffee, remedy for Boscia albitrunca Witgat boom epilepsy Women’s health Boscia foetida Stink sheperds tree Women’s health Sarcostemma viminale Rapunzel plant Wound healing, tonic plant and Xanthium strumarium Spiny cocklebur fruits As the survey occurred in the late winter, grass cover was at a minimum; however in areas that have previously disturbed due to construction activities, there was substantial grass cover. Bush encroachment, specifically Dichrostachys cinerea (Sickle bush) made access to some areas of the project area very difficult due to the nature of the bush itself. In some areas (Operational Area) the area had been extensively disturbed due to on-going prospecting drilling. Cattle herding is evident in all sections of the Platreef Project area, as well as aloe tapping. For images of infrastructure areas please refer to Figure 5-1 to Figure 5-5.
15 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 5-1: General site conditions within the Operational Area
Figure 5-2: General view of TSF Option 1. Approximately 95% of the project area is covered by agricultural fields.
16 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 5-3: General view of the TSF Option 2
Figure 5-4: General view of TSF Option 3.
17 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 5-5: General view of the Alternative Plant area.
5.2 Details of Area Surveyed Table 5-2: Location Data
Province Limpopo Province
Magisterial District / Local Authority Mokopane/Potgietersrus Magisterial District
Local Authority Waterberg District Municipality
Municipality Mogalakwena Local MunicipalIity
Turfspruit 241 KR Macalacaskop 243 KR Property Name and Number Rietfontein 2 KS Bultonfontein 866 LR
1: 50 000 Map Sheet 2428BB Tinmyne and 2429AA Mokopane
GPS Co-ordinates East/LON/X: -24.113113
(relative centre point of study area) South/LAT/Y: 28.965987
18 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
5.2.1 Location maps The regional settings of the Platreef Project are depicted in Plan 1, Plan 2 and Plan 3 in Appendix C.
5.2.2 Site maps Plan 4 depicts the current points that drill rigs have disturbed the project area. Plan 5 depicts the infrastructure footprint of the Platreef Project with identified Heritage sites. The infrastructure footprint of the Platreef Project consists of the following areas: ■ Operational Area (main infrastructure area); ■ TSF Option 1, 2 and 3; ■ Landfill options 1-5; ■ Alternative Plant area; and ■ Four pipelines leading from TSF Option 2 and 3. Plans 6 to 11 show identified Heritage sites per major infrastructure area. Plan 12 shows the Makapan World Heritage Site in relation to the Platreef Project area.
5.3 Literature Review
5.3.1 Geological background and palaeontological potential Most if the development area is underlain by Precambrian igneous rocks of the Rustenburg Layered Suite of the Bushveld Complex. The south-west section part of the property is underlain by the Molendraai Magnetite Gabbro of the Rustenburg Layered Suite. The south- eastern portions of the property are underlain by the Duitschland Formation and the Malmani Subgroup of the Chuniespoort Group. To the extreme south-east, a small section of the property is underlain by the Uitloop Granites of the Mashashane Suite. The Bushveld Complex is a layered igneous intrusion containing a large reserve of platinum group metals (Lee, 1996; Eales & Cawthorn, 1996). Associated with this complex is the Rustenburg Layered Suite known to be the oldest mafic layered complex on earth (Wilson, 2012). As these rocks are Precambrian in age and of igneous origin it is unlikely that fossils will be affected. The Malmani Subgroup generally comprises dolomite, interbedded chert and shales, quartzite, and a variety of stromatolite structures. The dolomitic rocks this subgroup will contain stromatolites and will also have the potential to have sinkholes and caves which may have Quaternary deposits.
5.3.2 Archaeological and historical background
5.3.2.1 Makapan UNESCO World Heritage Site The Makapan World Heritage Site (WHS) is part of a group of sites that were nominated as a collection of sites that display the same or similar characteristics. This group includes sites
19 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
such as fossil hominid sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans, Kromdraai and environs as well as the Taung Skull Fossil Site. The sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans and Kromdraai were inscribed on the World Heritage Site list in 1999 and received an extension in 2005 to include the Taung Skull Fossil Site and Makapan (UNESCO, 2013). According to the UNESCO website, “Fossils found in the many archaeological caves of the Makapan Valley have enabled the identification of several specimens of early hominids, more particularly of Paranthropus, dating back between 4.5 million and 2.5 million years, as well as evidence of the domestication of fire 1.8 million to 1 million years ago.” (UNESCO, 2013). The sites as a whole were nominated to become UNESCO World Heritage Site according to the following criteria: ■ Criterion (iii): The nominated serial site bears exceptional testimony to some of the most important Australopithecine specimens dating back more than 3.5 million years. This therefore throws light on to the origins and then the evolution of humankind, through the hominisation process. ■ Criterion (vi): The serially nominated sites are situated in unique natural settings that have created a suitable environment for the capture and preservation of human and animal remains that have allowed scientists a window into the past. Thus, this site constitutes a vast reserve of scientific data of universal scope and considerable potential, linked to the history of the most ancient periods of humankind. ■ Integrity (2005): The Fossil Hominid Sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans, Kromdraai and environs together with Makapan Valley and Taung Skull Fossil Site comprise five separate components situated in different provinces and each has a buffer zone. Collectively these components contain the necessary evidence of sites where abundant scientific information on the evolution of modern humans over the past 3.5 million years was uncovered. Furthermore, the nominated serial site covers an area big enough to constitute a vast reserve of scientific information, with enormous potential. ■ Authenticity (2005): As regards authenticity, the sites contain within their deposits all of the key interrelated and interdependent elements in their natural palaeontological relationships. Thus, the breccia representing the cave fillings contains the fossilised remains of hominids, their lithicultural remains (from about 2.0 million years onwards), fossils of other animals, plants and pollen, as well as geochemical and sedimentological evidence of the conditions under which each member of the deposits was laid down. They represent a succession of palaeo‑ecosystems. The caves, breccias and strata from which quantities of fossils or tools have been extracted, together with the landscape are generally intact, but are vulnerable to development pressures, villagers’ use of the environment and tourism.
20 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
The entire collection of sites are protected as National Heritage sites in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999). In terms of this legislation, no person may destroy damage, deface, excavate, alter, remove from its original position, subdivide or change the planning status of any heritage site without a permit issued by the heritage resources authority responsible for the protection of such site. The property size of the Makapan WHS is 2 220 ha, while the buffer zone extends 48 065 ha around the site (Plan 12) according to the Government Gazette GR. 1197 of 2007.
5.3.2.2 Stone Age Evidence suggests that the region surrounding the project area has been inhabited during all periods of the Stone Age, including the Early Stone Age (ESA), Middle Stone Age (MSA) and Later Stone Age (LSA). This is most evident and extensively documented at the Cave of Hearths in the Makapans Valley some 20 km to the east (McNabb & Binyon, 2004; Phillipson, 2005). Previous impact assessments (Huffman, 1997; Fourie, 2002; Pistorius, 2002; Roodt, 2007; Roodt, 2008a; Roodt, 2008b) conducted within and surrounding the project area have all reported stone tool scatters associated with the MSA and LSA. Fourie (2002) also reported on a possible ESA core found on the surface. These finds are commonly asscoiated with water sources, such as rivers and pans. LSA stone tools are commonly assocaited with hunter-gathers, but are also known to occur with Iron Age communities. Resounding rocks or “rock gongs” are features that are often asscoiated with the San/Bushmen culture. These are natural occuring ironstone boulders that either rest ontop of ironstone rocks or other rocks that have natural resonating qualities. While these features are natural and occur all over the country, not all show signs of human interaction and use. The areas of the rock which were constantly beaten to produce sound show a distinct difference in surface patina to the surrounding cortex of the rock. The rocks were either beaten by hand or by using other rocks and pieces of wood. The “rock gongs” were often used in rain-making rituals and medicine dances in which the concussive and resonating sound helps the shaman enter a trace like state in which he/she enters the “Spirit World” to conduct ritual activities (Ouzman, 2001).
5.3.2.3 Iron Age Based on ceramic distributions as defined in Huffman (2007), the project area may possibly produce sites that span from the Early Iron Age through to the Late Iron Age (LIA). Several Eiland facies ceramics have been identified in the region surrounding the project area (WITS, 2010). Huffman (1997) identified two ‘Moloko’ settlements in the region dating to approximately 1500 CE – 1600 CE and several have been recorded by the University of the Witwatersrand. Based on these dates and ceramic distributions, these sites are likely associated with the Madikwe facies of the western Sotho-Tswana. It is also possible that these ceramics belonged to the Ndebele that also occupied the area but whose ceramics belonged to the Letaba or Moloko Traditions (Loubser, 1994). Sites recorded on the
21 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
University of the Witwatersrand Archaeological Database (WAD) indicate that several Ndebele sites occur around this project area. Ethnographically, the Ndebele of the region are divided into two groups with claims to similar origin in the north-west of Kwa-Zulu Natal. It is from here that they moved into the Gauteng and Limpopo region during the 16th – 17th century where they settled and subdivided into separate groups. Metal smelting sites are prevalent within the North-West (NW) Province near Zeerust Rooiberg and the Waterberg region in Limpopo approximately 150 km south-west from the project area (Boeyens, et al., 1995). Evidence of iron, tin and copper smelting is present in these areas with smelting furnaces, tuyere pipe fragments and slag excavated from sites near Rooiberg, NW province (Miller & Hall, 2008).
5.3.2.4 Historical period By the 19th century, several local Ndebele communities occupied the region around the project area, one of the most prominent being the Kekana. In 1837, the Boers arrived at Louis Trichardt marking the first contact between the Boers and Ndebele (Naidoo, 1987). During the latter part of the 19th century the Boers assumed control over the slave and ivory trade after the establishment of the town Piet-Potgietersrus (later Potgietersrus and today Mokopane) in the 1850’s causing tension between the two groups (Tobias, 1945; Bonner, 1983; Delius & Trapido, 1983; Hofmeyr, 1988; Esterhuysen, Sanders, & Smith, 2009; Esterhuysen, 2010). Three incidents resulting from tensions between the Ndebele and the Boers culminated in the infamous Mugombane siege of 1854 at Historic Cave in the Makapans Valley (Tobias, 1945). After this siege in 1858 a second group of Ndebele, the Langa of Hlubi (Nguni) origin under the Chief Mankopane, were attacked by a Boer expedition. Approximately 800 Langa Ndebele were killed. After their defeat, Chief Mankopane settled on Thutlwane Hill which is today located on the farm Kromkloof 744 LR, approximately 40 km north-west of the Platreef Project Area (Jackson, 1969; Jackson, 1982). After these incidents, the Ndebele wanted nothing to do with Boers or Europeans. With regards to literacy, writing was seen as ‘Boer business’ and in 1864 the Ndebele refused to adopt it (Hofmeyr, 1991). Despite this, in 1865 the Berlin Mission Station was given permission to establish a mission under W. Moschutz at the foot of Sefakaola Hill (Macalacaskop) on whose summit resided the capital of Mokopane’s chiefdom. Tensions between the Boers and Ndebele resulted in the mission stations abandonment and use by the Boers as a garrison where they could fire upon Mokopane’s chiefdom, ultimately resulting in the destruction of the mission station. The mission was reoccupied in 1868 but in 1877, Mokopane exercised his authority and ousted the missionaries as he decided that it was a good vantage point for his enemies to spy on him. The chief erected an iron structure from the remains of the station as a symbol of his resistance to European interference. In 1890, Mokopane died and his successor was Lekgobo Valtyn. Valtyn’s view of literacy was different to that of Mokopane as he embraced the idea of literacy and saw it as a resource that could be exploited (Hofmeyr, 1991) and therefore allowed the mission station to be rebuilt.
22 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Also in 1890, a ‘location’ was unofficially established named after Chief Valtyn. By the early 20th century the Berlin Mission Society began to fence off portions of land which again caused tension between local inhabitants and Europeans resulting in what was termed ‘The Fence War’ (Hofmeyr, 1990). It was believed that Europeans were stealing land from local inhabitants. Plans for the official establishment and expansion of the location are evident in a letter dated 6 January 1937 between the Controller of Native Settlements and the Deputy Director of Native Agriculture, where it was discussed that the establishment of the Valtyn Location on the edge of Potgietersrus was intended to provide the growing town with a large cheap labour supply (National Archives and Record Service, 1996). Some measures at mitigating this tightening of control over the land in the area were attempted by Chief Kutter Seleka in the early 1930s. This included the proposed purchase of farms bordering the location, in order to try and extend the pasture for cattle. The farm Rietfontein was eventually bought with the aid of a bond taken out at the Transvaal Consolidated Land and Exploration Company (Ltd) (TCLEC) by Chief Kutter Seleka, and his followers. The bond was granted with interest set at 6%. Rietfontein was bought by the Kekana under Chief Seleka for a sum total of £1983 in November 1929 (National Archives and Record Service, 1996). The present day settlements of Tshamahansi, Mahwereleng, GaMadiba, Maroteng and Masodi are situated on the three farms, Rietfontein, Turfspruit, and Macalacaskop that were originally expropriated from the local farmers.
5.4 Results of stakeholder analysis The Public Participation Process (PPP) identified a total of 1432 stakeholders who have registered as IAPs (Appendix D). These include private individuals, representatives from Government Institutions and Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) Although no registered local heritage conservation bodies were identified, certain organisations and individuals were identified that may have interests in heritage resources. These are listed in Table 5-3.
23 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 5-3: Results of stakeholder analysis for the Platreef Project
Identified stakeholder Role Relevance
SAHRA Commenting authority on general ESIA and HIA High Competent authority with regard to formally protected heritage in terms of Sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 35. 36 and 37 of the NHRA
LIHRA Commenting authority on general ESIA and HIA High Competent authority with regard to formally protected heritage in terms of Section 34 of the NHRA
Limpopo Provincial Provincial authority and leadership High House of Traditional Gatekeepers with regard to provincial Leaders knowledge and heritage
Mokopane Tribal Local authority and leadership High Council Gatekeepers with regard to local knowledge and heritage
Tshamahansi Tribal Local authority and leadership High Council Gatekeepers with regard to local knowledge and heritage
Individuals present at Key informants who would provide the High meetings regarding necessary heritage information Intangible Heritage
During the Public Participation Process, two individuals commented during the public meetings regarding heritage issues. Their concerns were about graves that may be disturbed, and the destruction of medicinal plants (See Table 5-4). These concerns were answered during the public meetings and were addressed in this study by collecting information regarding graves and medicinal plants.
24 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Table 5-4: I&APs consulted and the comments pertaining to heritage resources that were raised during the SEP
Comment Contributor Date Method Response
Platreef is prospecting in Mr Molwatsi 12/07/2013 Stakeholders The prospecting our area and affecting Magongwa Forum activities are regulated animals, plants and ritual Meeting by an Environmental grounds. The trees of our Management Plan ancestors are being (EMP). The specialist destroyed. These are studies for the ESIA used for traditional will address some of medicines. The traditional the issues being healers are now providing raised such as medicines that are medicinal plants and poisonous. Why is Digby heritage issues. Wells only commencing with the studies now when they have been involved in this project for a long time. The damage done has already been felt by the communities.
Platreef wants to build a Mr Lekau 7/07/2013 Public Digby Wells is working dam on the graves. Kekana Meeting hand in hand with the Requests details of what Magongwa - Magongwa South African will happen to the old Community Heritage Resources graves at Makoka, Forum Agency (SAHRA). All Lejwana, Motlhwatlhwa grave sites will be commentary. identified and marked and feedback given to SAHRA. The authorities will be consulted to request permission to relocate the graves. Once this is done, the affected families will be consulted. Thus, there will be no relocation of graves without consultation and agreement with the affected families.
25 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
A focused consultation process was conducted to gather information from relevant stakeholders regarding intangible heritage. These meetings were organized in conjunction with Platreef and a Platreef Community Liaison Officer (Geoffrey Mokhondo) was present at all meetings for translation and logistics purposes. The meetings were conducted by the Heritage Specialist and a questionnaire was used to guide the meeting. These meetings were held on the 29 August 2013 and the 12 September 2013 with the following community groups: Please see Appendix E for attendance registers. ■ Machikiri Community elders; and ■ Tshamahansi Traditional Council respectively. After several failed attempts to organise a meeting with the Mokopane Tribal Council, any efforts to re-organize meetings with said council were abandoned due to time constraints and project deadlines. A meeting was held with the Machikiri Community elders on the 29 August 2013 at the Machikiri kgoro (Figure 5-6). A total of 12 individuals were present, with ages of the attending individuals ranging from 33 to 93. Two members of the Machikiri Community were present to ensure transparency throughout the meeting.
Figure 5-6: Consultation with Machikiri Community elders regarding Intangible Heritage
26 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
According to the informants, men’s and women’s initiation schools were previously performed on the farm Bultongfontein 866 LR. These initiation schools do not stay in one place and change venue every year. The mountain located to the east of the project is named Tsotsodi and community members perform rain-making rituals in a cave on the mountain depicted in Figure 5-7. According to informants, small ceramic pots are used for offerings and are still there today. They also indicated that several plants that are found within the project area that are used for medicinal and ritual purposes. The informants indicated that they previously lived on the farm until they were forced off the land in 1955 due to the Group Areas Act, (Act No.41 of 1950). Individuals would rent the land from a man (Hanes van Bronkhorst) by working for three months without pay and some lived in a hostel on Bultonfontein for free. An elderly woman by the name of Raisebe Tshumune Nong was shot on the farm and buried in 1952 or 1953.
Figure 5-7: Tsotsodi mountain on which rain-making rituals are still performed today
27 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
A meeting was held with the Tshamahansi Community Elders on the 15 September 2013 in Tshamahansi (Figure 5-8). A total of 24 individuals were present, with ages of the attending individuals ranging from 33 to 70. The individuals present spoke mostly Shangaan.
Figure 5-8: Consultation with Tshamahansi Elders regarding Intangible Heritage According to Mr M. J Maluleke (one of the Nduna’s of the village who has grown up in the area) there used to be a group of people living to the north of the present day of Tshamahansi in the area near the TSF Option 2 in the year 1938. According to Mr Maluleke, the area was undeveloped and was used to herd cattle owned by the group. He also stated that the group used ceramic pots, built stone walls and smelted iron. According to Mr J. Ndlovo, an initiation school for boys occurs in the area of the TSF Option 2. The location of the initiation school moves every year, however, it is usually located to the north of the village. According to Anna Manganye, her grandparents used to live in an area between the present day Tshamahansi and Madiba. She stated that her grandparents made ceramic pots, used grinding stone and made houses with reed roofs. She indicated that the pots were produced from various clays in the area and some pots were produced from a mixture of clay and
28 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
black soil. Some pots were burnished with graphite; however she could not remember any specific decorative designs. Informal discussions with fieldworkers during another project in the area, revealed the presence of book called “Motswiring wa Tladi” written by a Prof. Rafapa from the University of UNISA. Apparently the book was written about an old settlement situated between Ga- Magongwa and Ga-Kgabudi; however the book could not be located. A traditional healer by the name of Dr Mohatla was consulted to identify medicinal plants and to understand their significance within the Operational Area. Dr Mohatla is a registered Traditional Health Practitioner (THP). He is also the District Chairperson of THP’s for the Waterberg Municipality, District Leader of the Mogalakwena Municipality and the Limpopo Provincial Committee Member. He indicated that while these plants were important to his work, they are found in many places and are not only found within the project area. The plants and items indicated in Table 5-5 were shown to the heritage specialist that are collected for medicinal and consumption purposes: Table 5-5: Traditional plants and items for traditional medicinal use identified within the Operational Area as indicated by the Traditional Healer
Sepedi names Scientific names Part of plant used
Lepatla Unknown Seeds
Motlahokoko Dichrostachys cinerea Leaves and roots
Motetepe Unknown Unknown
Sephato Gymnosporia buxifolia Unknown
Mosehla Peltophorum africanum Branch
Animal droppings Unknown Unknown
Sehlaresadipoko Unknown Unknown
Mphalatsamaru Asparagus spp Roots and leaves
Sefapabadia Unknown Unknown
Unknown Tephrosia prpurea Unknown
Sethube Unknown Sand
Unknown Gymosporea cf. senegalensis Thorns
Mokgalo Unknown Roots, leaves, fruit and thorns
29 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Marogo Unknown Root
Unknown Hyparhenia hirta Roots
6 RESTRICTIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND KNOWLEDGE GAPS The following restrictions and limitations were encountered during the course of this study: ■ Project related timeframes limited the extensive survey. Sample areas of the larger project area were investigated and assessed resulting in a representative survey; ■ Sickle bush (Dichrostachys cinerea) limited access to certain areas of the project area; ■ Access to the properties along the pipelines was not possible during the time of the survey; and ■ Construction of existing infrastructure may have damaged or destroyed heritage resources that occurred in the area. As a result of the above restrictions and limitations, the following knowledge gaps have occurred: ■ Additional heritage resources may occur within the project area; ■ Due to the nature of archaeological remains, these resources may be located on a subsurface level and be uncovered during the various phases of the project; and ■ The distribution of subsurface palaeontological resources is unpredictable and may only be identified by a qualified palaeontologist after exposure. Consequently, chance find procedures (CFP) must be implemented as required by the NHRA. Refer to Appendix H for the CFP.
7 DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTED HERITAGE RESOURCES This section aims to describe the identified heritage resources (Appendix F), discuss their ascribed values, as well as to assess the impacts of the proposed development on them. The assessment of site value and impacts on sites are presented in the impact assessment matrix in Appendix G. Heritage resources were identified in the TSF Option 2 and 3, Operational Area Alternative Plant, TSF Option 2 pipelines and TSF Option 3 pipelines and are described in that order, per main infrastructure area. No heritage resources were identified in the TSF Option 1 or the five landfill options and are therefore excluded from the Heritage study. CFPs should be put in place during ground clearance if sub-surface heritage resources are identified (See Appendix H).
30 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
A total of 25 isolated surface occurrences, three archaeological sites, 55 burial grounds and one historical werf were identified within the Platreef Project area. A list of all identified heritage resources can be found in Appendix F. Isolated occurrences are surface finds of artefacts within no context or additional information potential. Archaeological sites are often complex sites with evidence of archaeological deposit and various features such as stone walls and middens.
7.1 TSF Option 2 A total of 11 isolated surface occurrences and one archaeological site were identified within the proposed TSF Option 2, all of which will be impacted upon by the construction of the TSF Option 2.
7.1.1 Isolated occurrences A total of 11 isolated surface occurrences and one stone walled site were identified within the TSF Option 2. Of these 11 occurrences, three are Stone Age occurrences and eight are Iron Age occurrences. S.35-001; S.35-004 and S.35-011 were identified as Middle Stone Age (MSA) surface occurrences consisting of alluvial MSA lithics such as flakes with faceted platforms and retouch (Figure 7-1). The remaining occurrences (S.35-002; S.35-003; S.35- 005; S.35-008 to S.35-010; S.35-012 and S.35-013) are Iron Age surface finds. These include lower and upper grinding stones depicted in Figure 7-2 and undiagnostic potsherds. No other material culture was noted that might provide any further site context. No evidence of archaeological deposit was noted. The stone walled site (S.35-007) consists of three sections of stone walls measuring 11 m, 13 m and 10 m, approximately 50 cm wide (Figure 7-3). One section of wall has a 0.5 m entrance halfway through the section, and a lower grinding stone was identified near the entrance. No other material culture was noted that might provide any further site context. No evidence of archaeological deposit was noted.
Figure 7-1: Examples of Middle Stone Age lithics identified within the TSF Option 2 at S.35-004
31 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-2: Example of lower grinding stone identified within the TSF Option 2 at S.35- 009
Figure 7-3: Example of stone walling identified at S.35-007 within the TSF Option 2
32 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.1.1.1 Statement of value
Field value: None The sites S.35-001 to S.35-005 and S.35-007 to S.35-013 have a negligible value in aesthetic and technical characteristics and scientific information because these are undiagnostic finds that cannot be associated with a particular group of people. The rating was informed by credible information sources such as other impact assessment reports which indicate that isolated occurrences of ceramics, lithics and stone walling such as these are common in the Limpopo region. No site context could be established as the heritage resources were degraded to the extent where no information potential exists. Single occurrences such as these sites are inherently without site integrity. Taking these characteristics into account, the heritage resources were given a negligible heritage value.
7.1.1.2 Recommendations The heritage resources are of a negligible value and have been sufficiently recorded. No further mitigation is required.
7.1.2 Description of archaeological and historical resources A single archaeological site (PLA1677/S.35-006) was identified within the proposed TSF Option 2.
7.1.2.1 PLA1677/S.35-006 – Iron Age Smelting Site The site of PLA1677/S.35-006 consists of different features in the landscape, of which a section falls within the project area and another section falls within 800 m of the project area boundary. The section that falls outside the project area were identified during the initial scoping visit conducted in August 2011, while the remaining section were identified during the HIA physical survey in August 2013. The relationship between these separate points has been established due to the presence of slag fragments at the two sections and as such is discussed as one site. The section outside the project area is located on the north-eastern side of group of koppies, just north of the village of Tshamahansi. Erosion gullies are present with numerous surface occurrences of MSA lithics of negligible significance. The site includes terraced walling and two large middens with undiagnostic potsherds and faunal remains. The slag was identified on a slope of a small hill, with tuyere pipe pieces located within the slag deposit. The section located within the project area comprised of a large midden with potsherds, faunal remains and iron slag fragments, and decorated potsherds identified within the spoil heap of an animal burrow. The midden has been disturbed by animal burrows and vegetation growth which are what allowed the artefacts to be identified. Potsherds are undiagnostic; however two sherds had red ochre burnish. Faunal remains were too
33 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
fragmented to assign a species and two small iron slag fragments were identified on the surface. The decorated potsherds were identified on the surface of an animal burrow spoil heap. The decorations on one of the sherds can be described as ‘untidy’ parallel lines filled with incised diagonal lines. These characteristics suggest the potsherds can fall within the Letaba facies (AD1600 – 1840), however as the potsherds are too highly fragmented to be certain. The other two potsherds were too fragmented to assign them to any pottery tradition or facies. Table 7-1: Summary of PLA1677/S.35-006
Site type Smelting site
Site category Iron Age
South/LAT/Y: -24.07816 East/LON/X: 29.00186 The site is situated north of the village of Tshamahansi, within Site location and adjacent to the TSF Option 2. The southern section of the site is located within 70 m of the TSF Option 2, while the remaining section of the site is located 800 m outside the TSF Option 2.
Context Primary
Cultural affinities To be determined
Age Approx: AD 1600-1850.
Significant features Terraced walling, middens and slag heap
Site extent and orientation 980 m x 250 m
Stratification To be determined
Threats or sources of risk
The construction of the proposed TSF Option 2 will destroy the site. In addition, any removal of vegetation and ground clearing may expose more extensive deposit potentially existing subsurface.
Description of Artefacts, Faunal, Botanical or Other Finds and Features
Artefacts
Two potsherds (recently broken) which fit together, with red ochre colouring and “rope” decoration on the rim. A second piece (rim sherd) has a dark finish with two sets of parallel lines with an infill of short diagonal lines. The other piece is a decorated rim sherd in an orange finish with “fingernail” indents on
34 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
the rim. Other potsherds include non-diagnostic potsherds with no decoration and two potsherds with red ochre burnish. One rim sherd was identified with no decoration. Long bone fragments (from a limb) were identified; however no species could be assigned due to the fragmented nature of the remains. Tuyere pipe fragments were also identified.
Features
Several terraced stone walls
Figure 7-4: General view of S.35-006
35 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-5: General view of main smelting site identified at S.35-006 with slag runoff down the slope
Figure 7-6: Decorated potsherds identified at S.35-006
36 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-7: Midden at S.35-006 where slag fragments were identified
a. b.
c.
Figure 7-8: Surface artefacts found at S.35-006: a. undiagnostic potsherds; b. faunal remains; and c. slag fragments identified
37 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.1.2.1.1 Statement of value
9 - <12 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: Medium Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in technical skill, historical information, social association and integrity. The information is based on highly credible sources. It is in a fair to good condition. There is some decay present but it can easily be restored.
7.1.2.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Provincial The impact will affect the entire province or region
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity High Irreparable damage to highly valued items of cultural significance
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the site is located in the infrastructure area.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (103)
The heritage resource is of medium to high heritage value. Smelting sites in the Mokopance region of Limpopo are rare and can contribute to our understanding of the archaeology of the province. Furthermore, the smelting site may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.1.2.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
Duration Permanent Mitigation measures will reduce the impact. mitigated
38 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs it will cause damage to items of cultural significance.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Minor (32)
7.1.2.1.4 Recommendations It is recommended that PLA1677/S.35-006 undergo archaeological mitigation by a qualified archaeologist to adequately record the site if project mitigation cannot be implemented. The mitigation measures include focused archaeological excavations and sampling of the site. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the site before mitigation can take place.
7.2 TSF Option 3 A total of 10 isolated surface occurrences and one burial ground were identified within the proposed TSF Option 3, all of which will be impacted upon by the construction of the TSF Option 3.
7.2.1 Isolated occurrences A total of ten surface occurrences were identified within the TSF Option 3 area. Of these 10 occurrences, three contained Stone Age artefacts and eight contained Iron Age artefacts. S.35-014 (Figure 7-9) and S.35-015 included decorated potsherds identified within animal burrow spoil heaps. S.35-016 and S.35-022 were isolated lower grinding stones (Figure 7-10) and a single undiagnostic potsherd was identified at S.35-017. Decorated potsherds and slag residue was identified at S.35-018 in the spoil heap of an animal burrow depicted in Figure 7-11. Five undiagnostic potsherds were identified at S.35-019, with one fragment measuring 1.5 cm thick with a pronounced curve (Figure 7-12). This could be a possible tuyere fragment. Artefacts identified at S.35-020 and S.35-024 includes MSA flakes found in alluvial material in a large area of erosion. Lithics include flakes, blades and points produced from a fine- grained material. Retouch and cortex is present on many lithics and a number show evidence of faceted platforms (Figure 7-13). Undiagnostic potsherds and MSA flakes were identified at S35-021 on a decomposing calcrete layer as shown in Figure 7-14. S.35-024 also included alluvial MSA lithics and flakes and points were identified at this point (Figure 7-15). All identified potsherds were too fragmented to assign them to any pottery tradition or facies. No other material culture was noted that might provide any further site context. No evidence of archaeological deposit was noted.
39 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-9: Decorated and undecorated potsherds identified at S.35-014 in TSF option 3
Figure 7-10: Example of a lower grinding stone identified within TSF Option 3 at S.35- 016
40 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-11: Decorated potsherds identified at S.35-088 within TSF Option 3 at S.35- 018
Figure 7-12: Undiagnostic potsherds and possible tuyere fragment (centre) identified at S.35-019 within TSF Option 3
41 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-13: Examples of Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35-020 within TSF Option 3
Figure 7-14: Undiagnostic potsherds and Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35- 021
42 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-15: Examples of Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35-024 within TSF Option 3.
7.2.1.1 Statement of value
<3 Resource of no/negligible heritage value as part of national estate None/negligible
Field value: None The sites S.35-014 to S.35-022 and S.35-024 have a negligible value in aesthetic and technical characteristics and scientific information because these are undiagnostic finds that cannot be associated with a particular group of people. The rating was informed by credible information sources such as other impact assessment reports which indicate that isolated occurrences of ceramics and lithics such as these are common in the Limpopo region. No site context could be established as the heritage resources were degraded to the extent where no information potential exists. Single occurrences such as these sites are inherently without site integrity. Taking these characteristics into account, the heritage resources were given a negligible heritage value.
43 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.2.1.2 Recommendations The heritage resources are of a negligible value and have been sufficiently recorded. No further mitigation is required.
7.2.2 Description of burial grounds and graves
7.2.2.1 PLA1677/S.36-023 – Single Grave A single grave was identified within the TSF Option 3 project area (Figure 7-16). The grave has recently been tended by way of clearing the vegetation (Figure 7-17). The grave may be associated with the local community and it located 190 m within the TSF Option 3. Table 7-2: Summary of Site S.36-023
Context Single grave
South/LAT/Y: -24.012918 Site location East/LON/X: 28.983628 The burial ground is located 190 m within the TSF Option 3
One grave present, 3 m x 1.5 m, lower grinding stone within the stone Physical Description dressing
Condition Recently maintained
Age No date
Possible Affinity Affinity with local community
Threats or sources of risk and legal implications
■ Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure associated with the TSF Option 3 area;
■ Potential sources of threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
■ Legal implications based on Section 36 of the NHRA and Regulations Chapter XI (Sections 38-40), consultation with affected families and permit application for possible grave relocation
44 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-16: General view of Grave S.36-023 located within TSF Option 3
Figure 7-17: Detail of Grave S.36-023 located within the TSF Option 3
45 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.2.2.1.1 Statement of value
9 - <12 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: Medium Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in social association and integrity. The burial ground may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources. It is in a fair to good condition. There is some decay present but it can easily be restored. Based on these attributes, the burial ground was given a medium heritage value.
7.2.2.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale National The impact will affect the whole of South Africa as impacted family members may be scattered throught the country.
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Medium to high Very serious widespread social impacts resulting in irreparable damage to burials.
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the burials are located in the mine footprint.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (91)
The heritage resource is of a medium heritage value. Furthermore, the burials may have a strong association to the local community or farmworkers for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.2.2.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
46 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Duration Project life If the impact occurs, it will cease after the operational life span of the Platreef Project.
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs, it will cause damage to burials and human remains.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (30)
7.2.2.1.4 Recommendations If project mitigation measures cannot be implemented, the burial grounds will be negatively impacted on due to the construction of TSF Option 3. As such, it is recommended that the burial grounds be relocated to avoid negative impacts. A Grave Relocation Plan (GRP) must be drafted and implemented in accordance with Section 36 of the NHRA and NHRA Regulations. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the burial ground before mitigation can take place.
7.3 Operational Area A total of two isolated surface occurrences, one archaeological site and 42 burial grounds were identified within the proposed Operational Area, of which all will be impacted upon by the construction of the infrastructure within the project area.
7.3.1 Isolated occurrences One occurrence of MSA lithics and an isolated undiagnostic potsherd were identified within the project area. The S.35-026 represents a surface occurrence of MSA flakes (Figure 7-18) and no other material culture or features were noted that might provide any further site context. No evidence of archaeological deposit was noted. The isolated undiagnostic potsherd located at S.35-057 was identified approximately 100 m within the project area. No other material culture was noted that might provide any further site context. No evidence of archaeological deposit was noted.
47 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-18: Middle Stone Age lithics identified at S.35-026 within Operational Area
7.3.1.1 Statement of value
Field value: None The sites S.35-026 and S.35-057 have a negligible value in aesthetic and technical characteristics and scientific information because these are undiagnostic finds that cannot be associated with a particular group of people. The rating was informed by credible information sources such as other impact assessment reports which indicate that isolated occurrences of ceramics and lithics such as these are common in the Limpopo region. No site context could be established as the heritage resources were degraded to the extent where no information potential exists. Single occurrences such as these sites are inherently without site integrity.
7.3.1.2 Recommendations The heritage resources are of a negligible value and have been sufficiently recorded. No further mitigation is required.
48 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.3.2 Description of archaeological and historical resources Within Operational Area, one archaeological site was identified at S.35-027.
7.3.2.1 PLA1677/S.35-027 – Iron Age/Historical Site S.35-027 is located on a flat landscape between the villages of Ga-Kgubudi and Ga- Magongwa, and an informal settlement. There are the fields from the village of Ga- Magongwa to the east of the site, and prospecting drilling is taking place to the north of the site. A few drill sites have previously been drilled within the site, one in very close proximity to a burial site within the site (S.36-029). The site is dominated with both circular and rectangular stone foundations and remnants of walls. There are 5 burials within the site which are defined as recent burials and do not form part of the site - these will be discussed and assessed separately in Section 7.3.3. The site has been delineated due to the presence of aloes that dominate the site and no stone foundations or signs of settlement are present outside the aloe grove (Figure 7-19). Pathways and terraced walls are present within the site (Figure 7-20). The circular foundations measured between 2.5 m and 3 m in diameter (Figure 7-21). The identified rectangular foundations vary between 4 m and 5 m in length (Figure 7-22). Undiagnostic potsherds surface occurrences, glass and metal fragments were found within the site. Table 7-3: Summary of PLA1677/S.35-027
Site type Stone walled settlement
Site category Late Iron Age/Historical period stone walling site
South/LAT/Y: -24.09194 East/LON/X: 28.95664 Site location The site is located approximately 300 m within the infrastructure area
Context Primary
Cultural affinities Unknown
Age Iron Age or Historical
Circular and rectangular stone foundations, with stone Significant features pathways and terraced walls
Site extent and orientation 750 m x 200 m
Stratification Unknown
49 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Threats or sources of risk
The construction of the infrastructure within the project will destroy the site. In addition, any removal of vegetation and ground clearing may expose more extensive deposit potentially existing subsurface.
Description of Artefacts, Faunal, Botanical or Other Finds and Features
Ceramics
Undiagnostic potsherds scattered throughout the site.
Features
Circular and rectangular stone foundations, stone pathways and terraced walls
Figure 7-19: General view of S.35-027
50 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-20: Stone pathways within the S.35-027
Figure 7-21: Circular stone foundations identified within S.35-027
51 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-22: Rectangular stone foundations identified within S.35-027
7.3.2.1.1 Statement of value
9 - <12 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: Medium Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in artistic value, historical significance, social association and integrity. Its importance is based on credible sources. There is some decay present but it can easily be restored.
7.3.2.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Municipal The impact will affect the whole municipal area.
52 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Medium Significant damage to structures and items of cultural significance.
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the site is located in the infrastructure area.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (91)
The heritage resource is of a medium heritage value. Furthermore, the site may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.3.2.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
Duration Permanent Mitigation measures will reduce the impact. mitigated
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs it will cause damage to items of cultural significance.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (23)
7.3.2.1.4 Recommendations It is recommended that PLA1677/S.35-027 undergo archaeological mitigation by a qualified archaeologist to adequately record the site if project mitigation cannot be implemented. The mitigation measures include intensive mapping and sample excavation of the site. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the site before mitigation can take place.
7.3.3 Description of burial grounds and graves A total of 42 burial grounds were identified within the Operational Area All burial grounds are to be impacted upon in the same manner; therefore the impact assessment will remain the
53 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
same for all burials within the area. For a full list of burial grounds, please see the site list in Appendix F. Burial grounds within the infrastructure area range from stone dressed burials (Figure 7-23) to burials with commercial granite headstones (Figure 7-24). Table 7-4: Summary of burial grounds identified within the Operational Area
Context Burial grounds
All burial grounds are located within the Operational Area with the Site location exception of S.36 050; S.36-055 and S.36-056. These are located within 100 m from the project area.
Physical Description 42 burial grounds
Condition Most are not maintained, with a few exceptions
Age Approx. 100 years to recent
Possible Affinity Affinity with local community
Threats or sources of risk and legal implications
■ Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area
■ Potential sources of threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
■ Legal implications based on Section 36 of the NHRA and Regulations Chapter XI (Sections 38-40), consultation with affected families and permit application for possible grave relocation.
54 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-23: Example of stone dressed burial grounds identified in the Operational Area
Figure 7-24: Example of formal burial identified within the Operational Area
55 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.3.3.1.1 Statement of value
9 - <12 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: Medium Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in social association and integrity. The burial grounds may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources. Most burial grounds are in poor to fair condition with some decay present. Some restoration is required. Based on these attributes, the burial grounds were given a medium heritage value.
7.3.3.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale National The impact will affect the whole of South Africa as impacted family members may be scattered throughout the country.
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Medium to high Very serious widespread social impacts resulting in irreparable damage to burials.
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the burials are located in the mine footprint.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (91)
The heritage resource is of a low to medium heritage value. Furthermore, the burials may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.3.3.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
56 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Duration Project life If the impact occurs, it will cease after the operational life span of the Platreef Project.
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs, it will cause damage to burials and human remains.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (30)
7.3.3.1.4 Recommendations The burial grounds will be negatively impacted on due to the construction of the Operational Area (primary infrastructure area) as this is the area under consideration for the MRA. As such, it is recommended that the burial grounds be relocated to avoid negative impacts such as permanent loss of access and a high probability of damage. A GRP must be drafted and implemented in accordance with Section 36 of the NHRA and NHRA Regulations. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the burial grounds before mitigation can take place.
7.4 Alternative Plant area One archaeological site, one single grave and five burial grounds were identified within the proposed Alternative Plant area, all of which will be impacted upon by the construction of the Alternative Plant area.
7.4.1 Description of archaeological and historical resources The archaeological site is situated over 90% of the Alternative Plant area. The burial grounds are located within the site, however they defined as recent burials and do not form part of the site even though they are situated within the site. These will be discussed and assessed separately in Section 7.4.2.
7.4.1.1 PLA1677/S.35-071 – Iron Age/Historical site The site measures approximately 500 m x 300 m and is located on a small rise within the project area (Figure 7-25). The site consists of rectangular and circular stone foundations (Figure 7-26 and Figure 7-27) and stone walling in the north section and monolithic stone walling at the southern end of the settlement. One area has two circular stone foundations with sun-baked bricks that had collapsed towards the centre (Figure 7-23). Surface occurrences of undiagnostic potsherds are found scattered throughout the western side of the settlement. Decorated potsherds shown in Figure 7-28 were identified near burials (S.35- 073) and adjacent to three burials located within the site (S.36-076) shown in Figure 7-29.
57 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
The stone walling with monolithic elements measures 20 m x 10 m and constitutes one rectangular stone structure with one circular stone structure within the rectangle. The rectangular structure has monoliths standing on the western side of the structure. Two parallel stone walls run towards the rectangular structure, towards an entrance. Two raised stone walled platforms are located north of the rectangular structure (See Figure 7-30 to Figure 7-34). A resounding rock or “gong rock” is located on the western side of the settlement (See Figure 7-35). A total of 8 areas were identified where the cortex of the rock has been worn away from constant hammering. Three large rocks are on-top of a larger rock that show the most amount of wear (See Figure 7-36). A metallic sound is heard when struck with the palm of the hand. MSA lithics are scattered around the “gong rock”, which include flakes with retouch. Table 7-5: Summary of PLA1677/S.35-071
Site type Stone walling
Site category Iron Age
South/LAT/Y: -24.10595
Site location East/LON/X: 28.98375 The site is located within the Alternative Plant area
Context Primary
Cultural affinities Unknown
Age Unknown
Monolithic stone walls, circular and rectangular stone Significant features foundations, “gong rock”
Site extent and orientation 500 m x 300 m
Stratification Unknown
Threats or sources of risk
The construction of the plant will destroy the site. In addition, any removal of vegetation and ground clearing may expose more extensive deposit potentially existing subsurface.
Description of Artefacts, Faunal, Botanical or Other Finds and Features
Artefacts
58 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
MSA flakes with retouch and decorations on potsherds include parallel lines with punctates and bands with incisions and graphite burnish.
Features
Circular stone foundations measuring on average 3 m across, rectangular stone foundations, sun- baked bricks within circular stone foundations, monolithic stone walling and a “gong rock”
Figure 7-25: General view of S.35-071
59 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-26: Example of rectangular stone foundations identified within S.35-071
Figure 7-27: Example of circular stone foundations with sun-baked bricks identified within S.35-071
60 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-28: Decorated and undecorated potsherds identified near burial S.35-073
Figure 7-29: Decorated potsherds located adjacent to the burials at S.36-076
61 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-30: Monolithic stone walling identified within S.35-071
Figure 7-31: Parallel stone walls leading into the main rectangular stone structure identified within S.35-071
62 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-32: Entrance to main rectangular stone structure identified within S.35-071. Note raised stone platforms indicated by the arrows and circular stone foundation indicated by the stippled line.
Figure 7-33: Circular stone foundations located within the rectangular stone structure identified at S.35-071
63 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-34: One of the raised platforms located to the north of the main rectangular structure identified at S.35-071
Figure 7-35: Resounding or “gong rock” identified within S.35-071
64 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-36: Main area of cortex removal on the “gong rock” identified at S.35-071
7.4.1.1.1 Statement of value
9 - <12 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: Medium Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in artistic, value, historical significance, social association and integrity. Its importance is based on credible sources. There is some decay present but it can easily be restored. Based on these attributes the site was given a medium heritage value.
7.4.1.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Municipal The impact will affect the whole municipal area.
65 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Medium Significant damage to structures and items of cultural significance.
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the site is located in the infrastructure area.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (91)
The heritage resource is of a medium heritage value. Furthermore, the site may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.4.1.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
Duration Project life If the impact occurs, it will cease after the operational life span of the Platreef Project.
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs it will cause damage to items of cultural significance.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (23)
7.4.1.1.4 Recommendations It is recommended that PLA1677/S.35-071 undergo archaeological mitigation by a qualified archaeologist to adequately record the site if project mitigation cannot be implemented. The mitigation measures include intensive mapping of the site and features, and sample excavations throughout the site. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the site before mitigation can take place.
66 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.4.2 Description of burial grounds and graves A total of five burial grounds and one single grave are located within the proposed Alternative Plant area. All burial grounds are to be impacted upon in the same manner; therefore the impact assessment will remain the same for all burials within the area. Burial grounds identified within the Alternative Plant area range from stone dressed burials (Figure 7-37) to burials with granite headstones (Figure 7-38). A summary of the burials is provided in Table 7-6. Table 7-6: Summary of burial grounds identified in Alternative Plant area
Context Informal burial grounds
Site location All burials are located within the Alternative Plant area
Physical Description Five burial grounds and one single grave
Condition Generally maintained
Age Approx. 100 years to recent
Possible Affinity Affinity with local community
Threats or sources of risk and legal implications
■ Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in Alternative Plant area;
■ Potential sources of threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
■ Legal implications based on Section 36 of the NHRA and Regulations Chapter XI (Sections 38-40), consultation with affected families and permit application for possible grave relocation
67 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-37: Example of stone dressed burial located within the Alternative Plant area
Figure 7-38: Example of formal burial located within the Alternative Plant area
68 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.4.2.1.1 Statement of value
9 - <12 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: Medium Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in social association and integrity. The burial ground may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources. It is in a poor to fair condition with active decay visible and some overgrown. Some restoration is required. Based on these attributes, the burial ground was given a medium heritage value.
7.4.2.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale National The impact will affect the whole of South Africa as impacted family members may be scattered throught the country.
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Medium to high Very serious widespread social impacts resulting in irreparable damage to burials.
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the burials are located in the mine footprint.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (91)
The heritage resource is of a medium heritage value. Furthermore, the burials may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.4.2.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
69 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Duration Project life If the impact occurs, it will cease after the operational life span of the Platreef Project.
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs, it will cause damage to burials and human remains.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (30)
7.4.2.1.4 Recommendations The burial grounds will be negatively impacted on due to the construction of the Alternative Plant area. As such, it is recommended that the burial grounds be avoided where possible or relocated to avoid negative impacts. If grave relocation is to take place, a GRP must be drafted and implemented in accordance with Section 36 of the NHRA and NHRA Regulations. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the burial grounds before mitigation can take place.
7.5 TSF Option 2 pipeline options One isolated surface occurrence and five burial grounds were identified within the proposed TSF Option 2 pipelines options, all of which will be impacted upon by the construction of the pipelines.
7.5.1 Isolated occurrences An area of collapsed stone walling was identified at S.35-077 (Figure 7-39). No other material culture was noted that might provide any further site context. No evidence of archaeological deposit was noted.
70 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-39: Rough stone walling identified at S.35-077 within the TSF Option 2 pipeline
7.5.1.1 Statement of value
Field value: None The site S.35-077 has a negligible value in aesthetic and technical characteristics and scientific information because these are undiagnostic finds that cannot be associated with a particular group of people. The rating was informed by credible information sources such as other impact assessment reports which indicate that isolated occurrences of stone walling such as these are common in the Limpopo region and where they do occur, they are of no information potential. No site context could be established as the heritage resources were degraded to the extent where no information potential exists. Single occurrences such as these sites are inherently without site integrity. Taking these characteristics into account, the heritage resources were given a negligible heritage value.
71 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.5.1.2 Recommendations The heritage resource is of a negligible value and has been sufficiently recorded. No further mitigation is required.
7.5.2 Description of burial grounds and graves A total of five burial grounds are located within the TSF Option 2 Pipelines. All burial grounds are to be impacted upon in the same manner; therefore the impact assessment will remain the same for all burials within the area. For a full list of burial grounds and descriptions, please see the site list in Appendix F. Table 7-7: Summary of burial grounds identified within TSF Option 2 pipelines
Context Burial grounds
All burials are located within the 100 m buffer-zone of the TSF Option 2 Site location pipelines
Physical Description 5 burial grounds present
Condition Generally maintained
Age Unknown
Possible Affinity Affinity with local community
Threats or sources of risk and legal implications
■ Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of pipeline;
■ Potential sources of threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
■ Legal implications based on Section 36 of the NHRA and Regulations Chapter XI (Sections 38-40), consultation with affected families and permit application for possible grave relocation
7.5.2.1.1 Statement of value
Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in historical and social association and integrity. The burial grounds may have a strong association to the local community for historical, social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources. Most burial grounds are in poor to fair condition with some decay present. Some restoration is required. Based on these attributes, the burial grounds were given a medium heritage value.
72 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.5.2.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale National The impact will affect the whole of South Africa as impacted family members may be scattered throught the country.
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Medium to high Very serious widespread social impacts resulting in irreparable damage to burials.
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the burials are located in the mine footprint.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (91)
The heritage resource is of a medium heritage value. Furthermore, the burials may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.5.2.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
Duration Project life If the impact occurs, it will cease after the operational life span of the Platreef Project.
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs, it will cause damage to burials and human remains.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (30)
73 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.5.2.1.4 Recommendations The burial grounds will be negatively impacted on due to the construction of the TSF Option 2 pipelines. As such, it is recommended that the burial grounds be avoided where possible or relocated to avoid negative impacts. If grave relocation is to take place, a GRP must be drafted and implemented in accordance with Section 36 of the NHRA and NHRA Regulations. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the burial grounds before mitigation can take place.
7.6 TSF Option 3 Pipelines One isolated surface occurrence, one historical werf and one burial ground were identified within the proposed TSF Option 3 Pipelines, all of which will be impacted upon by the construction of the pipelines.
7.6.1 Isolated occurrences Undiagnostic potsherds were identified at S.35-084 in close proximity to a farm fence and no other material culture was noted that might provide any further site context. No evidence of archaeological deposit was noted.
74 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-40: Undiagnostic potsherds identified at S.35-084 within TSF Option 3
7.6.1.1 Statement of value
Field value: None The site S.35-084 has a negligible value in aesthetic and technical characteristics and scientific information because these are undiagnostic finds that cannot be associated with a particular group of people. The rating was informed by credible information sources such as other impact assessment reports which indicate that isolated occurrences of ceramics such as these are common in the Limpopo region. No site context could be established as the heritage resources were degraded to the extent where no information potential exists. Single occurrences such as these sites are inherently without site integrity. Taking these characteristics into account, the heritage resources were given a negligible heritage value.
7.6.1.2 Recommendations The heritage resources are of a negligible value and have been sufficiently recorded. No further mitigation is required.
7.6.1 Description of built environment resources
7.6.1.1 PLA1677/S.34-083] – Historical werf A historical werf is located on the N11 within the buffer-zone of the pipeline. The werf includes a main residence located approximately 100 m from the road, and an outbuilding is located immediately adjacent to the road. The main residence is surrounded by Agave sp., Erythrina sp. and Euphorbia sp. and appears to be a two storey building with two chimneys. According to aerial imagery from 1948, the farmstead appears to be well established and can be assumed to be over 60 years old. No access was possible to the property so a full examination of the building was not possible at the time of the survey; therefore a cursory impact assessment has been conducted on the complex. The Olifants River Water Resources Development Project is currently installing water pipes through the farmstead complex, disturbing the site. Table 7-8: Summary of Site S.34-083
Site Type Historical werf
Site category Residential
South/LAT/Y: -24.03768 Site location East/LON/X: 28.98044 The farmstead complex is located within the buffer-zone of the
75 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
pipelines
Context Located next to the N11 within the buffer-zone of the pipeline
Age Over 60 years
Significant features Two chimney stacks on either side of the building
Site extent Unknown
Threats or sources of risk
■ Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure associated with the TSF Option 3 pipelines;
■ Potential sources of threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of werf by construction workers on site.
Description of structure present
Main residence and outbuildings
Description of features present
Two chimney stacks on either side of the building
Condition of site
Good condition, however a full examination of the structure was not possible due to access issues
Figure 7-41: Partial view of the main residence located at S.34-083
76 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-42: Outbuilding located as part of the farmstead complex located at S.34-083
Figure 7-43: Olifants River Water Resources Development Project installing water pipes through the farmstead complex located at S.34-083
77 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
7.6.1.1.1 Statement of value
<3 Resource of no/negligible heritage value as part of national estate None/negligible
Field rating: IV B The heritage resource has a low to negligible heritage value in aesthetic and technical characteristics, historic association and social association. The rating was informed by credible information sources such as peer-reviewed publications that have indicated that historical farmstead complexes such as these are commonplace in Limpopo. The werf was identified, recorded and assessed by a generalist heritage practitioner. As a result, the ascribed significance value was only evaluated on one dimension – Historic.
7.6.1.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited The impact will be limited to the site and its immediate surroundings
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Low to medium Damage to items of cultural significance
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the farmstead complex is located in the pipeline footprint.
Magnitude Minor (26)
The heritage resource is of a low to negligible heritage value. Furthermore, the werf may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.6.1.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
78 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Duration Project life If the impact occurs, it will cease after the operational life span of the Platreef Project.
Severity Low Low-level repairable damage to commonplace structures
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude Minor (4)
7.6.1.1.4 Recommendations It is recommended that the werf be avoided to circumvent negative impact to the site. If project mitigation measures cannot be implemented and the werf will be impacted on, a Built Heritage Assessment must be conducted by a qualified Built Heritage Specialist to provide further terms of reference. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the site before mitigation can take place.
7.6.2 Description of burial grounds and graves
7.6.2.1 PLA1677/S.36-085] – Formal cemetery A formal cemetery located within the buffer-zone of the TSF Option 3 pipeline. The cemetery is fenced, maintained and is still in use. It contains many graves, with both stone dressed and granite headstones. Table 7-9: Summary of Site S.36-085
Context Formal cemetery
South/LAT/Y: -24.06323 Site location East/LON/X: 28.96786 Located within the buffer-zone of the TSF Option 3 pipelines
Physical Description 100 m x 200 m
Condition Generally maintained
Age Unknown
Possible Affinity Affinity with local community
Threats or sources of risk and legal implications
■ Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of
79 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
infrastructure associated with the TSF Option 3 pipelines;
■ Potential sources of threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
■ Legal implications based on Section 36 of the NHRA and Regulations Chapter XI (Sections 38-40), consultation with affected families and permit application for possible grave relocation
Figure 7-44: General view of the formal cemetery identified at S.36-085 within the buffer-zone of the TSF Option 3 pipeline
80 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Figure 7-45: Signboard outside formal cemetery S.36-085
7.6.2.1.1 Statement of value
9 - <12 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: Medium Field rating: IV A The heritage resource has a medium local heritage value in historical and social association and integrity. The burial ground may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources. It is in a fair to good condition. There is some decay present but it can easily be restored. Based on these attributes, the burial ground was given a medium heritage value.
7.6.2.1.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact Negative impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
81 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Scale National The impact will affect the whole of South Africa as impacted family members may be scattered throught the country.
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation.
Severity Medium to high Very serious widespread social impacts resulting in irreparable damage to burials.
Probability Certain/definate The impact will occur as the burials are located in the mine footprint.
Magnitude of impact Moderate (99)
The heritage resource is of a medium heritage value. Furthermore, the burials may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources.
7.6.2.1.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
Duration Project life If the impact occurs, it will cease after the operational life span of the Platreef Project.
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs, it will cause damage to burials and human remains.
Probability Unlikely/low There is a possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (32)
7.6.2.1.4 Recommendations As such, it is recommended that the burial grounds be avoided where possible or relocated to avoid negative impacts. If grave relocation is to take place, a GRP must be drafted and implemented in accordance with Section 36 of the NHRA and NHRA Regulations. In the interim, a site management plan which will include monthly monitoring must be drafted to ensure the in-situ preservation of the burial ground before mitigation can take place.
82 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
8 MAKAPAN WORLD HERITAGE SITE The Makapan WHS is part of a group of sites that were nominated as a collection of sites that display the same or similar characteristics. This group includes sites such as fossil hominid sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans, Kromdraai and environs as well as the Taung Skull Fossil Site. The sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans and Kromdraai were inscribed on the World Heritage Site list in 1999 and received an extension in 2005 to include the Taung Skull Fossil Site and Makapan (UNESCO, 2013). According to the UNESCO website, “Fossils found in the many archaeological caves of the Makapan Valley have enabled the identification of several specimens of early hominids, more particularly of Paranthropus, dating back between 4.5 million and 2.5 million years, as well as evidence of the domestication of fire 1.8 million to 1 million years ago.” (UNESCO, 2013). The Makapan Cave served as a sanctuary for the Kekana Ndebele when they were under attack from Trekboers, where over 300 Ndebele were killed and where Piet Potgieter was shot (Esterhuysen, et al., 2009). Table 8-1: Summary of the Makapan WHS
Site type Cave complex
Site category Palaeontological, Stone Age and Historical
South/LAT/Y: -24.158611
Site location East/LON/X: 29.176944 This site is located approximately 17 km east from the project area
Context Primary
Cultural affinities Hominids. Ndebele and Voortrekker
Age 4.5 million years to recent
Significant features Large cave complex
Site extent and orientation 48065 ha
Stratification Extensive
Past environment information Provide information back to 4.5 million years ago
Threats or sources of risk
No threats or sources of risks caused by the Platreef Project have been identified on the WHS.
Description of Artefacts, Faunal, Botanical or Other Finds and Features
83 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Early hominid fossils, Early to Late Stone Age lithics, ceramics and human remains
8.1 Statement of value
15 - 18 Resource of exceptional value and must be considered for inclusion in national estate: High Field rating: Grade 1 - National The heritage resource has a high local heritage value in artistic, value, historical significance, social association and integrity, as well as it is a WHS. Its importance is based on credible sources. Based on these attributes the site was given a high value.
8.2 Rating of impact (pre-mitigation)
Type of Impact No impact
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale International The effect will occur across international borders
Duration Permanent/no No mitigation measures of natural process will reduce the impact mitigation after implementation
Severity High Irreparable damage to highly valued items of great cultural significance
Probability None No impact will occur on the site
Magnitude of impact Low to negligible (24)
The heritage resource is of a high heritage value. Furthermore, the site may have a strong association to the local community for social, cultural and spiritual reasons. Its importance is also based on highly credible information sources. Factors such as noise pollution, air pollution and visual effects caused by the Platreef Project will not impact the core site.
An Environmental Noise Assessment, Air Quality Assessment and a Visual Impact Assessment were conducted as part of the ESIA for the Platreef Project (Crone, 2013; Jovic, 2013 and Sadler, 2013). Results from these studies indicate that these factors will not impact the core Makapan WHS. A visual impact is expected on the buffer-zone of the WHS; however the town of Mokopane, industrial areas and national roads currently cause a visual impact on the buffer-zone. Impacts caused by noise and air pollution from the Platreef Project will be contained to the project area itself and the immediate surrounding areas.
84 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
8.3 Rating of impact (post-mitigation)
Type of Impact Positive change
Rating of Impacts
Characteristic Designation Summary of Reasoning
Scale Limited If the impact occurs, it will be limited to the site and its immediate surrounding.
Duration Permanently No impact will occur on the site. mitigated
Severity Low to medium If the impact occurs it will cause damage to items of cultural significance.
Probability Unlikely/low There is no possibility that the impact will occur. probability
Magnitude of impact Low to Minor (23)
8.4 Recommendations No Project-related mitigation measures such as changes to design or mine plan was considered necessary as there will be no impact on the Makapan WHS.
9 DISCUSSION The project footprint area consists mainly of agricultural land, grazing land and road servitudes. These areas have been previously impacted upon due to agricultural and pastoral activities, as well as the construction of roads and exploration drill rigs. Medicinal plants that were identified during the fauna and flora report, as well as through consultation were found to occur across the project area; however they are not endemic to the project area. According to Dr Mohatla, the plants are highly significant to the Traditional Healers within the community; however they can be sourced elsewhere. The two archaeological sites identified at Operational Area (S.35-027) and the Alternative Plant area (S.35-106) share similar characteristics, such as a mixture of circular and rectangular stone foundations, and both sites are located in areas dominated with Aloe sp. While one site has monolithic stone walling and a “gong rock”, it can be assumed that they were settled at the same time and both settlements may have been inhabited at the same time as they share similar characteristics. During times of peace, these sites with good access to grazing and agricultural areas would have flourished within the floodplains. Features such as “gong rock” are usually associated with hunter-gatherers; however this example may have had a role within the Iron Age/Historical community that resided in the
85 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
settlement nearby (S.35-071). These sites may also have a link to the historical Ndebele that resided on Sefakaola Hill (Macalacaskop), the capital of Mokopane’s chiefdom in 1854 approximately 5 km south from S.35-027 and S.35-071. The smelting site identified at TSF Option 2 (S.35-006) may be a representation of a different group, and time period, as the stone walling is different to that of the S.35-027 and S.35-071. Smelting sites are not common within the Mokopane region and this site has the potential to broaden the archaeological model of the Iron Age of the Limpopo Province. There are still community members within Tshamahansi that remember that a group was living in the hills behind the present day village and recall that they smelted iron. Although no signs of settlements indicated during social consultation were identified within the TSF Option 3 area, community members from Machikiri have strong cultural, historical and spiritual ties to the area due to their on-going rain rituals that are performed on the mountain to the east of the project area and the collection of medicinal plants. According to background research, the werf identified along the TSF Option 3 pipeline is a common representation of a typical structure that can be identified in the surrounding areas. Though it could not be fully accessed during the time of the survey and only a cursory assessment was conducted, it is already impacted upon by the Olifants River Water Resources Development Project and the N11 with its associated infrastructure. The werf may have historical ties to the Witvinger Nature Reserve as it is situated at the entrance to the reserve. Burials identified within project areas are mostly recent and are still connected to those residing in nearby villages. They are part of the living heritage of the communities and are significant as shown by the comments made during public meetings. Community members still visit their ancestors as shown by various burial grounds showing signs of on-going maintenance. The Makapan WHS will not be impacted on by the Platreef Project with regards to visual, noise and air quality factors. The WHS is approximately 17 km east of the project area and any air quality and noise impacts caused by project will be contained with the project area and the immediate surrounding areas. The predominant wind direction is from the northeast, frequent winds mainly from the NW and SE quadrant and it is anticipated that there will be no influence with regards to dust and gaseous pollutants as the Maribashoekberge range that is situated to the west of Makapan will act as a barrier to any air pollution or dust from the proposed Platreef operations. A visual impact will occur on the buffer-zone and this visual impact is expected to be minimal as the buffer is at least 10 km from the proposed infrastructure. There is also likely to be an existing visual impact from the industrial area of Mokopane that already affects this part of the buffer. The proposed Platreef Project is, therefore, expected to have a minimal visual impact on the buffer and no visual impact on the core area of the Makapan Valley WHS.
86 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
10 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Platreef Project is proposed to be an underground mine with associated infrastructure such as a TSF, Plant, pipelines and landfill options. The project footprint is proposed to cover over 2 247 ha over land that is used for grazing and agricultural purposes. Residential areas are located in close proximity to the project area and these communities have special association with the impact areas due to burial grounds and medicinal plants in the project area. From the research conducted on the Study Area, it is evident that cultural heritage exists in this area of Limpopo which spans from the Stone Age to more recent times. Heritage resources that can be found include Iron Age/Historical settlements, historical structures and burial grounds. These heritage resources highlight the uniqueness of Mokopane and the surrounding areas. During the HIA survey, a total of three archaeological sites, one historical werf and 55 burial grounds were identified within the project areas. Areas associated with intangible heritage were identified within the TSF Option 2 and 3, the Alternative Plant area and the Operational Area. All of these sites are located within the proposed infrastructure footprint areas and will be impacted on by the proposed development. During the field survey, no surface fossils were identified in the project area, specifically in the areas overlying the rocks of the Duitschland Formation and the Malmani Supergroup of the Chuniespoort Group. Fossils may exist beneath the surface but their existence can only be verified through monitoring excavations. In this sense, the impact of construction activities such as excavations is positive for palaeontology, provided that efforts are made to monitor and rescue fossils Potential impacts on the archaeological sites may be avoided through the implementation of feasible mitigation measures related to project design and planning. If this is not feasible, archaeological mitigation must be conducted by a qualified archaeologist to adequately investigate and record the sites. Mitigation measures for the impacted sites include archaeological excavation, sample excavations such as shovel test pits and intensive mapping. It is recommended that the historical werf be avoided to reduce negative impact to the site. If project mitigation measures cannot be implemented, the site should undergo a Built Environment Assessment by a qualified historical architect to accurately determine the significance value of the resources and provide appropriate mitigation measures. Potential impacts on the burial grounds may be avoided though the implementation of feasible mitigation measures related to project design and planning. The burial grounds may therefore be preserved in situ ensuring protection during development and the long-term. Project-related mitigation measures and site managements should be implemented to reduce the significance of the impact. Mitigation measures include:
87 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
■ The project mitigations measures include adjusting the proposed infrastructure areas location a minimum of 100 m from the burial grounds to reduce negative impacts; ■ The burial grounds should be protected and conserved in perpetuity. Access to the burial grounds should be negotiated with communities in the immediate area; ■ A perimeter fence should be built around the burial grounds and placed two meters away from the perimeter. The perimeter fences should include an entry gate to allow visits from relatives and family friends. The mine should be responsible for the maintenance of these fences; and ■ The Environmental Control Officer (ECO) should be present on site when these fences are being erected around the burial grounds. ■ Detailed project design should ensure that there is a 100 m buffer between the perimeter fence and the proposed infrastructure areas. If the above measures cannot be implemented, a GRP must be drafted and implemented in accordance with Section 36 of the NHRA and NHRA Regulations. Grave relocation will be necessary for the Operational area as this is the area for which the MRA is being considered. Graves will be negatively impacted on due to a permanent loss of access and a high probability of damage. In future, other areas within the broader lease area of the Platreef Project will undergo grave relocation as the lease area (not yet determined) will be fenced off to prevent residential encroachment. Grave located within the lease area will be negatively impacted on due to the loss of access and a probability of damage. Although the location and number of graves have not been confirmed, the lease area will be systematically surveyed in a phased approach and community consultation and grave relocation will occur as necessary. A Conservation Management Plan (CMP) will be drawn up in the interim for all heritage resources that are to be impacted on by the proposed development. The aim of the CMP is to monitor and manage the in-situ conservation of the heritage resources before mitigation can take place while activities such as prospecting and bulk sampling are to occur. Monitoring will occur on a monthly basis and monitoring reports will be submitted to SAHRA for review. No visual, air quality and noise impacts will be experienced at the Makapan WHS as shown by the various specialists’ reports conducted as part of the ESIA and therefore no mitigation measures are recommended. Sub-surface heritage resources may be present within the project area and Chance Finds Procedures should be adhered to during the ground clearance and construction phase of the project if additional heritage resources are uncovered.
88 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
11 REFERENCES Boeyens, J., Küsel, M. & Miller, D., 1995. Metallurgical Analyses of Slags, Ores, and Metal Artefacts from Archaeological Sites in the North-West Province and Northern Transvaal. The South African Archaeological Bulletin, 50(161), pp. 39-54. Bonner, P., 1983. Kings, commoners and concessionaires. The evolution and dissolution of the nineteenth century Swazi State. African Study Series, Volume 31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crone, S., 2013. Topography and Visual Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Project, Randburg: Digby Wells Environmental. Delius, P. & Trapido, S., 1983. Inboekselings and oorlams: The creation and transformation of a servile class. In: B. Bozzoli, ed. Town and Countryside in the Transvaal. Capitalist Penetration and Popular Response. Johannesburg: Ravan Press. Eales, H. V. & Cawthorn, R. G., 1996. The Bushveld Complex. Developments in Petrology, Volume 15, pp. 181 - 229. Esterhuysen, A. B., 2010. Excavation at Historic Cave, Makanpans Valley, Limpopo. South African Archaeological Bulletin, 65(191), pp. 67 - 83. Esterhuysen, A. B., Sanders, V. M. & Smith, J. M., 2009. Human skeletal and mummified remains from the AD1854 siege of Mugombane, Limpopo South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science, Volume 36, pp. 1038 - 1049. Fourie, W., 2002. Cultural Heritage Assesment of Volspruit 326 KR, District of Potgietersrus, Limpopo Province, Unpublished Report by: Matakoma Consultants. Government of the Republic of South Africa, 2007. Proclamation of the Fossil Hominid Sites of South Africa (Consisting Of Fossil Hominid Sites Of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans, Kromdraai and the Environs, Taung Skull Fossil Site and Makapan Valley) as a World Heritage Site in terms of the World Heritage Conve. s.l.:Government Gazette. Greffrath, R., 2013. Flora and Fauna report for Platreef, Randburg: Digby Wells Environmental. Hofmeyr, I., 1988. Oral and written versions of the Makapansgat Siege. In: R. Mason, ed. Cave of Hearths, Makapansgat, Transvaal. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand, Archaeological Research Unit, pp. 417 - 426. Hofmeyr, I., 1990. 'Nterata'/'The Wire': Fences, boundaries and cultural resistance in the Potgietersrus District. Johannesburg, University of the Witwatersrand. Hofmeyr, I., 1991. Jonah and the Swallowing Monster: Orality and literacy on a Berlin Mission Station in the Transvaal. Journal of South African Studies, 17(4), pp. 633 - 653. Huffman, T. N., 1997. Archeaological Survey of the Doorndrai Dam, Potgietersrus pipeline, Unpublished Report by: Archeaological Resource Management.
89 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Huffman, T. N., 2007. Handbook to the Iron Age: The Archaeology of Pre-Colonial Farming Societies in Southern Africa. Cape Town: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press. IFC, 2012. International Finance Corporation's Policy on Environmental and Social Sustainability, s.l.: International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group. Jackson, A. O., 1969. The history and political structure of the Mapela Chiefdom of the Potgietersrus District, s.l.: s.n. Jackson, A. O., 1982. The Ndebele of Langa, s.l.: s.n. Jovic, V., 2013. Air Quality Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Platinum Mine, Randburg: Digby Wells Environmental. Lee, C. A., 1996. A review of mineralization in the Bushveld Complex and some other layered intrusions. Developments in Petrology, Volume 15, pp. 103 - 145. Loubser, J. N., 1994. Ndebele archaeology of the Pietersburg area. Navorsinge van die Nasionale Museum (Bloemfontein), Volume 10, pp. 61-147. Low, A. B. & Rebelo, A. G., 1996. Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland.. Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. McNabb, J. & Binyon, F. &. H. L., 2004. The large cutting tools from the South African Acheulean and the question of social traditions, Current Anthropology: 45(5): 653-677. Miller, D. & Hall, S., 2008. Rooiberg revisited -the analysis of tin and copper smelting debris. Historical Metallurgy, 42(1), pp. 23-38. Morton, F., 2005. Female inboekelinge in the South African republic. Slavery and Abolition, 26(2), pp. 199 - 215. Mucina, L., Rutherford, M. C. & Powrie, L., 2006. Vegetation Map of South Africa, Lesotho & Swaziland. Pretoria.: SANBI. Naidoo, J., 1987. The siege of Makapansgat: a massacre? and a Trekker victory?. History in Africa, Volume 14, pp. 173 - 187. National Archives and Record Service, 1996. National Archives Repository. Viewed August 2011: NARS Database. Ouzman, S., 2001. Seeing is Deceiving: Rock Art and the Non-Visual. World Archaeology, 33(2), pp. 237-256. Phillipson, D. W., 2005. African Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pistorius, J. C., 2002. A Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Overysel Zwartfontein (PPRust North) Project. Amendment to Potgietersrust Platinums LTD's (PPRust) Environmental Management Programme Report (EMPR) Report, Unpublished Report by: SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists Potgietersrust Platinum Mine.
90 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Roodt, F., 2007. Phase 1 Heritage Resource Impact Assessment: Access Road Zebetiela Engen One-Stop Complex North Statement With Regard to Heritage Resources Management , Unpublished Report by: Synergistics Environmental Services. Roodt, F., 2008a. Phase 1 Heritage Resource Impact Assesment ( Scoping & Evaluation): Mooiplaas Residential Development Mokopane, Limpopo, Unpublished Report for: Envirosolutions. Roodt, F., 2008b. Phase 1 Heritage Resource Impact Assesment (Scoping & Evaluation): Landfill and Salvage Yard Anglo Platinum: Mogalakwena Section, Limpopo, Unpublished Report for: SRK Consulting. Sadler, L., 2013. Environmental Noise Assessment for the proposed Platreef Mining Project, Randburg: Digby Wells Environmental. SANBI, S. N. B. I., 2011. Savanna Biome.. [Online] [Accessed 13 September 2013]. Tobias, P. V., 1945. Student scientific expedition to the Makapan. WU's Views, 9(5), p. 1. UNESCO, 2013. Fossil Hominid Sites of South Africa. [Online] Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/915/ [Accessed 11 September 2013]. Van Schalkwyk, J., 2011. Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Upgrade of a Section of the N11 National Route North of Mokopane, Limpopo Province, Unpublished Report by: SSI Environmental Consultants. Wessels, B., 2013. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for the Platreef Project, Randburg: Digby Wells Environmental. Wilson, M. G. C., 2012. Summary of Economic Geology of Provinces: Limpopo Province. [Online] Available at: http://www.geoscience.org.za [Accessed 5 November 2012]. WITS, 2010. Archaeological Site Database, Johannesburg: Department of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Science.
91 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Specialist
JOHAN NEL
Mr Johan Nel Unit manager: Heritage Resources Management Social Sciences Digby Wells Environmental
1 EDUCATION 2002 BA Honours - Archaeology 2001 BA Anthropology & Archaeology 1997 Matriculated Brandwag Hoërskool
2 LANGUAGE SKILLS Fluent in English and Afrikaans
3 EMPLOYMENT 2011 to present Unit manager: Heritage Resources Management, Digby Wells Environmental 2010-2011 Archaeologist, Digby Wells Environmental 2005-2010 Manager and co-owner, Archaic Heritage Project Management 2003-2005 Freelance archaeologist Resident archaeologist, Rock Art Mapping Project, Ndidima, Ukhahlamba- Drakensberg World Heritage Site 2002-2003 Special Assistant: Anthropology, Department of Anatomy, University of Pretoria 2001-2002 Technical Assistant: Department of Anatomy, University of Pretoria 1999-2001 Assistant: Mapungubwe Project, National Cultural History Museum & Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, UP
4 EXPERIENCE I have 13 years of combined experience in the field of cultural heritage resources management (HRM) including archaeological and heritage assessments, grave relocation, social consultation and mitigation of archaeological sites. I have gained experience both within urban settings and remote rural landscapes. Since 2010 I have been actively involved in environmental management that has allowed me to investigate and implement the integration of heritage resources management into environmental impact assessments (EIA). Many of the projects since have
______Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd. Co. Reg. No. 1999/05985/07. Fern Isle, Section 10, 359 Pretoria Ave Randburg Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125, South Africa Tel: +27 11 789 9495, Fax: +27 11 789 9498, [email protected], www.digbywells.com ______Directors: A Sing*, AR Wilke, LF Koeslag, PD Tanner (British)*, AJ Reynolds (Chairman) (British)*, J Leaver*, GE Trusler (C.E.O) *Non-Executive ______
required compliance with International Finance Corporation (IFC) requirements and other World Bank standards. This exposure has allowed me to develop and implement a HRM approach that is founded on international best practice and leading international conservation bodies such as UNESCO and ICOMOS. I have worked in most South African Provinces, as wells Swaziland, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sierra Leone. I am fluent in English and Afrikaans, with excellent writing and research skills.
5 PROJECT EXPERIENCE PHASE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS: ■ Above Ground Storage Tanks survey, SASOL Oil (Pty) Ltd, Free State Province, South Africa ■ Access road establishment , AGES-SA, Tzaneen, South Africa ■ Boikarabelo Railway Link, Resgen South Africa, Steenbokpan, South Africa ■ Conversion of prospecting rights to mining rights, Georock Environmental, Musina, South Africa ■ Galaxy Gold Agnes Mine, Barberton, South Africa ■ HCI Khusela Palesa Extension, Bronkhorstspruit, South Africa ■ Kennedy’s Vale township establishment, AGES-SA, Steelpoort, South Africa ■ Koidu Diamond Mine, Koidu Holdings, Koidu, Sierra Leone ■ Lonmin Platinum Mine water pipeline survey, AGES-SA, Lebowakgomo, South Africa ■ Mining right application, DERA Environmental, Hekpoort, South Africa ■ Mogalakwena water pipeline survey, AGES-SA, Limpopo Province, South Africa ■ Nzoro Hydropower Station, Environmental and Social Impact Assessment, DRC ■ Randgold Kibali Gold Project, Environmental and Social Impact Assessment, Kibali, Democratic Republic of the Congo ■ Randwater Vlakfontein-Mamelodi water pipeline survey, Archaeology Africa cc, Gauteng, South Africa ■ Residential and commercial development, GO Enviroscience, Schoemanskloof, South Africa ■ Temo Coal, Limpopo, South Africa ■ Transnet Freight Line survey, Eastern Cape and Northern Cape, ERM, South Africa ■ Van Reenen Eco-Agri Development Project, GO Enviroscience, South Africa ■ Platreef Platinum Mine, Ivanhoe Nickel & Platinum, Mokopane, South Africa
MITIGATION PROJECTS: ■ Mitigation of Iron Age archaeological sites: Kibali Gold Project, DRC
2
■ Mitigation of Iron Age metalworking site: Koidu Diamond Mine, Sierra Leone ■ Mitigation of Iron Age sites: Boikarabelo Coal Mine, South Africa ■ Exploratory test excavations of alleged mass burial site: Rustenburg, Bigen Africa Consulting Engineers, South Africa ■ Mitigation of Old Johannesburg Fort: Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA), South Africa ■ Site monitoring and watching brief: Department of Foreign Affairs Head Office, Imbumba- Aganang Design & Construction Joint Venture, South Africa GRAVE RELOCATION ■ Du Preezhoek-Gautrain Construction, Bombela JV, Pretoria, South Africa ■ Elawini Lifestyle Estate social consultation, PGS (Pty) Ltd, Nelspruit, South Africa; ■ Motaganeng social consultation, PGS (Pty) Ltd Burgersfort, South Africa ■ Randgold Kibali Mine, Relocation Action Plan, Kibali, DRC ■ Repatriation of Mapungubwe National Park and World Heritage Site, DEAT, South Africa ■ Smoky Hills Platinum Mine social consultation, PGS (Pty) Ltd Maandagshoek South Africa ■ Southstock Colliery, Doves Funerals, Witbank, South Africa ■ Tygervallei. D Georgiades East Farm (Pty) Ltd, Pretoria, South Africa ■ Willowbrook Ext. 22, Ruimsig Manor cc, Ruimsig, South Africa ■ Zondagskraal social consultation, PGS (Pty) Ltd,Ogies, South Africa ■ Zonkezizwe Gautrain, PGS, (Pty) Ltd, Midrand, South Africa OTHER HERITAGE ASSESSMENTS AND REVIEWS: ■ Heritage Scoping Report on historical landscape and buildings in Port Elizabeth: ERM South Africa ■ Heritage Statement and Cultural Resources Pre-assessment scoping report on Platreef Platinum Mine, Mokopane: Platreef Ltd ■ Heritage Statement and Scoping Report on five proposed Photo Voltaic Solar Power farms, Northern Cape and Western Cape: Orlight SA ■ Land claim research Badenhorst family vs Makokwe family regarding Makokskraal, Van Staden, Vorster & Nysschen Attorneys, Ventersdorp South Africa ■ Research report on Cultural Symbols, Ministry for Intelligence Services, Pretoria, South Africa ■ Research report on the location of the remains of kings Mampuru I and Nyabela, National Department of Arts and Culture, Pretoria, South Africa ■ Review of Archaeological Assessment: Resources Generation, Coal Mine Project in the Waterberg area, Limpopo Province
3
■ Review of CRM study and compilation of Impact Assessment report, Zod Gold Mine, Armenia
6 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Society for Africanist Archaeologists (SAfA)
7 PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION Association fo Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA) Accredited by ASAPA Cultural Resources Management section International Association of Impact Assessors (IAIA)
8 PUBLICATIONS Nel, J. 2001. Cycles of Initiation in Traditional South African Cultures. South African Encyclopaedia (MWEB). Nel, J. 2001. Social Consultation: Networking Human Remains and a Social Consultation Case Study. Research poster presentations at the Bi-annual Conference (SA3) Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists: National Museum, Cape Town. Nel, J. 2002. Collections policy for the WG de Haas Anatomy museum and associated Collections. Unpublished. Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine: University of Pretoria. Nel, J. 2004. Research and design of exhibition for Eloff Belting and Equipment CC for the Institute of Quarrying 35th Conference and Exhibition on 24 – 27 March 2004. Nel, J. 2004. Ritual and Symbolism in Archaeology, Does it exist? Research paper presented at the Bi-annual Conference (SA3) Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists: Kimberley Nel, J & Tiley, S. 2004. The Archaeology of Mapungubwe: a World Heritage Site in the Central Limpopo Valley, Republic of South Africa. Archaeology World Report, (1) United Kingdom p.14-22. Nel, J. 2007. The Railway Code: Gautrain, NZASM and Heritage. Public lecture for the South African Archaeological Society, Transvaal Branch: Roedean School, Parktown. Nel, J. 2009. Un-archaeologically speaking: the use, abuse and misuse of archaeology in popular culture. The Digging Stick. April 2009. 26(1): 11-13: Johannesburg: The South African Archaeological Society. Nel, J. 2011. ‘Gods, Graves and Scholars’ returning Mapungubwe human remains to their resting place.’ In: Mapungubwe Remembered. University of Pretoria commemorative publication: Johannesburg: Chris van Rensburg Publishers. Nel, J. 2012. HIAs for EAPs. Paper presented at IAIA annual conference: Somerset West.
4
JUSTIN DU PIESANIE
Mr. Justin du Piesanie Archaeology Consultant Social Sciences Department Digby Wells Environmental
1 EDUCATION University of the Witwatersrand ■ BA Degree (2004) ■ BA Honours Degree (2005) - Archaeology o Title of Dissertation - Seal Skeletal Distribution of Herder and Forager Sites at Kasteelberg, Western Cape Province of South Africa. ■ Master of Science (MSc) Degree (2008) – Archaeology o Title of Dissertation – Understanding the Socio-Political Complexity of Leokwe Society during the Middle Iron Age in the Shashe-Limpopo Basin through a Landscape Approach
2 LANGUAGE SKILLS English First Language Afrikaans Second Language
3 EMPLOYMENT 2011 to Present: Archaeology Consultant at Digby Wells Environmental 2009 to 2011: Archaeology Collections Manager at the University of the Witwatersrand. 2009 to 2011: Freelance Archaeologist for Archaeology Resource Management (ARM), Matakoma Heritage Consultants, Wits Heritage Contracts Unit & Umlando Heritage Consultants. 2006 to 2007: Tour Guide at Sterkfontein Caves World Heritage Site.
______Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd. Co. Reg. No. 1999/05985/07. Fern Isle, Section 10, 359 Pretoria Ave Randburg Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125, South Africa Tel: +27 11 789 9495, Fax: +27 11 789 9498, [email protected], www.digbywells.com ______Directors: A Sing*, AR Wilke, LF Koeslag, PD Tanner (British)*, AJ Reynolds (Chairman) (British)*, J Leaver*, GE Trusler (C.E.O) *Non-Executive ______
p:\company_info\staff_cvs_and_bios\cvs\6_social\j_du_piesanie.docx
4 EXPERIENCE ■ Wits Fieldschool - Excavation at Meyersdal, Klipriviersberg Johannesburg (Late Iron Age Settlement). ■ Wits Fieldschool - Phase 1 Survey of Prentjiesberg in Ugie / Maclear area, Eastern Cape. ■ Wits Fieldschool – Excavation at Kudu Kopje, Mapungubwe National Park Limpopo Province. ■ Wits Fieldschool – Excavation of Weipe 508 (2229 AB 508) on farm Weipe, Limpopo Province. ■ Survey at Meyerdal, Klipriviersberg Johannesburg. ■ Mapping of Rock Art Engravings at Klipbak 1 & 2, Kalahari. ■ Survey at Sonop Mines, Windsorton Northern Cape (Vaal Archaeological Research Unit). ■ Excavation of Kudu Kopje, Mapungubwe National Park Limpopo Province. ■ Excavation of KK (2229 AD 110), VK (2229 AD 109), VK2 (2229 AD 108) & Weipe 508 (2229 AB 508) (Origins of Mapungubwe Project) ■ Phase 1 Survey of farms Venetia, Hamilton, Den Staat and Little Muck, Limpopo Province (Origins of Mapungubwe Project) ■ Excavation of Canteen Kopje Stone Age site, Barkley West, Northern Cape ■ Excavation of Khami Period site AB32 (2229 AB 32), Den Staat Farm, Limpopo Province
5 PROJECT EXPERIENCE ■ Phase 2 Mitigation at Meyersdal, Klipriviersberg Johannesburg (ARM) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Mapping of Late Iron Age Site in Pilansberg, Sun City (ARM) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Witbank dam development (ARM) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Glen Austin AH, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 34, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 38, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 44, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 46, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 47, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 48, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 49, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 50, Johannesburg (Matakoma)
2
■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 61, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 62, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 71, Johannesburg (Matakoma). ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein AH Holding 72, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Modderfontein 35IR Portion 40, Johannesburg (Matakoma) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Rhino Mines, Thabazimbi Limpopo Province (ARM) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Moddergat 389KQ, Schilpadnest 385KQ, Swartkop 369KQ, Cronimet Project, Thabazimbi Limpopo Province (Matakoma) ■ Desktop Study – Desktop study for the Eskom Thohoyandou SEA Project, Limpopo Province (Matakoma) ■ Phase 2 Mitigation – Excavation of Iron Age site on Wenzelrust, Shoshanguve Gauteng (Heritage Contracts Unit) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Mapping of Late Stone Age shelter, Parys, Free State ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Vaalkrans Battlefield for the Transnet NMPP Line (Umlando) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Survey of Portion 222 of Mindale Ext 7 Witpoortjie 254 IQ & Portion 14 of Nooitgedacht 534 IQ, Johannesburg (ARM) ■ Phase 2 Mitigation – Excavation of Site 19 for the Anglo Platinum Mines Der Brochen & Booysendal, Steelpoort, Mpumalanga (Heritage Contracts Unit) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Mapping of sites 23, 26, 27, 28a & b for the Anglo Platinum Mines Der Brochen & Booysendal, Steelpoort, Mpumalanga (Heritage Contracts Unit) ■ Desktop Study - Desktop study for the inclusion into the Thohoyandou Electricity Master Network for Eskom, Limpopo Province (Strategic Environmental Focus) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Mapping of historical sites as part of the mitigation for the expansion of the Bathlako Mine’s impact area (Heritage Contracts Unit). ■ Phase 2 Mitigation – Kibali Grave Relocation Project (KGRP) for the Kibali Gold Project, Democratic Republic of Congo (Digby Wells) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Heritage Assessment and Survey for the proposed Kibali Hydro Power Stations, Democratic Republic of Congo (Digby Wells) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Heritage Impact Assessment & Survey of the farm Vygenhoek for Aquarius Resources Everest North Mining Project, Steelpoort, Mpumalanga (Digby Wells) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Heritage Impact Assessment for the Gold One International Ltd Proposed Geluksdal Tailings Storage Facility and Pipeline Infrastructure, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province (Digby Wells) ■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Burial Grounds and Graves Survey (BGGS) for Platreef Resources, Mokopane, Limpopo Province (Digby Wells) ■ Phase 2 Mitigation – Archaeological Impact Assessment of sites for Resource Generation Boikarabelo Mine, Steenbokpan, Limpopo Province (Digby Wells)
3
■ Phase 1 Mitigation – Watching Brief for Bokoni Platinum Mines (Pty) Ltd, Burgersfort, Limpopo Province (Digby Wells) ■ Heritage Statement for Rhodium Reefs Limited Platinum Operations on the Farm Kennedy’s Vale 361 KT, Steelpoort, Mpumalanga Province (Digby Wells). ■ Socio-Economic and Asset Survey, SEGA Gold Mining Project, Cluff Gold PLC, Burkina Faso (Digby Wells)
6 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Society for Africanist Archaeologists (SAfA) Member
7 PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA): Professional & CRM Member
8 PUBLICATIONS ■ Huffman, T.N. & du Piesanie, J.J. 2011. Khami and the Venda in the Mapungubwe Landscape. Journal of African Archaeology 9(2): 189-206
4
NATASHA HIGGITT
Ms Natasha Higgitt Archaeology Consultant Social Department Digby Wells Environmental
1 EDUCATION ■ University of Pretoria ■ BA Degree (2008) ■ Archaeology Honours (2009) ■ Title of Dissertation- Pass the Salt: An Archaeological analysis of lithics and ceramics from Salt Pan Ledge, Soutpansberg, for evidence of salt working and interaction.
2 LANGUAGE SKILLS ■ English - Excellent (read, write and speak) ■ Afrikaans - Fair (read, write and speak) ■ Italian – Poor (Speaking only)
3 EMPLOYMENT ■ July 2011 to Present: Archaeology Consultant at Digby Wells Environmental ■ April 2011 to June 2011: Lab assistant at the Albany Museum Archaeology Department, Grahamstown, Eastern Cape ■ April 2010 to March 2011: Intern at the Archaeology Department, Albany Museum, Grahamstown, Eastern Cape under the Department of Sports, Recreation, Arts and Culture, Eastern Cape Government, South Africa (DSRAC)
4 EXPERIENCE ■ Human remains rescue excavation at St Francis Bay, Eastern Cape ■ Human remains rescue excavation at Wolwefontein, Eastern Cape
______Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd. Co. Reg. No. 1999/05985/07. Fern Isle, Section 10, 359 Pretoria Ave Randburg Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125, South Africa Tel: +27 11 789 9495, Fax: +27 11 789 9498, [email protected], www.digbywells.com ______Directors: A Sing*, AR Wilke, LF Koeslag, PD Tanner (British)*, AJ Reynolds (Chairman) (British)*, J Leaver*, GE Trusler (C.E.O) *Non-Executive ______
p:\staff and hr\cv's and profiles\current staff cvs\6_social\natasha higgitt.docx
■ Recorded two rock art sites at Blaauwbosch Private Game Reserve, Eastern Cape ■ Attended a 2 week excavation/study tour in the Friuli Region in Italy, organised by the Società Friulana di Archeologia, sponsored by Ente Friuli nel Mondo, and excavated a 12th century medieval castle ■ Attended a 2 week excavation in Limpopo, Waterpoort Archaeological Project organised by Xander Antonites (Yale PhD Candidate) ■ A total of 5 University of Pretoria Archaeology field schools in Limpopo and Gauteng spanning over 4 years
5 PROJECT EXPERIENCE ■ Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Thabametsi Coal Mine, Lephalale, Limpopo for Exxaro Coal (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Heritage Statement for the Zandbaken Coal Mine Project, Zandbaken 585 IR, Sandbaken 363 IR and Bosmans Spruit 364 IS, Standerton, Mpumalanga for Xtrata Coal South Africa (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Brakfontein Thermal Coal Mine, Mpumalanga for Universal Coal (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Development of a RAP for Aureus Mining for the New Liberty Gold Mine Project, Liberia (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Phase 1 Archaeological Impact Assessment for the MBET Pipeline, Steenbokpan, Limpopo (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Notice of Intent to Develop and Cultural Resources Pre-Assessment for Orlight SA (PTY) Ltd Solar PV Project. 2012. (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Agricultural Survey for Platreef ESIA, Mokopane, Limpopo. 2011. (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Cultural Resources Pre-Assessment for the Proposed Sylvania Everest North Mining Development in Mpumalanga, near Lydenburg. 2011. (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Phase 2 Mitigation of Archaeological sites at Boikarabelo Coal Mine, Steenbokpan, Limpopo. 2011. (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Cultural Resources Pre-Assessment for Proposed Platinum Mine Prospecting in Mpumalanga, near Bethal for Anglo Platinum. 2011. (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Cultural Resources Pre-Assessment for proposed Platinum Mine at Mokopane, Limpopo for Ivanhoe Platinum. 2011. (Digby Wells Environmental) ■ Phase 1 AIA Mixed-use housing Development, Kwanobuhle, Extension 11, Uitenhage, Eastern Cape. 2011. ■ Phase 1 AIA Centane to Qholora and Kei River mouth road upgrade survey, Mnquma Municipality, Eastern Cape. 2011. (SRK Consulting)
2
■ Phase 1 AIA Clidet Data Cable survey, Western Cape, Northern Cape, Free State and Eastern Cape. 2011. (SRK Consulting) ■ Phase 1 AIA Karoo Renewable Energy Facility, Victoria West, Northern Cape. 2011. (Savannah Environmental) ■ Phase 1 AIA Windfarm survey in Hamburg, Eastern Cape. 2010. (Savannah Environmental) ■ Phase 1 AIA Windfarm survey in Molteno, Eastern Cape. 2010. (Savannah Environmental) ■ Phase 1 AIA Housing Development at Motherwell, P.E. 2010. (SRK Consulting) ■ Phase 1 AIA Sand quarry survey in Paterson, Eastern Cape. 2010. (SRK Consulting) ■ Phase 1 AIA Quarry Survey at Victoria West. 2010. (Acer [Africa] Environmental Management Consultants) ■ Phase 1 AIA Quarry Survey at Port Elizabeth. 2010. (E.P Brickfields)
6 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS ■ Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA): Professional member ■ Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA): CRM Practitioner (Field Supervisor: Stone Age, Iron Age and Rock Art) ■ South African Museums Association: Member
3
SHAHZAADEE KARODIA
Ms Shahzaadee Karodia Archaeology Consultant Social Science Department Digby Wells Environmental
1 EDUCATION ■ 2006 BA Anthropology & Archaeology, University of the Witwatersrand ■ 2007 BSc Honours. Palaeontology, University of the Witwatersrand . Courses included: comparative vertebrate anatomy; cladistics analysis; primate and human evolution; Karoo biostratigraphy; dinosaurs and the origins of birds; Cenozoic mammals; taphonomy; and palaeoecology . Honours Thesis: “Encephalization and its relationship to orbit size in modern humans and a small bodied population from Palau, Micronesia”. ■ 2012 MSc Archaeology, University of the Witwatersrand . MSc Thesis: “Naturally mummified human remains from Historic Cave, Limpopo, South Africa”. . Skills obtained during MSc included: stereo microscopy; light microscopy; scanning electron microscopy; and histology
2 LANGUAGE SKILLS English (read, write, speak) Currently completing French training for beginners
3 EMPLOYMENT
2012: Archaeology consultant, Digby Wells Environmental
April 2012 – June 2012: External archaeology research consultant, EcoAfrica
April 2011 – November 2011: Archaeology intern, University of Pretoria
______Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd. Co. Reg. No. 1999/05985/07. Fern Isle, Section 10, 359 Pretoria Ave Randburg Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125, South Africa Tel: +27 11 789 9495, Fax: +27 11 789 9498, [email protected], www.digbywells.com ______Directors: AR Wilke, LF Koeslag, PD Tanner (British)*, AJ Reynolds (Chairman) (British)*, J Leaver*, GE Trusler (C.E.O) *Non-Executive ______
2007 – 2008: Palaeontology collections assistant, BPI University of the Witwatersrand
2006 – 2007: Tour guide, Sterkfontein Caves
4 EXPERIENCE ■ Archaeology Field School in Klipriviersberg with Dr Karim Sadr, University of the Witwatersrand ■ Archaeology Field School in Swartkrans and Maropeng with Dr Kathy Kuman, University of the Witwatersrand ■ Archaeology Field School in Ottosdaal with Dr Thembi Russell, University of the Witwatersrand ■ Palaeontology Field School in the Karoo with Professor Bruce Rubidge, University of the Witwatersrand ■ Palaeontology Field School in Gladysvale with Professor Lee Berger, University of the Witwatersrand ■ Palaeontology Field School in Wonderkrater with Dr Lucinda Backwell, University of the Witwatersrand
5 PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Project Title Client Role
Heritage Statement for the Central AECOM Heritage Specialist & Report Basin, Witwatersrand AMD Project Writer
Heritage Impact Assessment for AECOM Heritage Specialist & Report the Witwatersrand Gold Fields Writer Acid Mine Drainage Project (Western Basin)
Heritage Statement for the Anglo American Thermal Coal Heritage Specialist & Report Dalyshope Project: Phase 1 Writer NEMA Application, Lephalale, Limpopo Province
Archaeological Watching Brief on Bokoni Platinum Mine Heritage Specialist & Report Access Road Writer
Heritage Impact Assessment for Bokoni Platinum Mine Heritage Specialist & Report the Proposed Bokoni Klipfontein Writer Opencast Mine Project, Klipfontein 465 KS, Sekhukhune,
2
Project Title Client Role Limpopo Province
Heritage Statement for Rhodium EastPlats Group Palaeontological Specialist Reef Limited Platinum Operation, Limpopo Province
Heritage Screening Assessment ERM Palaeontological Specialist for the Kangra Coal Project
Heritage Impact Assessment for ERM Heritage Specialist & Report the Kangra Coal Project Writer
Heritage Statement for the Exxaro Coal Heritage Specialist & Report Thabametsi Project, Lephalale, Writer Limpopo Province
Heritage Impact Assessment for Exxaro Coal Heritage Specialist & Report the Proposed Thabametsi Project, Writer Lephalale, Limpopo Province
Heritage Statement for Eskom Fourth Element Heritage Specialist & Report Transmission Division – Writer Roodepoort Strengthening Project
Phase 1 Heritage Impact Gold One International Limited Heritage Specialist & Report Assessment of the Proposed Writer Geluksdal Tailings Storage Facility and Pipeline
Heritage Statement Report for the Iliso Consulting Palaeontological Specialist Kosmosdal Sewer Pipe Bridge Upgrade
Heritage Statement Report for the Iliso Consulting Palaeontological Specialist Wilgespruit Bridge Upgrade
Heritage Statement for Atcom And Jones and Wagener Consulting Palaeontological Specialist Tweefontein Dragline Relocation Civil Engineers Project
Heritage Statement for the Msobo Coal Heritage Specialist & Report Consbrey Colliery Writer
Heritage Statement for the Harwar Msobo Coal Heritage Specialist & Report Colliery Writer
3
Project Title Client Role
Heritage Impact Assessment for Msobo Coal Palaeontological Specialist the Consbrey Colliery Project, Mpumalanga Province
Heritage Impact Assessment for Msobo Coal Heritage Specialist & Report the Harwar Colliery Project, Writer Mpumalanga Province
Heritage Statement for the Platinum Group Metals Heritage Specialist & Report Waterberg Prospecting Rights Writer Application, Blouberg, Limpopo Province
Heritage Statement for the Platreef Resources Heritage Specialist & Report Platreef Platinum Project, Writer Mokopane, Limpopo Province
Heritage Statement for the Rhodium Reefs Palaeontological Specialist Rhodium Reef Limited Platinum Operation, Limpopo Province
Heritage Statement for the Vedanta Zinc International Heritage Specialist & Report Vedanta IPP Project, Lephalale, Writer Limpopo Province
Heritage Statement for the Xstrata Coal South Africa Heritage Specialist & Report Zandbaken Coal Mine Project, Writer Standerton, Mpumalanga Province
6 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS ■ Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA) ■ Geological Survey of South Africa (GSSA) ■ Golden Key Society ■ Palaeontological Society of Southern Africa (PSSA) ■ South African Archaeology Society (SAAS) ■ Society of Africanist Archaeologists (SAfA) ■ South African Society for Amateur Palaeontologists (SASAP)
4
Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix B: Impact Assessment Methodology
HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
HRM UNIT MANAGER: JOHAN NEL
MAY 2013
______Digby Wells and Associates (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (Subsidiary of Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd). Co. Reg. No. 2010/008577/07. Fern Isle, Section 10, 359 Pretoria Ave Randburg Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125, South Africa Tel: +27 11 789 9495, Fax: +27 11 789 9498, [email protected], www.digbywells.com
______Directors: A Sing*, AR Wilke, LF Koeslag, PD Tanner (British)*, AJ Reynolds (Chairman) (British)*, J Leaver*, GE Trusler (C.E.O) *Non-Executive ______HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 3
2 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE OR VALUE ...... 3
2.1 IMPORTANCE ...... 4 2.1.1 Authenticity ...... 5 2.1.2 Credibility ...... 5
2.2 INTEGRITY ...... 5 3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 6
4 FIELD RATING (SOUTH AFRICAN PROJECT) ...... 13
5 REFERENCES ...... 14
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Summary of dimensions and attributes ...... 4 Table 2-2: Integrity definitions ...... 6 Table 3-1: Impact characteristic terminology ...... 6 Table 3-2: Description of magnitude ratings ...... 8 Table 3-3: Scores, descriptions and ratings determining consequence of impact ...... 9 Table 3-4: Significance of impact on categories of heritage resources ...... 11 Table 4-1: Field rating thresholds and descriptions ...... 13
ii HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
1 INTRODUCTION The impact assessment stage includes several steps aimed to evaluate the way in which environmental aspects will/may interact with the cultural landscape (the environment) resulting in environmental impacts to heritage resources. Environmental aspects and impacts are defined as: ■ Environmental aspects: an element of an organisation’s activities or products or services that can interact with the environment’ (ISO 14001: 2004 - 3.6); and
■ Environmental impacts: any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, wholly or partially resulting from an organization's environmental aspects (ISO 14001: 2004 - 3.7).
However, in terms of cultural heritage resources, environmental impacts should be assessed relative to the heritage value or significance of a resource. The methodology employed in the various stages of the impact assessment process is described in more detail below.
2 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE OR VALUE
Heritage resources – both cultural and natural – are finite, non-renewable and irreplaceable. They characterise community identity and cultures and are therefore are intrinsic to the history and beliefs of communities. As sources of information, heritage resources have inherent potential to contribute significantly to research, education and tourism, as well as allowing capacity for reconciliation, understanding and mutual respect. Considering the innate value of heritage resources, the foundation of heritage resources management (HRM) is the acknowledgement that heritage resources have lasting worth as evidence of the origins of life, humanity and society. Every generation is therefore morally obligated to act as trustees of heritage for future generations through conservation, preservation and protection. Accordingly, HRM must take into account rights of affected communities to be consulted and to participate. Where heritage resources are developed and presented the dignity and respect of diverse cultural values must be ensured. In addition, heritage in its broadest sense must never be used for sectarian purposed or political gain. Notwithstanding the fundamental value ascribed to heritage, significance of individual resources needs to be determined to allow implementation of appropriate management measures. This is achieved through assessing a heritage resource’s value relative to certain prescribed criteria, encapsulated in international conventions as well as national legislation. This is addressed in Section 2.1 below. The significance/value is established by determining the level of importance taking and assessing the degree of integrity of cultural heritage resources. A resource’s value thus influences the intensity of environmental impacts. As a result, environmental impacts that are rated low may cause severe change in a heritage resources rated as highly significant. Vice versa, severe impacts may cause negligible change to an insignificant resource.
3 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
The steps involved in determining the value of a heritage resource is described in more detail below.
2.1 Importance
The importance of a heritage resource is determined on four dimensions – aesthetic, historic, scientific, and social. In turn, each dimension is measured against one or more descriptive attributes, defined in national legislation and international convention: NHRA (1999), UNESCO World Heritage Convention (1972), ICOMOS Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties and the Australian ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance (1999) (Burra Charter). These attributes, or criteria, are aimed to provide a guide as to whether a resource should be included in the national estate as defined in these documents and presented in Table 2-1 below. Importance of each dimension and subsequent attributes must be considered in relation to the resource's authenticity. Notions of authenticity are addressed under Section 2.1.1. Importance ratings must be informed and motivated by certain information sources. The credibility of information sources must therefore be evaluated and referred to when importance is discussed. Credibility is addressed under Section 2.1.2. Table 2-1: Summary of dimensions and attributes
NHRA UNESCO Dimension Attributes considered Ref. Ref.
1 Importance in aesthetic characteristics S.3(3)(e) Aesthetic & technical 2 Degree of technical / creative skill at a particular period S.3(3)(f)
3 Importance to community or pattern in country's history S.3(3)(a) Historical importance 4 Site of significance relating to history of slavery S.3(3)(i) & associations Association with life or work of a person, group or 5 S.3(3)(h) organisation of importance in the history of the country
Possession of uncommon, rare or endangered natural 6 S.3(3)(b) or cultural heritage aspects Information potential 7 Information potential S.3(3)(c)
8 Importance in demonstrating principle characteristics S.3(3)(d)
Association to community or cultural group for social, Social 9 S.3(3)(g) cultural or spiritual reasons
4 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
2.1.1 Authenticity
Authenticity is an integral concept in cultural heritage resources management and must be considered when determining significance/value of cultural landscapes and heritage resources. The Nara Document on Authenticity (Nara Document) (1993) forms the basis of determining authenticity. Authenticity can refer to design, material, workmanship and setting of a resource. Aesthetic and historical aspects of a landscape or site including its physical, social and historical context, use and function are also covered (Winter & Baumann, 2005, p. 4). Determining authenticity of a resource requires a sound knowledge of the type of heritage resource as well as the context within which occurs – the cultural landscape. This knowledge can only be gained through a detailed baseline accessing credible information sources.
2.1.2 Credibility
The Nara Document (1993) accepts that understanding authenticity and thus determining importance attributed to heritage resources rely on credible information sources. Information sources are defined as all physical, written, oral, and figurative sources, which make it possible to know the authenticity – nature, specificities, meaning, and history – of cultural heritage resources. This requires knowledge and understanding of information sources employed in relation to original and subsequent characteristics of heritage resources, and their meaning. Information that should be considered are published, peer reviewed literature, archival research, popular publications, and any other information source that may be relevant (Nara Document on Authenticity, 1993). Information sources need to be assessed as credible and truthful and referenced when determining importance of a resource and in motivation of its authenticity. Credibility of information sources forms the basis in determining the importance of heritage resources. The importance rating per dimension and attribute discussed above is thus intrinsically linked to the credibility of information sources used.
2.2 Integrity
Integrity is determined by examining the physical condition of a heritage resource – as witnessed at the time of assessment – compared to an ideal or other existing example. Integrity ought to be assessed only after the resource’s authenticity has been determined, as the information source/s used should provide comparative examples against which its present condition may be measured. Thresholds and definitions for integrity are described in Table 2-2 below.
5 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
Table 2-2: Integrity definitions
Integrity
Resource degraded to extent where no information potential exists; resource cannot be 0 restored; single, isolated find, without any site context;
Poor condition, active decay visible; excessive restoration required; little information 1 potential
Fair to good condition; well preserved; some decay present; can be easily 2 restored/conserved/preserved; good information potential
Excellent/pristine; extremely well preserved; little to no decay present; little restoration 3 required/restoration will greatly enhance resource; excellent information potential
3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Assessing environmental impacts on heritage resources are based first on the value of a resource and second how that value may change due to environmental aspects. Environmental management systems employ relative standard terminology that characterises impacts. This terminology has been adapted to provide a well-defined descriptive terminology for use in assessing environmental impacts on heritage resources summarised in Table 3-1. Table 3-1: Impact characteristic terminology
Characteristic Description Designation
Direct Relationship of an assumed impact to Type a heritage resource (in terms of cause Indirect and effect) Induced
None
Scale of The physical area (size) of a heritage Isolated parts / aspects will change change resource that may change Large parts / aspects will change Most or entire resource will change
Immediate, non-permanent and fully reversible Time period over which resource will Duration Long-term, non-permanent and reversible change Long-term, permanent and irreversible Immediate, permanent and irreversible
6 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
Characteristic Description Designation
None Change in integrity without affecting How an impact could change the authenticity Intensity authenticity and integrity, thus Change in integrity will affect aspects of importance, of a resource authenticity Change in integrity will affect overall authenticity
None Project-related mitigation will remove change Probability Likelihood of change occurring Project-related mitigation will reduce change Project-related mitigation will not reduce change
The rating takes into account: ■ Spatial scale of impact; ■ Expected duration of impact; and ■ Severity of impact; ■ Consequence of impact; ■ Probability of impact occurring; and ■ Value of heritage resource Impact significance = Value x Magnitude Where Value =Importance + Credibility + Integrity And Magnitude = Consequence x Probability And Consequence = Spatial scale + Duration + Severity The impact rating is applied to pre- and post-mitigation scenarios. The ideal is to remove all impacts to a heritage resource. Where post mitigation significance is not zero, the recommended field rating (heritage) mitigation must be undertaken. The tables below provide the various descriptions and thresholds applicable to the impact assessment ratings.
7 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
Table 3-2: Description of magnitude ratings
Score Description Rating
No/negligible environmental impacts expected on heritage 0 None/negligible resource
Low magnitude of environmental impacts on heritage 1-8 Low resource
Medium magnitude of environmental impacts on heritage 9-16 Medium resource
High/exceptional magnitude of environmental impacts on 17-27 High heritage resource
Magnitude
Consequence
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
3 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 Probability Magnitude = Consequence x Probability where
Consequence = scale + duration + severity
8 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
Table 3-3: Scores, descriptions and ratings determining consequence of impact
Scale
Score Description Rating
0 No effect on any part/aspect of heritage resource None
1 Isolated parts/aspects of heritage resource will be affected Low
2 Large parts/aspects of heritage resource will be affected Medium
3 Most or entire heritage resource will be affected High
Duration
Score Description Rating
0 No impact will occur during life of project None
1 Impact will be short and reversible Low
2 Impact will occur throughout life of project, but is reversible Medium
3 Impact is permanent and irreversible High
Severity
Score Description Rating
0 Negligible to no change/alteration/damage/destruction of heritage resource None
1 Reversible changes/alterations to heritage resource Low
Parts/aspects of heritage resource will be permanently 2 Medium altered/changed/destroyed
3 Entire heritage resource will be permanently altered/changed/destroyed High
9 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
Probability
Score Description Rating
0 Impact will not occur None
Impact could occur, but implementation of appropriate project mitigation 1 Unlikely measures reduce/remove impacts
Impact may occur during life of project regardless of implementation of project 2 Probable mitigation measures
Impact will definitely occur, project mitigation measures will not reduce or 3 Certain remove impacts
10 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
Table 3-4: Significance of impact on categories of heritage resources
Magnitude of Impact Score Rating Archaeology, Palaeontology Built Environment/Structures Historic Landscape No changes to landscape elements, parcels or 0 No change No change No change to fabric or setting components; no visual or audible changes; no changes in amenity or community factors. Very minor changes to key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; virtually unchanged visual effects; very Very minor changes to key archaeological Slight changes to historic building elements 1-49 Low slight changes in noise or sound materials, or setting. or setting that hardly affect it. quality; very slight changes to use or access; resulting in very small change to historic landscape character. Change to few key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; slight visual Change to key historic building elements, changes to few key aspects of Changes to key archaeological materials, such that the resource is slightly different; the historic landscape; limited 50-98 Medium such that the resource is slightly altered; change to setting of an historic building, changes in noise or sound slight changes to the setting. such that it is noticeably changed. quality; slight changes to use or access; resulting in limited changes to historic landscape character.
11 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
Magnitude of Impact Score Rating Archaeology, Palaeontology Built Environment/Structures Historic Landscape Change to many key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; visual change to Change to many key historic building Changes to many key archaeological many key aspects of the historic elements, such that the resource is materials, such that the resource is clearly landscape; noticeable significantly modified; change to setting of modified; changes to the setting that affect differences in noise or sound an historic building, such that it is the character of the asset quality; considerable changes to significantly modified. use or access; resulting in moderate changes to historic landscape character. 99-147 High Change to most or all key historic landscape elements, Changes to attributes that convey parcels or components; extreme Change to key historic building that outstanding national value of national visual effects; gross change of contributes to outstanding national value of estate; Most or all key archaeological noise or change to sound national estate such that the resource is materials, including those that contribute to quality; fundamental changes to totally altered; Comprehensive changes to ONV such that the resource is totally use or access; resulting in total setting. altered; comprehensive changes to setting change to historic landscape character unit and loss on outstanding national value.
12 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
4 FIELD RATING (SOUTH AFRICAN PROJECT)
Field ratings, or proposed grading of heritage resources, are required by SAHRA in terms of Section 7(1) of the NHRA. Field ratings are based on the assessments of heritage resources in relation to criteria contained in Section 3(3) of the NHRA (see above). Section Y of the NHRA further outlines a three-tier system for heritage resources management of the national estate based on proposed grading: ■ National: SAHRA is responsible for identification and managing of Grade I heritage resources; ■ Provincial: Provincial Heritage Resources Authorities (PHRAs) are responsible for identification and managing of Grade II heritage resources; and ■ Local: Local authorities (municipalities, metros, local government) are responsible for identification and managing of Grade III heritage resources. Field ratings are based on (equal to) the value of a heritage resource. The thresholds for field ratings are present in Table 4-1 below. Table 4-1: Field rating thresholds and descriptions
NHRA SECTION 7 GRADING
Score Grade Protection Recommended Heritage Mitigation
Heritage resource should be nominated as a National 41-45 Grade I National Site/Object, included in National Estate
Heritage resource should be nominated as a Provincial 36-40 Grade II Provincial Site/Object, included in National Estate
Heritage resource should be nominated as a Regional 31-35 Grade III A Local Site/Object, included in National Estate
The heritage resource must be mitigated and partly 16-30 Grade III B Local conserved/preserved
The heritage resource must be mitigated before 8-15 Grade IV A General destruction
The heritage resource must be recorded before 1-7 Grade IV B General destruction
0 Grade IV C General No mitigation required - application for destruction permit
13 HERITAGE IMPACT MATRIX METHODOLOGY
5 REFERENCES Nara Document on Authenticity, 1993. ICOMOS: The Nara Document on Authenticity, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation: International Council on Monuments and Sites. Winter, S. & Baumann, N., 2005. Guideline for Involving Heritage Specialist in EIA Process Edition 1: CSIR Report No ENV-S-C 2005 E , Cape Town: Republic of South Africa, Provincial Government of the Western Cape, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.
14 Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix C: Location and Site Maps
28°30'0"E 28°37'30"E 28°45'0"E 28°52'30"E 29°0'0"E 29°7'30"E 29°15'0"E 29°22'30"E 29°30'0"E
Plan 1 Platreef Resources
23°52'30"S 23°52'30"S (Pty) Ltd Regional Setting 1:250 000
Legend
24°0'0"S 24°0'0"S ESIA Study Area
24°7'30"S 24°7'30"S
24°15'0"S 24°15'0"S
24°22'30"S 24°22'30"S
2428 Modimolle
24°30'0"S 24°30'0"S
Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201305.346 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 1 24°37'30"S 24°37'30"S Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 27/05/2013
02.5 5 10 15 20
Kilometres 1:380 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°30'0"E 28°37'30"E 28°45'0"E 28°52'30"E 29°0'0"E 29°7'30"E 29°15'0"E 29°22'30"E 29°30'0"E 28°45'0"E 28°52'30"E 29°0'0"E 29°7'30"E 29°15'0"E
Plan 2 Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Regional Setting 1:50 000
Legend
24°0'0"S 24°0'0"S ESIA Study Area
24°7'30"S 24°7'30"S
2428BB Tinmyne 2429AA Mokopane
24°15'0"S 24°15'0"S
Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201305.347 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 1 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 27/05/2013
0 2.5 5 10
Kilometres 1:190 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°45'0"E 28°52'30"E 29°0'0"E 29°7'30"E 29°15'0"E 28°45'0"E 28°52'30"E 29°0'0"E 29°7'30"E 29°15'0"E
Plan 3 Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Regional Setting 1:10 000
Legend
24°0'0"S 24°0'0"S ESIA Study Area
24°7'30"S 24°7'30"S
2428BB 2429AA
24°15'0"S 24°15'0"S
Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201305.348 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 1 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 27/05/2013
0 2.5 5 10
Kilometres 1:190 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°45'0"E 28°52'30"E 29°0'0"E 29°7'30"E 29°15'0"E 28°54'0"E 28°56'0"E 28°58'0"E 29°0'0"E 29°2'0"E
Plan 4
GROOT- SANDSLOOT Platreef Resources
OOT G R -S T 24°0'0"S 24°0'0"S A NDSLOO (Pty) Ltd
Site 3 Heritage Resources
Legend
N11 ESIA Study Area
Heritage Resources
Heritage Tracks Mapela Estimated Extent of Archaeological Sites 24°2'0"S I 24°2'0"S S T O L Arterial / National Route PHO Main Road
Railway Line
Non-Perennial Stream
Perennial Stream
Dam Wall
TSF Site 3 Pipeline Option 1 Dam / Lake
O KL ITH KENG EI D N- Wetland SA TSF Site 2 PipelineN DSL Option 2 24°4'0"S OOT IN-SA 24°4'0"S Ga-Magongoa KLE ND SL TSF Pipeline Options OO T Operational Area Tshamahansi Site 2 Alternative Plant Area
TSF Options
TSF Site 3 Pipeline Option 2
T Sekgoboko O LO Landfill Options Option 3 IS O O
R Ga-Kgubudi
Option 1 Option 5 Option 2 24°6'0"S Option 4 24°6'0"S Mzumbani M O G A L A
K
W
E
N
A
R518
Masodi
Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Site 1 N11 Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.129 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 2
N Madiba Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 26/09/2013 G W A 24°8'0"S D ROO 24°8'0"S IT ISL S OO 00.5 1 2 3 E T
Masehlaneng Kilometres 1:65 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°54'0"E 28°56'0"E 28°58'0"E 29°0'0"E 29°2'0"E 28°56'45"E 28°57'0"E 28°57'15"E 28°57'30"E 28°57'45"E 28°58'0"E 28°58'15"E
24°4'15"S 24°4'15"S G Plan 5 EN OK H TSF Site 3 Pipeline Option 1 IT D Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd PLA1677/S.36-050 Heritage Resources PLA1677/S.36-041 PLA1677/S.36-068 - Operational Area - PLA1677/S.36-043 PLA1677/S.36-066 PLA1677/S.36-044 PLA1677/S.36-065 24°4'30"S PLA1677/S.36-067 24°4'30"S PLA1677/S.36-042 Legend
ESIA Study Area
PLA1677/S.36-048 PLA1677/S.36-069 Heritage Resources Burial Ground
TSF Site 3 Pipeline Option 2 Iron Age Surface Occurrence PLA1677/S.36-034 PLA1677/S.36-064 Iron Age/Historical Settlement
Stone Age Surface Occurrence 24°4'45"S 24°4'45"S PLA1677/S.36-059 Heritage Tracks PLA1677/S.36-049 PLA1677/S.36-063 PLA1677/S.36-032 PLA1677/S.36-033 Estimated Extent of Archaeological Sites
PLA1677/S.36-051 National / Arterial Route
Minor Road PLA1677/S.36-055 PLA1677/S.36-062 PLA1677/S.36-061 Non-Perennial Stream PLA1677/S.36-056 PLA1677/S.36-052 PLA1677/S.36-054 PLA1677/S.36-037 TSF Pipeline Options PLA1677/S.35-057 Option 3 PLA1677/S.36-040 PLA1677/S.36-058 Operational Area 24°5'0"S 24°5'0"S Landfill Options
TSF Site 2 Pipeline Option 2
24°5'15"S 24°5'15"S
PLA1677/S.36-031 PLA1677/S.36-053 PLA1677/S.36-035
TSF Site 2 Pipeline Option 1 PLA1677/S.36-060 PLA1677/S.36-028 PLA1677/S.36-036
PLA1677/S.36-045 PLA1677/S.35-027
PLA1677/S.36-029
24°5'30"S 24°5'30"S Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.130
N11 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 2 PLA1677/S.36-030 PLA1677/S.36-047 PLA1677/S.36-046 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 26/09/2013
PLA1677/S.35-026 0 125 250 500 PLA1677/S.36-025 Metres 1:10 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°56'45"E 28°57'0"E 28°57'15"E 28°57'30"E 28°57'45"E 28°58'0"E 28°58'15"E 28°58'40"E 28°58'50"E 28°59'0"E 28°59'10"E
Plan 6 Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Heritage Resources - Alternative Plant Area -
Legend Heritage Resources Burial Ground
Iron Age/Historical Settlement 24°6'10"S 24°6'10"S Heritage Tracks
Estimated Extent of Archaeological Sites
Non-Perennial Stream PLA1677/S.36-074 PLA1677/S.36-070 Alternative Plant Area PLA1677/S.36-075
24°6'20"S 24°6'20"S PLA1677/S.36-072
PLA1677/S.35-071
PLA1677/S.36-073
PLA1677/S.36-076
24°6'30"S 24°6'30"S
Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.131 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 2 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 26/09/2013
0 50 100 200
Metres 1:4 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°58'40"E 28°58'50"E 28°59'0"E 28°59'10"E 28°55'45"E 28°56'0"E 28°56'15"E 28°56'30"E 28°56'45"E
Plan 7 Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd 24°7'0"S 24°7'0"S Heritage Resources - TSF Site 1 -
Legend
Heritage Tracks
R518 Main Road Minor Road
Non-Perennial Stream 24°7'15"S 24°7'15"S TSF Site 1
24°7'30"S Site 1 24°7'30"S
24°7'45"S 24°7'45"S
Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity 24°8'0"S 24°8'0"S Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.132 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 2 ROOISLOOT T Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 26/09/2013 LOO OIS RO 0 125 250 500
Metres 1:9 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°55'45"E 28°56'0"E 28°56'15"E 28°56'30"E 28°56'45"E 29°0'0"E 29°0'15"E 29°0'30"E 29°0'45"E 29°1'0"E 29°1'15"E
Plan 8 DITHOKENG Platreef Resources
24°3'45"S 24°3'45"S (Pty) Ltd Heritage Resources - TSF Site 2 -
Legend
ESIA Study Area Heritage Resources 24°4'0"S 24°4'0"S Iron Age Smelting Site
K LE IN Iron Age Surface Occurrence OT -S LO A NDS N KLEIN-SA D S L Stone Age Surface Occurrence O O T Stone Walling PLA1677/S.35-013 K LEI N-SLOO T Heritage Tracks
Estimated Extent of Archaeological Sites PLA1677/S.35-010 PLA1677/S.35-012 Non-Perennial Stream 24°4'15"S 24°4'15"S PLA1677/S.35-009 Dam Wall
PLA1677/S.35-008 Dam / Lake TSF Pipeline Options Site 2
PLA1677/S.35-007 TSF Site 2
TSF Site 2 Pipeline Option 2
PLA1677/S.35-011
24°4'30"S 24°4'30"S
PLA1677/S.35-005
PLA1677/S.35-001
PLA1677/S.35-006 PLA1677/S.35-003 PLA1677/S.35-004
PLA1677/S.35-002 24°4'45"S 24°4'45"S
Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.133 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 2
TSF Site 2 Pipeline Option 1 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 26/09/2013
0 125 250 500 24°5'0"S 24°5'0"S Metres 1:10 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 29°0'0"E 29°0'15"E 29°0'30"E 29°0'45"E 29°1'0"E 29°1'15"E 28°58'20"E 28°58'40"E 28°59'0"E 28°59'20"E 28°59'40"E 29°0'0"E
Plan 9 Platreef Resources OOT DSL AN -S OT (Pty) Ltd GRO Heritage Resources 23°59'40"S 23°59'40"S - TSF Site 3 -
Legend
ESIA Study Area Heritage Resources Burial Ground
Iron Age & Stone Age Surface Occurrence PLA1677/S.35-024 Iron Age Surface Occurrence 24°0'0"S 24°0'0"S Stone Age Surface Occurrence
Heritage Tracks
Arterial / National Route
Main Road
Minor Road PLA1677/S.35-016 PLA1677/S.35-017 Non-Perennial Stream PLA1677/S.35-019 PLA1677/S.35-018 Dam Wall
24°0'20"S Site 3 24°0'20"S TSF Pipeline Options PLA1677/S.35-015 PLA1677/S.35-014 Dam / Lake
TSF Site 3
PLA1677/S.35-022
PLA1677/S.35-021
24°0'40"S 24°0'40"S
PLA1677/S.35-020 PLA1677/S.36-023
N11 TSF Site 3 Pipeline Option 2 PLA1677/S.35-084 Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.134 24°1'0"S 24°1'0"S Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 2 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 26/09/2013
0100 200 400 600
Metres 1:12 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°58'20"E 28°58'40"E 28°59'0"E 28°59'20"E 28°59'40"E 29°0'0"E 28°56'0"E 28°57'0"E 28°58'0"E 28°59'0"E 29°0'0"E 29°1'0"E
PLA1677/S.36-023 PLA1677/S.35-020 Plan 10 N11 Site 3 PLA1677/S.35-084
24°1'0"S 24°1'0"S Platreef Resources TSF Site 3 Pipeline Option 1 (Pty) Ltd Heritage Resources - TSF Pipeline Options -
Legend
ESIA Study Area
24°2'0"S 24°2'0"S Heritage Resources Burial Ground
PLA1677/S.34-083 Historical Werf
Iron Age Smelting Site
Iron Age Surface Occurrence
Iron Age/Historical Settlement
Stone Age Surface Occurrence
Stone Walling
24°3'0"S 24°3'0"S Heritage Tracks
Estimated Extent of Archaeological Sites
Arterial / National Route
Main Road
Minor Road
Non-Perennial Stream PLA1677/S.36-085 HOKE DI T NG Dam Wall K L E IN-SANDS 24°4'0"S LOO 24°4'0"S TSF Pipeline Options T KLEIN-SA ND S Ga-Magongoa L PLA1677/S.35-013 OOT Dam / Lake PLA1677/S.35-012 PLA1677/S.35-010 TSF Site 2 Pipeline Option 2 PLA1677/S.35-009 Operational Area PLA1677/S.35-008 PLA1677/S.36-050 Site 2 PLA1677/S.35-007 PLA1677/S.36-068 TSF Site 3 Pipeline Option 2 TSF Options PLA1677/S.35-011 PLA1677/S.36-044 PLA1677/S.36-066 Tshamahansi PLA1677/S.35-005 Landfill Options PLA1677/S.36-069 PLA1677/S.36-065 PLA1677/S.36-034 PLA1677/S.35-006 PLA1677/S.35-003 PLA1677/S.36-064 PLA1677/S.36-059 PLA1677/S.35-004 PLA1677/S.36-033 PLA1677/S.35-002 PLA1677/S.36-055 PLA1677/S.36-063 PLA1677/S.36-061 PLA1677/S.36-052 Option 3 PLA1677/S.35-057 Sekgoboko 24°5'0"S PLA1677/S.36-056 24°5'0"S PLA1677/S.36-058 PLA1677/S.36-040
PLA1677/S.36-078 PLA1677/S.36-079
PLA1677/S.36-031 PLA1677/S.36-053 PLA1677/S.35-077
PLA1677/S.36-028 PLA1677/S.36-060 Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity Ga-Kgubudi PLA1677/S.36-036 TSF Site 2 Pipeline Option 1 Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.142 PLA1677/S.36-029 PLA1677/S.36-047 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 2 PLA1677/S.36-030 PLA1677/S.35-026 PLA1677/S.36-046 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 26/09/2013 PLA1677/S.36-025 Option 1 0 0.5 1 2 Option 2 Option 4 Option 5 PLA1677/S.36-081 Kilometres PLA1677/S.36-082
N11 1:37 000 24°6'0"S 24°6'0"S www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°56'0"E 28°57'0"E 28°58'0"E 28°59'0"E 29°0'0"E 29°1'0"E 28°55'0"E 29°0'0"E 29°5'0"E 29°10'0"E 29°15'0"E 29°20'0"E
Plan 11
Bloed Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd 24°0'0"S 24°0'0"S Makapan Valley World Heritage Site
Groot - Sandsloot Legend
Sand ESIA Study Area
Makapan Valley Core Area Ga-Magongoa Tshamahansi Makapan Valley Buffer Sekgoboko Main Road 24°5'0"S 24°5'0"S Ga-Kgubudi National Road Mzumbani N11 Railway Line
R518 R519 River Masodi
Rooisloot Madiba Dam
Masehlaneng Mahwelereng
Mogalakwena
R101 Gert Combrink Dam N1 24°10'0"S 24°10'0"S Mokopane
Mogoto
24°15'0"S 24°15'0"S
Mogotodam
R519
Rooisloot Zebediela Nkumpidamme
Nkumpi
Drummondlea Sustainability Service Positive Change Professionalism Future Focused Integrity
Projection: Transverse Mercator Ref #: scc.PLA1677.201309.177 Datum: Hartebeesthoek 1994 Revision Number: 1 R518 Central Meridian: 29°E Date: 30/09/2013 R101
Nyl 01 2 4 6 8 24°20'0"S 24°20'0"S Kilometres 1:165 000
www.digbywells.com © Digby Wells Environmental 28°55'0"E 29°0'0"E 29°5'0"E 29°10'0"E 29°15'0"E 29°20'0"E Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix D: Registered Stakeholders
First Name Last Name Position Company A Pakgotho 7 Miles/Mzumbani settement, resident A Matukane Chief Director Department of Water Affairs A Matukane Chief Director - Limpopo Region Department of Water Affairs A. Kharivhe Conflict Management Premiers Office A.T. Mashamaite Office of the Mayor Mogalakwena Local Municipality Aaiki Langa Magongoa village resident Aaron Moeng 7 Miles/Mzumbani settlement resident Aaron Mashile Ga-Kgobudi village resident Aaron Kharivhe Regional Manager Department of Mineral Resources Abbas Shaker Advisor Mogalakwena Local Municipality Abby Lebese Shami IS Projects Abel Mata Magongoa village resident Abraham Ledwaba Ga-Kgobudi village resident Abram Senego 7 Miles/Mzumbani settlement resident Abram Monama Ga- Kgobudi village resident abram Tema Ga- Kgobudi village resident Abram Letwaba Ga-Kgobudi village resident Abram Ramashala Magongoa village resident Abram Lebelo Masehlaneng Abrum Meheso 7 Miles/Mzumbani settlement resident Adam Gunn Left the Company Limpopo Environmental Action Forum Adele Manaka Mokopane Aden Tefu Magongoa village resident Aden Mamashala Magongoa village resident Agliah Malindisa Magongoa village resident Agnes Kekana Ga- kgobudi village resident Agnes Matjiu Ga-Kgobudi village resident Agnes Seema Ga-kgobudi village Agnes Thobane Ga-kgobudi village resident Agnes Monama Ga-Kgobudi village resident Agnes Mabotjia Magongoa village resident Agnes Magongoa Magongoa village resident Agnes Maleka Magongoa village resident Agnes Chauke Magongoa village resident Agnes Montana Tshamahansi village resident Agnes Kekana Masehlaneng Albert Malebana Magongoa resident Albort Ramashalala Magongoa village resident Aleen Monama Magongoa village resident Alex Kgamyago Magongoa village resident Alfred Langa 7 Miles/Mzumbani settlement resident Alfred Chauke Ga-kgobudi village resident Alfred Maila Headman Ga-Masenya village Alfred Puluky Kgobudi village resident Alfred Thule Kgobudi village resident Alfred Mokhanda Kgubudi vlliage resident Alfred Matli Magongoa village resident Alfred Papo Magongoa village resident Alfred Thobejane Magongoa village resident Alfred Khota Magongoa village resident Alfred Makhafola Magongoa village resident Alfred Gololo Magongoa village resident Alfred Mashilo Magongoa village resident Alfred Magongoa Magongoa village resident Alfred Masenya Magongoa village resident Alfred Digashu Magongoa village resident Alfred Matlaila Madiba Alldays Mukeri Ga-Kgobudi village resident Alpheus Maboshego Magongoa village resident Amos Thobane Ga-Kgobudi village resident Ananias Lebelo Kgobudi village resident Andres Malotsa Magongoa village resident Andrew Tema Kgobudi village resident Andrew Molekwa Magongoa village resident Andrew Latakgomo Magongoa village resident Andrew Sebele Tshamahansi village resident Andries Sedwana Ga- Kgobudi village resident Andries Mogale Magongoa village resident Andries Mamashola Magongoa village resident Andries Ramashala Magongoa village resident Andries Makopeng Matle Makopane Andros Ramashala Magongoa village resident Anique Greyling Manager: Law and Policy Programme Endangered Wildlife Trust Anita Manamela Magongoa village resident Anna Baloyi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Anna Kekana Kgobudi Village Anna Kolotsi Magongao village resident Anna Palo Magongao village resident Anna Rafapa Magongoa village resident Anna Nkhosi Magongoa village resident Anna Maboatle Magongoa village resident Anna Mohama Magongoa village resident Anna Monama Magongoa village resident Anna Kganyago Magongoa village resident Anna Sethosa Magongoa village resident Anna Mokhonwana Magongoa village resident Anna Matjiu Magongoa village resident Anna Malesa Magongoa village resident Anna Khalo Magongoa village resident Anna Moabelo Magongoa village resident Anna Khalo Magongoa village resident Anna Kekana Magongoa village Resident Anna Sedloane Magongoa village resident Anna Nkwana Magongoa village resident Anna Moshaga Tshamahansi village resident (Matjeke Section) Anna Manganyi (Tshamahansi Hlogwane section) village resident Anna Mangony Tshamahansi village resident Anna Sithole Tshamahansi village resident (Hlongwane section) Anna Kekana Annah Leso Ga-Kgobudi village resident Annah Kutumela Magongoa village resident Annah Mashamba Magongoa village resident Annah Khota Magongoa village resident Annah Molonyama Magongoa village resident Anneliza Collet Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Anost Seema Ga-Kgobudi village resident April Monyeki Magongoa village resident Archie Honyane Mogalakwena Business Aubrey Langa Masehleneng Aubrey Langa Aundries Mogale Magongoa village resident Azwi Mulaudzi Deputy Director Mineral Resources Department of Mineral Resources Azwi Mulaudzi Deputy Director Mineral Resources: Environment Department of Mineral Resources Azwindini Mabata Senior Legal Administration officer Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform B Mkhuna Tshamahansi village resident (Baloyi section) Barry Langa Mzombane Bashley Phosa Masehlaneng Bashley Felesi Beatrice Lebese Maroteng Beauty Magongoa Sediba Sabophelo Ben Leduba Kekana Moshate Bernice Mnisi Acting Manager: Roads Infrastructure & Maintenance Waterberg District Municipality Bethu Lekalakala Masehlaneng Betty Tema Kgobudi village resident Betty Gololo Magongoa village resident Betty Malinga Magongoa village resident Betty Ngobeni Tshamahansi village resident Biacky Masamabo Ga- Kgobudi village resident Bosiame Willem Shirindi Botshelo Letlabola Mokopane Caroline Mokobodi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Caroline Molokomme Ga-Kgobudi village resident Caroline Masenya Magongoa village resident Carolyn Verdoorn Law and Advocacy: Divisional Manager Birdlife SA Cate Mashapu Officer: Directorate Mineral Regulation Department of Mineral Resources Catherine Hlongone Tshamahansi village (Hlongoane section) Cathrieh Sebopa Ga-Kgobudi village resident Cecilia Makhala Magongoa village resident Cedrick Masemene Moshate Charles Kganyago Ga-Kgobudi village resident charles Makgeta Magongoa village resident Charles Ledwaba Magongoa village resident Charles Kganyago ANC| PR Councillor: WDM Corporate MPAC Mogalakwena Local Muncipality Charles Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident Charles Maluleke Tshamahansi village (T.M.C) Charles Nwaila DIRECTOR-GENERAL Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) Charles Mashishi Mapela Charlote Mmenu Magongoa village resident Charlote Baloyi Tshamahansi village (Matjeke section) Chirstina Masenya Magongoa village resident Chriastina Moabelo Magongoa village resident Christina Molala Ga- Kgobudi village resident Christina Morulane Ga-Kgobodi village resident Christina Monama Ga-Kgobodi village resident Christina Matjiu Ga-Kgobudi village resident Christina Mabotja Ga-Kgobudi village resident Christina Kgomo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Christina Ramashala Magongoa village resident Christina Ramashala Magongoa village resident Christina Khalo Magongoa village resident Christina Moabelo Magongoa village resident Christina Sasa Magongoa village resident Christina Beetha Magongoa village resident Christina Ledwaba Magongoa village resident Christina Mogatla Magongoa village resident Christina Papo Magongoa village resident christina Beetha Magongoa village resident Christina Digashu Magongoa village resident Christina Molwatsi Magongoa village resident Christina Setena Magongoa village resident Christina Lenwaba Magongoa village resident Christina Kekana Magongoa village resident Christinah Hlokota Ga- Kgubudi village resident Christinah Mkwakatse Magongoa village resident Cilia Masenya Ga-Kgobudi village resident Class Masenya Magongoa village resident Clement Thule Ga-Kgobudi village resident Clifford Motsepe Policy Implementation Dept of Cooperative Governance Clisa Khalo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Confidence Mbombi Tshamahansi Constance Bambo Magongoa village resident Cyril Kabe Ga- Kgobudi village D Mithileng Tshamahansi village resident D.C. Lubuku Provincial Government/Mokopane Department of Agriculture D.E Mailula Head Mogalakwena Local Municiplaity Daisy Mafubelu Head of Department: Health Department Department of Health and Social Development, Limpopo Dan Tsebe IDP and LED Manager Mogalakwena Local Municipality Danie Makhubeni Tshamahansi village resident Daniel Lefoka 7 Miles/Mzumbani settlement Daniel Hlapa Ga-Kgobudi village resident Daniel Mathatho Magongoa village resident Daniel Mabeshego Magongoa village resident Daniel Ramashala Magongoa village resident Daniel Mamashela Magongoa village resident Daniel Senama Magongoa village resident Daniel Papo Magongoa village resident Daniel Ledwaba Magongoa village resident Daniel Mamashela Magongoa village resident Daniel Maakamedi Mogangoa village resident Daniel Motileni Tshamahansi village resident Daniel Sithole Tshamahansi village resident Daniel Molefe Extension 19 (ANC) Daphney Senama Magongoa village resident Davhana Mashudu Official Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform David Mkoatsi Ga- Kgobudi village resident David Kekama Ga- Kgobudi village resident David Matadi Ga- Kgobudi village resident David Phahle Ga-Kgobudi village resident David Digashu Ga-Kgobudi village resident David Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village resident David Manculu Ga-Kgobudi village resident David Molehale Ga-Kgobudi village resident David Tsatsi Magongoa village resident David Kgole Magongoa village resident David Ledwaba Magongoa village resident David Moabelo Magongoa village resident David Kgole Magongoa village resident David Kleyn Directorate: Land Use and Soil Management Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) David Tsweleng Masehleneng Dennis Matlatla Ga Mothapo Dermima Kgonyane Ga- Kgobudi village resident Detrus Ngobeni Masodi Diarah Sebetha Ga- Kgobudi village resident Dickson Masemola Policy Implementation Dept of Education Dikeledi Seoloani Masehlaneng Dikeledi Mokonyane mahwelereng VEP Dimakatso Shiburi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Dineo Sasa Magongoa village resident Dipolelo Nyalungu Mokopane DNR Business Supplies Mahwelereng Doctor Bosii Magongoa village resident Doctor Kekana Mokopane Taxi Association Doctor Maluleka Tshamahansi village resident (Hlongwane Section) Dolly Maphoto Mosesetjane Sekgoboko Dorcas Mashitisho Magongoa village resident Dorcus Malebana Ga-Kgobudi village resident Dorcus Kwena Magongoa village resident Dumisani Sibaya Chief Executive Officer South African Heritage Resources Agency E Honiball EJ Honiball Prokureur Attonerys E. Panyane Ward 23 Mogalakwena Local Municipality E.R Baloyi Tshamahansi village Edwin Maletisa Magongoa village resident Elana left the company 4 years ago) Greyling Secretary: Lephalale AGRI SA Elias Maleka Magongoa village resident Elina Leso Ga- Kgobudi village resident Eliphas Mchauke Magongoa village resident Elisa Lebelo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Elisa Seqloana Magongoa village resident Elisa Masenya Magongoa village resident Elisa Matjiu Magongoa village resident Elisa Chabalala Tshamahansi village Matjeke Elizabeth Molokomme 7 Miles/Mzumbani settlement Elizabeth Kekana Ga- Kgobudi village resident Elizabeth Lomola Ga- Kgobudi village resident Elizabeth Tjotjo Ga- Kgubudi village resident Elizabeth Teffe Ga-Kgobudi village resident Elizabeth Matli Ga-Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Matshloe Magongoa village Elizabeth Bambo Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Magongoa Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Ramaru Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Mabule Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Phakane Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Qwanqwa Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Bosii Magongoa village resident Elizabeth Mangwani Tshamahansi village resident Elizabeth Mashilo Elsie Ledwaba Magongoa village resident Elsie Makhafola Magongoa village resident Elsie Mametsa Secretary Masehlaneng village Elvis Moremi Mokopane Emelia Galane Magongoa village resident Emely Magnatlala Magongoa village resident Emile Honiball Emilly Peffo Magongoa village resident Emily Lebelo Ga- Kgobudi village resident Emily Majopeto Ga- Kgobudi village resident Emily Somo Ga- Kgobudi village resident Emily Kgole Magongoa village resident Emily Mamashela Magongoa village resident Emily Khalo Magongoa village resident Emily Ramashala Magongoa village resident Emily Lethosa Magongoa village resident Emily Shibambo Tshamahansi village resident (Hlongoane Section) Emily Nkogatse Traditional Council Mokopane Traditional Council Emma Khota Ga- Kgobudi village resident Emma Chabalala Tshamahansi village resident (Hlongoane Section) Emmanuel Makendo 7 Miles,Mzumbani settlement Ephraim Ledwaba Headman Ga-Sekgoboko village Ephraim Seoko Magongoa village resident Ephraim Kwetsi Madiba Ephrieme Maunatlara Magongoa village resident Epraim Hlako Ga-Kgobudi village resident Eric Galame Magongoa village resident Erica Mabitsana Tshamahansi village resident Erik Khoza Tshamahansi village resident Erik Tsakune Tshamahansi village resident (Matjecke Section) Ernest Maboshego Magongoa village resident Ernest Meso Lekhureng Esrom Masenga Ga - Molekane Essy Letsoalo Official Limpopo Department of Rural Developement and Land Reform Esther Manganyi Tshamahansi village resident Esther Manganyi Tshamahansi village resident (Hlongoane section) Esther Appleyard LR to follow up Eskom Transmission Land and Rights Etiya Lenstswane Ga-Kgobudi village resident Evans Moleka Magongoa village residents Evans Chabalala Eveline Mahloko Magongoa village resident Eveline Letdala Magongoa village residents Evelyn Mashaba Tshamahansi village (T.M.C) Evertime Letoala Magongoa village resident Evidence Kekana Ga- Kgobudi village resident F. Chaba National Government/Conflict Management Limpopo Development Agency Fati Edith Ngobeni Chairperson Waterberg District Disability Committee Ferita Botha Magongoa village resident Flora Chabalala Ga-Kgobudi village resident Flora Mamashela Magongoa village resident Flora Matlala Magongoa village resident Flora Sikhu Magongoa village resident Flora Senama Magongoa village resident Florah Hlongwana Tshamahansi village resident Floria Matliou Ga-Kgobudi village resident Floyd Brink General Manager: Roads and Infrastructure Limpopo Department of Roads and Transport France Mola Mahwelereng Francina Kgaswa Ga-Kgobudi village Francina Senama Ga-Kgobudi village Francina Thabetha Ga-Kgobudi village Francina Mabetja Ga-Kgobudi village resident Francina Ledwaba Ga-Kgobudi village resident Francina Molomo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Francina Matjiu Ga-magongoa Francina Motoma Ga-magongoa Francina Maifo Ga-magongoa Francina Sethoga Ga-Magongoa village Francina Molotsa Magongoa village Francina Ramuleni Magongoa village resident Francina Mogatla Magongoa village resident Francina Ngobeni Tshamahansi village resident Francina Mashilo Mashodi Francinah Hlotoba Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Francinah Mashia Ga- Magongoa village resident Francinah Malota Ga- Magongoa village resident Francinah Makhafola Magongoa village resident Frank Madiba Headman Ga-Madiba village Frans Thindisa 7 Miles Frans Chabalala 7 Miles Box1081 Frans Bapela Ga- Kgobudi village resident Frans Mawamela Ga- Kgobudi village resident Frans Khalo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Frans Mphela Ga-Kgobudi village resident Frans Puka Ga-Kgobudi villager resident Frans Senama Ga-Magongoa village resident Frans Ledwaba Ga-Sekgoboko village Frans Mmati Magongoa village Frans Ijatji Magongoa village resident Frans Malindisa Magongoa village resident Frans Baloyi Tshamahansi Frans Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident Frans Ramolimi Frans Gololo Frans Setena Frans Makhafola Frans Khota Frans Mello Frans Kgalane Frans Tsatsi Frans Sekele Freddy Mathobela Ga-Kgodudi village resident Freddy Lekalakala Maroteng Fridah Ramoroka Ga- Kgobudi village resident G Mgobeni Tshamahansi village rsident G.G Shongwane Community Develoment Worker Limpopo: Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs Gabriel Mafafo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Galame Raesetsa George Malindisa Magongoa village resident George Alapa Magongoa village resident George Maleka Magongoa village resident George Mashathe Magongoa village resident George Chauke Tshamahansi village resident George Babili Madiba Gerrit Veen Mokopane Besigheids Kamer Gerrit van der Veen Gerrit van der Veen President Mokopane Chamber of business Gladys Sebetha Ga Kgobudi village resident Gladys Mokwelwa Ga-Kgobodi village resident Gladys Mmaphelo Ga-Kgobudi village Gladys Kgonyogo Ga-Magongoa village resident Gladys Maja Magongoa village Gladys Phele Magongoa village resident Gladys Mokobodi Magongoa village resident Gladys Magongoa Magongoa village resident Godfrey Lamola Ga- Kgobudi village resident Grace Papo Ga-Kgobudi village residents Grace Mamashela Ga-magongoa Grace Senama Magongoa village Grace Ledwaba Magongoa village resident Grace Ngobeni Tshamahansi village Grace Makhubela Tshamanhansi village resident Grace Ndobe Granny Nkoana Ga-Kgobudi village GS Madisha Fundisizwe H Macheke Tshamahansi H Mathebula Tshamahansi H Maluleka Tshamahansi village resident H Ngobeni Tshamahansi village resident H Ngoepe National Government/Conflict Management Municipal Tourism and Environment H.F Baloyi Tshamahansi H.S Mathebula Tshamahansi village Hellen Makamodi Ga- Kgobudi Village Hellen Lamola Ga- Kgobudi village resident Hellen Mabekela Ga-Magongoa village reisdent Hellen Lamela Kgubudi Village Hendrick Lendwaba Ga-Kgobudi village resident Hendrick Magongoa Magongoa village resident Hendrick Chabalala Tshamahansi village Hendry Kekana ANC| Councillor Ward 25: Traffic Mogalakwena Local Municipality Henrick Gwagwa Magongoa village resident Herman Bosii Magongoa village resident Hilary Knight Nyl Action Group Hlako Lesiba Madiba Hlamalane Chauke Tshamahansi vilalge resident Hluphi Nkosi Hon. E. Nong Policy Making Provincial Legislature Hon. H. Matime Policy Making Provincial Legislature Hon. Joy Matshoge Policy Making Provincial Legislature Hon. Lesiba Kekana Traditional Council Mokopane Traditional Council Hon. S.E. Maake Policy Making Provincial Legislature Hon. Thandi Moraka Policy Making Provincial Legislature Honey Labelo Ga- Kgobudi Village Hosea Ngobethi Tshamahansi village HP Mashaphu Mokopane Humpfrey Papo Ga- Kgobudi village resident Hussein Kopola Masehlaneng Hussein Kopole Twilight Ian Matjila Magongoa village resident Ida Manganyi Mosesane Section Idah Molebale Ga- Kgobudi village Igabarebe Macheke Tshamahansi village Irene Molebale Ga- Kgobudi village Isaac Mapokga Ga- Kgobudi Village Isaac Maknubela Tshamahansi village Isaac Majadibodu Head of Road Maintenance Limpopo Department of Roads and Transport Isaac Nyoni Sabaha April Corp. Isaac Nyoni Mahwelereng Isaiah Lekalakala Moshate Isaih Masina Magongoa village Ivonne Mqobar Tshamahansi village Ivy Maboatla Ga-Kgobudi village reisdent Ivy Molebale Ga-Kgobudi village residents Ivy Mogale Magongoa village resident Jaap Kroon Chief Engineer - External Works Department of Water Affairs - Part of Mokolo CWWAP Jack Baloyi 7 Miles/Mozombane Jack Magashwa Ga-Kgobudi village Jack Sathekge Ga-Magongoa village Jack Molwatsi Magongoa village Jack Sphezu Magongoa village Jack Phole Magongoa village Jack Dube Jacob Seoko Ga- Magongoa village resident Jacob Mamashela Ga-Kgobudi village reisedent Jacob Mamashela Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jacob Mothupi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jacob Mawinatlawa Ga-Magongoa village Jacob Kekana Kgobudi Village Jacob Maatla Kgobudi Village Jacob Makomedi Kgobudi Village Jacob Malotsa Magongoa village Jacob Kgole Magongoa village Jacob Lekalakala Masehlaneng village jacob mangamye Mosesane Block B Jacob Lesiba Mashala Ward 30 Mogalakwena Local Municipality Jacobeth Magongoa Ga- Magongoa village resident Jacobeth Magongoa Ga- Magongoa village resident Jahannes Tlhotse Ga-Kgobudi village James Ngobeni 7 Miles/ Mazombane James Maleka Ga- Magongoa village resident James Betha Ga-Kgobudi village reisdent James Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village resident James Mashishi Ga-Kgobudi village resident James Manyamane Ga-Magongoa village resident James Maleka Ga-Magongoa village resident James Mashia Ga-Magongoa village resident James Sethosa Ga-Magongoa village resident James Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident James Kganyago Ga-Magongoa village resident James Phakame Ga-Magongoa village resident James Kekana Kgobudi Village James Mahlangu Tshamahansi Matjeke James Baloyi Tshamahansi village James Sithole James Maluleka James Magongoa Gamagongoa James Maema Mzombane Jan Sebetha Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jan Ngoaka Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jan Maismoni Ga-Magongoa village resident Jan Young Farm Hendriksrust (conterberg) Jana Steyn Honiball att Jane Chabe 7 Miles/Mozombane Jane Kekana 7 Miles/Mzumbane Jane Kekana Ga- Kgobudi village resident Jane Ledwaba Ga- Kgobudi village resident Jane Matjia Ga- Kgobudi village residents Jane Maruma Ga- Magongoa village residents Jane Ramaru Ga-Kgobudi village Jane Mkwana Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jane Masenya Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jane Mashilo Ga-Kgobudi village residents Jane Seoko Ga-Magongoa village resident Jane Makgeta Ga-Magongoa village resident Jane Malatjane Ga-Magongoa village resident Jane Malindisa Ga-Magongoa village resident Jane Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Jane Lebelo Ga-Magongoa village resident Jane Maximan Tshamahansi village resident (Hlongaone section) Janet Dikotla Ga-Magongoa village resident Janlo Moller Jansen Rensburg CelaAfrique/MTN Japhta Kekana Secretary Mokopane Tribal Authority Jeff Papo Ga-Magongoa village resident Jemina Mafsiu Ga-Magongoa village resident Jeneaver Matheane Ga- Kgobudi village resident Jenet Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village residents Jeneth Baloyi Ga- Magongoa village resident Jerry Chabalala Ga- Magongoa village resident Jerry Malonyama Ga-Magongoa village Jerry Ramosha Mosesetjane Sekgoboko Jessy Seoko Ga-Magongoa village Jill Emmerich E5 Farming Jim Fale Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jim Khalo Magongoa village resident Jim Phangweni Tshamahansi village Jimmy Kgopa Ga-Kgobudi village resident Joel Mabeke 7 Miles/Mzombane Joel Makgeta Ga- Magongoa village resident Joel Manaboshego Ga-Magongoa village reisdent Joel Maluleke Johanes Betha Magongoa village Johanna Moloy Ga- Kgobodi village resident Johanna Mabotja Ga-Kgobudi village Johanna Baloyi Ga-Kgobudi village Johanna Magotlane Ga-Kgobudi village Johanna Mabusela Ga-Kgobudi village Johanna Mboweni Ga-Kgobudi village resident Johanna Masenya Ga-Kgobudi village resident Johanna Sekhele Ga-Magongoa village Johanna Mamashala Ga-Magongoa village resident Johanna Phele Ga-Magongoa village resident Johanna Mumushola Ga-Magongoa village resident Johanna Mashane Ga-Magongoa village resident Johanna Marakalala Ga-magongoa village resident Johanna Mathetja Ga-Magongoa village resident Johanna Mashishi Ga-Magongoa village resident Johanna Majiu Ga-magongoa village resident Johanna Nong Magongoa resident Johanna Maboya Magongoa village Johanna Kgole Magongoa village Johanna Khota Magongoa village Johanna Magongoa Magongoa village Johanna Magongoa Magongoa village Johanna Kolotse Mogongoa village Johanna Chuma Tshamahansi village Johanna Baloyi Tshamahansi village Johanna Masola Tshamahansi village resident Johanna Nkchuma Tshamahansi village (Hlongoane Section) Johannah Maaka Ga-Kgobudi village Johannah Matjiu Ga-magongoa Johannah Mpamonyane Ga-magongoa Johannah Matji Ga-magongoa Johannah Monama Ga-magongoa Johanne Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village Johanne Mashalala Tshamahansi village Johannes Mabunna 7 Miles/Mzumbane Johannes Kekana Ga- Kgobudi Village Johannes Mashikeri Headman Ga- Mashikeri village Johannes Lentswane Ga-Kgobudi village Johannes Morela Ga-Kgobudi village resident Johannes Sithole Ga-Kgobudi village resident Johannes Seoko Ga-Kgobudi village residents Johannes Mashejo Ga-Kgobudi village section Johannes Maji Ga-Magongoa village resident Johannes Moholoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Johannes Kutumela Magongoa village Johannes Gadebe Magongoa village Johannes Khalo Magongoa village Johannes Mabusala Magongoa village Johannes Mathebula Mokopane Johannes Mathe Tshamahansi Johannes Khuleyi Tshamahansi Hlongoane Johannes Baloyi Tshamahansi village Johannes Macheke Tshamahansi village resident Johannes Magwangaye Tshamahansi village resident Johannes Macheke Tshamahansi village resident Johannes Ramabuka Tshamahansi village residents (Hlongoane section) Johannes Chabalala Johannes Baloyi Masodi Johannes Langa Mahwelereng Johannes Mashishi Mapela Johannes Mogotlane Mokaba Joharah Mangoane Tshamahansi village residents John Magongoa Ga- Magongoa village resident John Mello Ga- Magongoa village resident John Moabelo Ga-Kgobudi village resident John Mamashela Ga-Kgobudi village resident John Ledwaba Ga-Kgobudi village resident John Magongoa Ga-Kgobudi village resident John Mello Ga-Magongoa village resident John Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village John Papo Ga-Magongoa village resident John Matiiu Ga-Magongoa village resident John Masenya Ga-Magongoa village resident John Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident John Khoka Ga-Magongoa village resident John Makhafola Ga-Magongoa village resident John Molomo Ga-Magongoa village resident John Makgeta Ga-Magongoa village resident John Kekana Ga-Magongoa village resident John Bambo Ga-Magongoa village resident John Seoko Ga-Magongoa villlage reisdent John Macheke Tshamahanis John Maluleke Tshamahansi village resident John Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident John Nkuna Tshamahansi village resident John Sithole Tshamahansi village resident Hlogoane John Mangany John Ngobane Johnny Mgidi Mahwelereng Jomas Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Jonas Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village resident Jonas Makhubela Tshamahansi village resident Jonathan Gafane Senior Manager: Environment Limpopo Department of Roads and Transport Jonathan Gafane Limpopo Department of Roads & Transport Jones Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Joseph Mange 7 Miles/Mzombane Joseph Mokgata Ga-Magongoa resident Joseph Mamashela Ga-Magongoa village resident Joseph Sethosa Ga-Magongoa village resident Joseph Mokgata Ga-Magongoa village resident Joseph Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Joseph Kekana Ga-Magongoa village resident Joseph Kekura Kgobudi Vilage Joseph Matjeke Tshamahansi village resident Joseph Maluleke Tshamahansi village resident Joseph Mokase Tshmahansi Mosesane Joseph Nkanyane Joseph Hlowgoane Joseph Matjeke Ganisani Josephina Lebogo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Josephina Maakamedi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Josephina Masenga Ga-Kgobudi village resident Josephina Sebebane Ga-Magongoa village resident Josephina Ngobeni Tshamahansi Josephina Maluleka Tshamahansi village resident Josephine Monama 7 Miles/Mzombane Josephine Sebebana Ga-Kgobudi village resident Josephine Papo Ga-Magongoa village resident Josephine Lekalakala Kgobudi Village Joshua Molala Ga- Kgobudi village resident Josia Masoga Ga-Kgobudi village resident Josias Lebese Tshamahansi village resident Joyce Shibambo 7 Miles/Mzombane Joyce Setena Ga- Kgobudi village resident Joyce Malindisa Ga- Magongoa village resident Joyce Chabalala Ga-Kgobudi village Joyce Laka Ga-Kgobudi village resident Joyce Magongoa Ga-magongoa Joyce Matsiu Ga-magongoa Joyce Bambo Ga-Magongoa village Joyce Kekana Ga-Magongoa village resident Joyce Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Joyce Masinga Joyco Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village resident Jubilee Seoko Ga- Magongoa village resident Julia Malokomme 7 Miles/Mzombane Julia Mabule Ga- Kgobudi village resident Julia Mathetja Ga-Kgobudi village resident Julia Makgeta Ga-Magongoa village resident Julia Phaahle Ga-Magongoa village resident Julia Kekana Kgobudi Village Julia Chaba Kgobudi Village Juliet Laka Ga- Magongoa village resident Juliet Molekane Ga-Kgobudi villag resident Junis Malete Ga-Kgobudi village Resident Junius Raila Ga- Magongoa village resident Justice Mapokga Ga- kgobudi village resident Justice Gwangwana Ga-Magongoa village resident K Maluleka Tshamahansi K Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident K Ngothi K.D Maluleka Tshamahasi village resident K.J Ngobeni Tshamahansi village K.J Baloyi District Councillor Waterberg District Municipality K.W Ngobeni Tshamahasi village resident Kagiso Lebodi Zone 2 Karen Behr SANBI Kate Mangena 7 Miles/Mzumbane Kekulu Rabohlale Ga- kgobudi village resident Kekulu Masanabo Ga- kgobudi village resident Kenneth Setena Ga-Magongao village Kenneth Kgalo ANC| Councillor Ward 24: Finance Mogalakwena Municipality Kgagodi Chuene Manager Limpopo Department of Energy Kgaugelo Ramashala Mosesetjane Sekgoboko Kgwantha Madimetja Mokopane Khale Faninkere Ga-Mangongoa village resident Khazamlo Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident Kholofolo Papo Ga-Magongao village resident Khwene Makamu Manager Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Klaas Maakmedi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Klaas Manama Ga-kgobudi village resident Klaas Seoko Ga-magongoa Klaas Galame Ga-Magongoa village resident Klaas Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village resident Klaas Matsiu Ga-Magongoa village resident Klaas Mvundlela Kgobudi Village Klaas Hlongwane Tshamahansi village Klaas Madlanato Madiba Klaas Mokwatlo Moshate Klass Magongwa Ga- Magongoa village resident Koketso Mojela Mahwelereng Koos Kekana Ga-Magongoa village resident Kuensani Maluleke Tshamahansi village resident L Mothopo 7 Miles/Mzombane L Moremi 7 Miles/Mzombane L kgosana Ga- Kgobudi village resident L Kganyago Ward Councillor L Hlekane Limpopo Department of Water Affairs L Kobe Director: Institutional Establishment Department of Water Affairs L Maruma Mokopane Interested & Affected Communities Committee L Maja National Government/Conflict Management Limpopo Dept of Economic Development L. Legodi Ward 22 Mogalakwena Local Municipality L.E. Manamela Ward 29 Mogalakwena Local Municipality L.J. Mashala Ward 36 Mogalakwena Local Municipality L.V Madubanya Manager Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Ladi Mochabi Masehlaneng village Ladiah Makgoba Ga-Magongao village resident Lawrence Tsatsi Ga-Magongoa village resident Lazarus Ramaru Ga-Magongoa village resident Lea Mathatha Ga-Magongoa village resident Lebo Molebale Kgobudi Lebogang Marakalala Moshate Lekau Kekana Kgobuda Lenga Motshudi Mahwelereng Leon Huyssteen Mokopane Recycling Lesega Mokgala Ga-Magongao village resident Lesetja Rakobela 7 Miles/Mzombane Lesetja Gwangwa No longer the Executive Mayor & Left the Company Waterberg District Municipality Lesiba Kekana Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Lesiba Mathobala Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lesiba Mamashila Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lesiba Mong Ga-Magongao village resident Lesiba Kekana Mokopane Tribal Authority Lesiba Matlou Masesetjane Lesiba Langa MBF (Mvela Civil) Lesiba Mpjatona Mashahleng Lesiba Molomo lomzit Lesiba Mokwena Mosesetjane LesibaLeft the Company Confirmed 20121113) Kekana Limpopo Office of the Premier Lesibana Mathobela Ga-Magongoa vilage resident Leslie Coetze Rietvally farm 240 Portion 9 Letha Mogotlane Ga-Kgobudi vilage resident Lichen Mashilo Ga- Magongoa village resident Lieya Poto Ga- Kgobudi village residents Limah Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Lina Molokomme 7 Miles/Mzombane village resident Lina Sengasti Ga- Kgobudi village resident Lina Rantji Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lina Papo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lina Ketana Ga-Magongoa village resident Linah Laka Ga- Kgobudi village resident Linah Bambo Ga-Magongoa village resident Linah Seoko Ga-Magongoa village resident Linah Setsiba Ga-Magongoa village resident Linah Sebetha Ga-Magongoa village resident Linah Mmoiawa Tshamahansi vilalge resident Linah Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident Lindah Kekana ANC| PR - Councillor Spec projects MPAC Mogalakwena Local Municipality Lindzi Baloyi 7 Miles/Mzombane Linkie Mokhanda Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Linkie Kekana Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Linky Mokobodi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lisa Jrgensen Lawyers for Human Rights Lisbeth Leso Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Lisbeth Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Lisbeth Mathathe Ga-Magongoa village resident Lisbeth Legodi Ga-Magongoa village resident Lisbeth Molonyama Ga-Magongoa village resident Lisbeth Beetha Ga-Magongoa village resident Lisbeth Makgoba Ga-Magongoa village resident Lisbeth Matsemela Ga-Magongoa village resident Lisbeth Mamashela Ga-Magongoa village resident Liza Hlongwani Tshamahansi village resident Lizzy Monama Ga-Kgobudi Village resident Lizzy Bosii Ga-Magongoa village resident Locie Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village resident Locus Chidi Ga- Magongao village resident Locus Malekane Ga-Kgobudi village resident Locus Mabule Ga-Kgobudi village resident Locus Mashela Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lorraine Mosebedi Information Manager Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Lorreine Seoko Ga-Magongoa village resident Louis Makhubele Environmental Specialist Transnet Freight Rail Louis Meintjes Chairman of the Forum National Water Forum Louisa Mong Ga-Mongongoa village resident Lucas Matli Ga-Magongoa village resident Lucas Nkwana Ga-Magongoa village resident Lucas Mahlangu Deputy Director: Chemical & Waste Management Department of Environmental Affairs Lucas Nkuna Sekgoboko Lucia Nzonama Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lucia Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village resident Lucky Mogatla Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lucky Sasa Ga-Magongao village resident Lucky Makhabela Tshamahansi village resident Lucky Kubai Ntwamano Lucus Matlou 7 Miles/Mzombane Lucy Maake Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Lucy Madlanato Ga- Kgobudi village resident Lucy Molonyama Ga-Kgobudi village resident Lucy Leso Ga-Kgobudi village resident Luke Perkins No Longer with the Company Wildlife and Environmental Society of South Africa (WESSA) Lutendo Tshifhango Principal Environmental Officer: Environmental Impact Assessement Department of Environmental Affairs Lydia Khalo Ga-Magongoa village resident M Molwele Ga-Kgobudi village resident M Leso Ga-Kgobudi village resident M Seoko Magongoa village resident M Maluleka Tshamahansi village resident M Magwai 7 Miles/Mzombane M Maja Dept of Economic Deve,Environment and Tourism M Molwatsi Chairperson Mokopane Interested & Affected Communities Committee M Pitsi Department of Mineral Resources M.A.D Monama Speaker Waterberg District Municipality M.C Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident M.E Malatji MLM M.F. Mutshinya Ward 27 Mogalakwena Local Municipality M.J Tsoai Ga-Madiba village resident M.J Mautla Chairperson Kgobudi Forum - Kgobudi village M.J Kekana Principal Lekwa High School- Kgobudi village M.K Kekana Sekgoboko M.K Kekana Sekgoboko M.K. Kgalo Ward 24 Mogalakwena Local Municipality M.M Komape Director: Water Regulation and Use Department of Water Affairs M.P Thamaga Kgobudi Development Committe M.P Somo Kgopedinota Primary School- Kgobudi village M.S Leso Headman Maroteng village M.T Baloyi Tshamahansi M.W Masimini Livestock Committe- Kgobudi village Mabana Mogano 7 Miles/Mzombane Maboya Eliya Ga- Magongoa village resident Mabye Makwena Mahwelereng Mack Sareha Johannesburg Mack Mahlanya Serappies Madimetja Gadebe Madimetsa Letwala Ga-Magongoa village resident Magalane Hlogwane Tshamahansi Magdeline Mata Ga-Magongoa village resident Magdeline Labella Ga-Magongoa village resident Maggie Nkuna Tshamahansi village resident Maggie Mkhubela Magret Bosii Ga-Magongoa village re sident Magret Katumela Ga-Magongoa village resident Magret Matjiu Ga-Magongoa village resident Magriaza Galimberti South African Heritage Resource Agency Mahlatji Malegodi Manager Department of Water Affairs Maifo Dorris Ga-Magongoa village resident Maki Mamashela Ga-Magongao village resident Malasela Magongwa Ga-Magongoa village resident Malesela Matjiu Ga-Magongao village resident Malesela Khalo Ga-Magongao village resident Malesela Bambo Ga-Magongoa village resident Malesela Kekana Headman Kgobudi village Maleseta Gololo Ga-Magongoa village resident Malobe Khalo Ga-Magongoa village resident Malose Maji Ga-Magongoa village resdent Malose Kolotsi Ga-Magongoa village resident Malose Dikutla Ga-Magongoa village resident Mamma Bambo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Mamoraka Ledwaba Ga-Kgobudi village resident Mapela John Nkoana Mapela Maphelo Ramaru Ga-Magongoa village resident Maphuma Monama Ga-Magongoa village resident Mapula Mokgata Ga-Kgobudi village resident Marcus Tsatsi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Margaret Mogale Ga-Kgobudi village resident Margaret Mphela Ga-Magongoa village Margeret Kekana Ga- Kgubudi village Margeret Tsatsi Ga- Magongoa village resident Margeret Maboshego Ga-Kgobudi village resident Margret Qwanqwa Ga-magongoa village resident Margret Nkumane Ga-magongoa village resident Margret Sithole Tshamahansi village resident Maria Molonyama African National Congress Youth League Maria Montja Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Maria Seoke Ga-Kgobudi village resident Maria Khalo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Maria Khumalo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Maria Phele Ga-Kgobudi village resident Maria Tema Ga-Kgobudi village resident Maria Mello Ga-Magongao village resident Maria Motimedi Ga-Magongao village resident Maria Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village Maria Makgeta Ga-Magongoa village Maria Mohlola Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Khalo Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Sema Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Mello Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Malindisa Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Papo Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Kekana Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Ndlovu Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Bosii Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Mogafe Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Mashilo Ga-magongoa village resident Maria Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Menu Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Mohlola Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Mashaba Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Legodi Ga-Magongoa village resident Maria Khalo Ga-Magongoa villlage Maria Kekana Kgobudi Village Maria Langa Kgobudi Village Maria Makhubela Tshaimahanzi Maria Lebese Tshamahansi Hlongoane Maria Hlongoana Tshamahansi village resident Maria Makhubela Tshamahansi village resident Mariam Gadebe Ga-Magongao village resident Mark Gordon Chief Director Department of Environmental Affairs Markerte Tsasti Ga-Magongoa village resident Marongwa Mphela Ga-Magongao village resident Martha Mabotha Ga-Kgobudi village resident Martha Makubela Ga-Kgobudi village resident Martha Ngwepe Ga-Kgobudi village resident Martha Shiburi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Martha Balayi Martin Mamashela Ga-Kgobudi village resident Marvin Mashala Maruteng Mary Mokobodi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Mary Maji Ga-Magongoa village resident Mary Mamashelo Ga-Magongoa village resident Mary Mokgato Pholarpark Mary Nyango Magungoa Mashela Kekana Masehlaneng Mashele Massy 7 Miles/Mzombane Matha Papo Ga-Magongoa village resident Mathildah Mphulo Ga-Magongoa village resident Matia Ramela Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Matilda Mphulo Ga-Magongoa village resident Matlakala Maronkang Kgobudi Village Matlhoma Mutshuo Masehlaneng Matome Mashita 7 Miles/Mzombane Matsobane Nyatlo 7 Miles/Mzombane Matsobane Molala Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Matsobane Monama Ga-Magongoa village resident Maureen Morwasu 7 Miles/Mzombane Mave Mashia Ga-Kgobudi village resident Maxwell Marenya Director-General Department of Water Affairs Mechack Masindi Manager: Bio-Diversity Limpopo Economic Development, Environment and Tourism Meho Mogotlane Ga-Magongoa village resident Meisie Rafapa Ga-Magongoa village resident Melilia Mamashela Ga-Magongoa village resident Melita khalo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Melita Serite Ga-Kgobudi village resident Melita Khota Ga-Magongoa village resident Melose Gadebe Ga-Magongoa village resident Melvin Mashiane Ga-Magongoa village resident Menu Lesiba Masehlaneng Mercy Thubakgale Mahwelereng Merriam Mokondo Moshate Mfundi Songo Eskom Transmission Land and Rights Michael Manamela 7 Miles/Mzombane Michael Magongwa Ga-Magongoa village resident Michael Kalobe Ga-Magongoa village Resident Michael Ndaba Michael Mabusela Bakenberg Micheal Tsatsi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Micheal Khalo Ga-Magongao village resident Millicent Mowaswi Mzombane Millicent Solomons Deputy Director Department of Environmental Affairs Mimi Maponya Ga-Magongoa village resident Minah Mashishi Ga-Magongoa village resident MJ Maphoso SANCO Limpopo MK Dabana SANCO Waterberg Mma Sebatjane 7 Miles/Mzombane Mmadichaba Trading CC Mahwelereng Mmakoma Ngdepe Ga-Kgobudi village resident Mmanare Kekae Ditspaning village Mmina Mathetja Ga-Magongoa village resident Mokgaetji Nkwama Ga-Magongoa village resident Mokgaetse Ngobeni Ga-Magongoa village resident Mokgaetsi Mvudlela Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Mokhalo Pitsi Manager Department of Mineral Resources Mokopane Letsoalo District Municipal Manager Waterberg District Municipality Molefe Mojela Bakone Creche Moloisi Kolotsi Ga-Magongao village resident Molomo Kgobudi Motshewe 155 Monica Kcobe Ga-Kgobudi village resident Morathi Legodi Masehlaneng Morgan Gololo Ga-Magongoa village resident Morris Mo Tshamahansi village resident Moses Malindisa Ga-Kgobudi village resident Moses Maponya Ga-Magongoa village resident Moses Senama Ga-Magongoa village resident Moses Kekana Ga-Magongoa village resident Moses Mashabanu Matjeke Moshupulogo Nong Ga-Magongoa village resident Mosima Mabotha Ga-Kgobudi village resident Mosima Mabotja Ga-Magongoa resident Mosima Malitisa Ga-Magongoa village resident Mosima Malesa Ga-Magongoa village resident Motjoko Johannes Langa Mogalakwena faith and hope foundation Moureen Kgole Ga-Magongoa village resident Mr & Mrs Sandow & Jill Emmerich Mr Bosiame Willem shirindi Shirindi Mr K Maluleke Mr N.J Tshikonelo Mr Phillemon Makwena Ramoroka Mr Shaun McGrath McGrath Mrs Morifi Provincial Government Ciruit Department of Education MS Golele Project Co-ordinator: Recap Directorate Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Ms Lucy (Mahwelereng Public Library) Mashetisho Ms Retha Eastes Mushi Phuti 7 Miles/Mzumbane MV Masakona Masopi N Ndaba N Masupa Senior Manager: Waterberg District Waterberg District Municipality N Moloto Manager: Head Of Department office Support Department: Public Works, Limpopo N.L Kgobe Municipal Speaker Mogalakwena Local Municipality N.M. Mangala Provincial Government District Department of Education N.R Mogotlane Executive Mayor Waterberg District Municipality Nakedi Seeko Ga-Magongoa village resident Nana Manamela Head of Department Limpopo: Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs Nanacy Masenya Headman Ga-Masenya village Nancy Jake Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Nancy Khalo Ga-Magongoa village resident Ndina Mudau Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Necs Kakana Ga-Magongoa village resident Nicolars Lamola Ga- Kgobudi village resident NJ Tshikonelo Department of Roads and Transport limpopo Nkateko Mabunda Tshamahansi village residents Nkele Boshomane Moshate Nkube Motlana Bakenberg Nkuna Petrus Tshamahansi village resident Nondi Lesu Masehlaneng Norah Ntsoane Specialist Department of Water Affairs Norman Masemene Masesetjane Ntau Letebele Head of Department: Roads and Transport Limpopo Department of Roads and Transport Ntau Letebele Head of Department Department of Roads and Transport Nthabiseng Koenaite Pholarpark Nurse Molengwa Ga-Magongoa village resident Nurse Mabitsela Maroteng Nvangaza Nkhoma Tshamahansi village resident Nyiko Nkosi Principal Environmental Officer: Environmental Impact Assessement Department of Environmental Affairs Olga Lebese 7 miles/Mzombane Olgar Moabelo Ga-Kgobudi village Olisa Kgole Ga-Magongoa village resident Onica Molebale Ga- Kgobudi Village resident Ore Maaka Ga-Kgobudi Village resident Ouma Makgata Ga-Magongoa Village resident Oupa Sethosa Ga-Magongoa village resident P Machaba 7 Miles/Mzombani P.G. Pila Ward 28 Mogalakwena Local Municipality P.K Madisha M.C.D.C Mahwelereng Pabalelo Khutso Madisha Patrcik Lebelo Kgobudi Village Patricia Ndaba Mashashane Patrick Kolotsi Ga-Magongoa village resident Paulina Mokwele Ga- Kgobudi village resident Paulina Xhato Ga-Magongoa village resident Paulina Maja Ga-Magongoa village resident Paulina Mashamaite Ga-Magongoa village resident Paulina Chaoke Masakhaneng Paulina Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident Paulina Nkuna Tshamahansi village residents Paulinah Beetha Ga-Magongoa village residents Peggy Kekana Ga-Magongoa village resident Peggy Baloyi Tshamahansi village resident Peggy Makhubela Tshamahansi village resident Percy Motileng Matseke Percy Motileng Peter Kekana 7 Miles/Mzombane Peter Laka 7 Miles/Mzombane Peter Mathapo Ga-Magongoa village resident Peter Chauke Tshamahansi village resident Peter Moloto Mahwelereng Petronella Rametse Mokopane Petrus Baloyi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Petrus Kgole Ga-Magongoa village resident Petrus Phele Ga-Magongoa village resident Petunia Kgomo Ga-Magongoa village resident Pheladi Bosii Ga-Kgobudi village resident Philamon Thamaga Ga- Kgobudi village resident Philamon Khalo Ga-Magongoa village resident Philamon Khota Ga-Magongoa village resident Philip Maboya Ga-Magongoa village resident Philip Bongi Philipos Matlou Ga-Kgobudi village resident Philleman Ramashitya Madiba Development Committee Phillimon Ramakgoba Ga-Kgobudi village resident Phillip Hine Heritage Officer in Archaeology South African Heritage Resources Agency
Phillip Hine Heritage and Traditional Officer: SAHRA Archaeology, Palaeontology & Meteorites Unit South African Heritage Resources Agency Phina Mathape Ga-Kgobudi village resident Phineas Seduma Ga-Magongoa village resident Phineas Moabelo Ga-Magongoa village resident Phumelani Tsedu Official Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Phumelelo Hokomane Mogalakwena LM Phumeza Skepe Assistant Director Department of Environmental Affairs Phumozo Thivhafuni Environment Officer Limpopo Economic Development, Environment and Tourism Phuti Kgomo Matlala Phuti Ramolobeng Specialist Department of Water Affairs Pierra Jacobs NTK LIMPOPO AGRIC Piet Lesiba Ga- Kgobudi village resident Piet Kgonyame Ga-Kgobudi village resident Piet Thole Ga-Kgobudi village resident Piet Moabelo Ga-Magongoa village Piet Moabelo Ga-Magongoa village resident Piet Bambo Ga-Magongoa village resident Piet Letoala Ga-Magongoa village resident Piet Mathtsa Ga-Magongoa village resident Piet Maluleka Ward Councillor 21 Piet Ngobeni Pietrus Kgole Ga-Magongoa village resident Pitsi Chokoe Ext 17 Poalina Seoko Ga-Magongoa village resident Poalina Mahlada Tshamahansi village resident Polina Mmatji Ga-Magongoa village resident Polinah Ngwepe Ga-Kgobudi village resident Pomina Nkune Tshamahansi village resident Poppy Mokagane Ga-Kgobudi Village resident Portia Mamashala Ga-Magongoa village resident Portia Kgosana Sekgakgapeng Potlana kgole Ga-Magongoa village resident Poulina Khalo Ga-Magongoa village resident Precious Khwinana Ga-Kgobudi Village resident Prince Bosii Ga-Magongoa Village resident Prince Manganyi Tshamahansi Pulana Rabekane Akasia R Matlou 7 miles/Mozombane R Matsheke 7 Miles/Mozombane R Mtileni Director: Water Sector Support and Development Department of Water Affairs R Dowelani Acting Chief Director Limpopo Provincial Shared Services Centre R.A Els District Officer Limpopo Department of Roads and Transport R.M Mabusela Speaker Mogalakwena Local Municpality R.P. Maluleke Ward 21 Mogalakwena Local Municipality R.S Manganyi Tshamahansi village resident Rachel Mathato Ga-Magongoa village resident Raesibe Sebogoane Ga-Magongoa village resident Raesibe Makhala Ga-Magongoa village resident Raesibe Mmamaseda Ga-Magongoa village resident Rahab Lebelo ANC| PR-Exco Chairperson: Electrical Mogalakwena Local Municipality Raijibo Masenya Ga-Magongoa village resident Rakgadi Ramale 7 Miles/Mzombane Ramadimetja Matjui Ga-Magongoa village resident Ramadimetja Papo Ga-Magongoa village resident Ramadimetsa Nkwana Ga-Magongoa village resident Ramadimetse Matjie Ga-Magongoa village resident Ramadinetsa Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa village resident Ramasela Matzeke Ga-Kgobudi village Ramasela Bambo Ga-Magongoa village Ramatsobane Bambo Ga-Magongoa village Ramokone Laka Ga-Kgobudi village Rankeka Maema Mzombane Rankeka Maema Rasibo Mogongwa Ga-Magongoa village Raymond Mashishi Ga-Magongoa village Reasibe Kgole Ga-Magongoa village Rebecca Loholo Ga-Kgobudi village Rebecca Mohlola Ga-Magongoa village Rebecca Khalo Ga-Magongoa village Rebecca Makgoka Ga-Magongoa village Refilwe Madisa Regina Thule Ga-Kgobudi village Rehab Masenya Ga-Magongoa village Reinhardt Weidemann Golder Associates Remembrance Mthunzi Masodi Renita Prinsloo Potgietersrus District Slandbou Unie Resenya Hlongwana Resibe Seoma Ga-Kgobudi village Reuben Bambo Ga-Magongoa village Rhina Letswalo Ga-Kgobudi village Ria Barkhuizen South African National Road Agency Ltd Ribu Malatji Office Angels Riccardo Mothapo Moshate Richard Langa 7 Miles / Mzumbani Richard Senama Ga-Magongoa village Richard Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Richard Tjale Masodi Rinso Mapokga Ga-Kgobudi village Rirhandza Shilote Director: Quality Assurance Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Robert Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village resident Ronnie Mabunda Tshamahansi Ronny Mamashela Ga-magongoa village resident Ronny Mashitelo Kgobudi Village Ronny Senanza Magongoa village resident Rosa Tjatji Magongoa village resident Rosa Mookamedi Magongoa village resident Rose Makamedi Magongoa village resident Rosima Kgomo Magongoa village resident Rosina Lebelo Ga- Kgobudi village resident Rosina Koka Ga- Kgobudi village resident Rosina Dolo Ga-Kgobudi village resident Rosina Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village resident Rosina Tsatsi Magongoa village resident Rosina Maleka Magongoa village resident Rosina Moabele Magongoa village resident Rosina Khota Magongoa village resident Rosina Ledwaba Magongoa village resident Rosina Kgasoa Magongoa village resident Rosina Mathetja Magongoa village resident Rosina Maluleke Magongoa village resident Rosina Gololo Magongoa village resident Rosinah Tole Magongoa village resident Rosinah Scoko Magongoa village resident Rosinah Tsebe Magongoa village resident Rosma Mashilo Magongoa village resident Rotlea Makhafola Masehlaneng Ruben Malete Magongoa village resident Rynette Coetzee Endangered Wildlife Trust S Mashao Secretary to Mayor Waterberg District Municipality S. Montana Ward 12 Mogalakwena Local Municipality S.C Sephosa Tshamhansi village resident S.H. Mathebula Councillor Mogalakwena Local Municipality S.W Kekana Municipal Manager Mogalakwena Local Municipality S.W. Kekana Municipal Managers Office Mogalakwena Local Municipality Salaelo Mphasha Land Claims Commissioner Department of Rural Development Land Affairs Salamina Mamashele Magongoa village resident Salome Mokgame Ga- kgobudi village resident Salome Mabote Ga-Kgobudi village resident Salome Ngobeni Tshamahansi village resident Salphy Kgomo 7 Miles/Mzumbani settlement Samuel Chipa Ga- kgobudi village resident Samuel Mmath Ga-Kgobudi village resident Samuel Tsatsi Ga-Kgobudi village resident Samuel Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village resident Samuel Mkhanda Ga-Kgobudi village resident Samuel Magongoa Ga-magongoa Samuel Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Samuel Maluleke Ga-Magongoa village resident Samuel Malokome Magangoa village resident Samuel Magonga Magongoa village - resident Samuel Kgole Magongoa village resident Samuel Magongoa Magongoa village resident Samuel Senama Magongoa village resident Samuel Matji Magongoa village resident Samuel Maboatle Magongoa village resident Samuel Kolobe Magongoa village resident Samuel Mello Magongoa village resident Samuel Mashaba Magongoa village residents Samuel Burayi Tshamahansi village resident Samuel Mathebula Ward Councillor Ward Councillor- Ward 20 Samuel Kekana Moshate Sanah Bambo Magongoai village resident Sanet van Jaarsveld Specialist Consultant Department of Water Affairs: Options Analysis - Part of Mokolo CWWAP Sara Kganyage Magongoa village resident Sara Nukeri Tshamahansi (Matjeke section) village resident Sara Boloyi Tshamahansi (Matjeke section) village resident Sarah Makgeta Magongoa village resident Sarah Maluleka Tshamahansi (Hlongwane section) village resident Sarah Baloyi Tshamahansi (Matkjeke section) village resident Selina Marokane Ga-Magongoa village Selinah Moafe Ga-Magongoa village resident Sello Kekana Mosesetjane SANCO Seromoa Matketse Matjeke Shadrack Ledwaba Ga-Magongoa Shibe Legodi Masehlaneng Shielda Baloyi Tshamahansi village Shillyboy Shibambo Tshamahansi village Shimane Kekana Masehlaneng Shinkuwan Ngobeni Shirley Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village Shiviti Coghsta Provincial Government/Mokopane District Office Department of Coorperative Governance, Human Settlement, and Traditional Affairs Sibongile Duba 7 Miles / Mzumbani Silas Maluleke 7 Miles / Mzumbani Silly Rabohlale Ga- Kgobudi village Simon Moasa Ga-Kgobudi village Simon Mokgotho Ga-Kgobudi village Simon Ledwaba Ga-Kgodudi village Simon Masenya Ga-Magongoa village Simon Moloto Ga-Magongoa village Simon Langa Ga-Magongoa village Simon Langa Ga-Magongoa village Simon Masoga Ga-Magongoa village Simon Molebale Kgobudi Village Simson Seoko Ga-Magongoa village Sinah Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village Sinah Mamashela Ga-Magongoa village Sinna Bosii Ga-Magongoa village Skiel Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village Slyvia Bambo Sylvia Sodley Maqubela Makopane Solomon Marakalala Ga-Kgobudi village Solomon Kekana Ga-Kgobudi village Solomon Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Solomon Maluleka Tshamahansi village Solomon Masi Tshamhansi village Matjieke section Solomon Makhubela Solomon Manganyi Tshamahansi Sonboy Nduna 7 Miles/Mzumbani Sophia Kgonyane Ga-Kgobudi village Sophia Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Sophia Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Sophia Khalo Ga-Magongoa village Sophia Sibanda Sophy Kekana Ga-Magongoa village Sophy Sinbanda Tshamahansi Mining Committee Sophy Maloka Mapela Spenkie Masenya Ga-Magongoa village Standford Masemene Ga-Kgobudi village Stanley Makhubela Tshamahansi village (Matjieke section) Stanley Koenaite Air Quality Officer Waterberg District Municipality Stephen Kekana Ga-Kgobudi Village Stephen Mapoga Ga-Kgobudi Village Stephen Khuimama Ga-Kgobudi village Steve Horak Digby Wells Steven Mmenu 7 Miles/Mzumbani Steven Monethe Ga-Magongoa village Surprise Makhubela Tshamahansi village (Matjeke section) Surprise Lesufi Lebowakgomo Suzan Mathetja Ga-Magongoa village Suzen Moakamedi Ga-Kgobudi village Sydney Kganyago Ga-Magongoa village Sydney Khalo Ga-Magongoa village Sydney Ngobeni Sylvester Ramakgole Masehlaneng Sylvia Masenya 7 Miles/Mzumbani T Marthrona 7 Miles /Mzumbani T Langa 7 Miles/Mzumbani T Khuzwayo Manager Limpopo Provincial House of Traditional Leaders T Khuzwayo Manager Limpopo Provincial Shared Services Centre T Khuzwayo Manager Limpopo Provincial House of Traditional Leaders T Maphoto Regional Land Claims Commissioner Office of the Regional Land Claims Commissioner T Malatji Department of Rural Development and Land Reform T Motau Chief Environmental Officer Limpopo Department of Health and Social Development T K.L Vaidyan Kgaba secondary school T. Mokgobu National Government/Conflict Management Premiers Office T.A Maphoto Chief Director: Rural Development Restitution Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform T.Alice Mongwe Mapela Tebatso Lekalakala Moshate Tebogo Molebana Ga-Kgobudi village Tebogo Mangaba Personal Assistant to Regional Manager Department of Mineral Resources Teboho Ntshangase Secretary to Speaker Waterberg District Municipality Teboho Ntshangase Secretary to Speaker Waterberg District Municipality Tendani Nditwani Chief Water Resource Planner North National Department of Water Affairs Terrecia Maiji Ga-Magongoa village Tess Rautenbach 0 Trautenb Tess Rautenbach Thabang Nkhana Thabo Street Thabo Lebese 7 Miles/Mzumbani Thabo Khalo Ga-Magongoa village Thandi Ramolemi Ga-Magongoa village Thandi Moraka Member of Parliament Limpopo Legislature Thando Khalo Ga-Magongoa village Thembi Maboshego Ga-Magongoa village Theophelus Nkhuna Tshamahansi Thoi Mahlafonya Sekgoboko Thomas Hlongwane 7 Miles/Mzumbani Thomas Mokwetu Ga- Kgobudi village Thomas Mashaba Ga-Kgobudi village Thomas Shibanda Ga-Kgobudi village Thomas Baloyi Tshamahansi Mining Committee Thomas Nqoleni Tshamahansi village Thomas Nkhuna Tshamahansi-Ward 21 Thomas Maluleka Thomas Mbombi Tshamahansi Tinyiko Malungani Manager: Environmental Impact management Limpopo Economic Development, Environment and Tourism Tjale Seipa Ga-Kgobudi Village Tobile Bokwe Chief Environmental Advisor Eskom Transmission Land and Rights Tokela Morudu Mzombane Tommy Nkosi Tonia Senama Ga-Magongoa village Trevor Lekalakala Moshate Tsakatie Maluleke Tshamahansi Tsebe Lesibana Ga-Kgobudi Village Tshegofatso Seoko ANC Tshepho Maja Moshate Tshepo Kekana Ga-Kgobudi Village Tshepo Mathatha Ga-Magongoa village Tshepo Baloyi Tshamahansi Tshepo Chokoe Pholarpark Tshidi Maphilelo LYD Tshikwane Kekanna Ga-Kgobudi village Tswelopele Beetha Ga-Magongoa village V Devchander Manager Department of Mineral Resources V.H. Kekana Ward 25 Mogalakwena Local Municipality V.M Mahlabepane Moshate V.M Kekana Mvela Civil Veronica Fatana Ga- Kgobudi village Victor Makgoba Ga-Magongoa village Victor Baloyi Ga-Machikiri Victor Mongwe Senior Manager: Environmental Impact Management Division Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism Victoria Mabuela Ga- Kgobudi village Vinash Devchander Department of Mineral Resources Vincent Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Violet Rantjie Ga-Magongoa village Virginia Zodwaba Ga-Magongoa village Virginia Mokgopha Pholarpark Vusi Mtimkulu Mogalakwena Local Municipality W Pulela 7 Miles/Mzumbani W Mosola Tshamahansi village (Hlogwane Section) Walter Moasa Ga-Magongoa village Welhemina Magongoa Ga-Magongoa village Wellema Koebisa Tshamahansi village Wena Goelst Wendi Tlhoka Ga- Kgobudi village Wilfred Mashita Ga-Kgobudi village Willem Mbore Thabaneng Section William Aphane Ga-Kgobudi Village William Ndlovu Ga-Kgobudi village resident William Nkwana Ga-Magongoa village William Bambo Ga-Magongoa village William Popa Ga-Magongoa village William Tsatsi Ga-Magongoa village William Rantji Ga-Magongoa village William Malindisa Ga-Magongoa village William Malindsa Ga-Magongoa village William Manganyi Secretary Ga-Mashikeri William Sithole Tshamahansi village William Mangoane Tshamahansi village William Masundo Tshamahansi village (Hlogwane Section) William Muthi Tshamahansi village (Hlongane section William Kepuse Tshamahansi village (Hlongoane section) William Tshamanasi Tshamahansi village (Hlongoane section) William Nobela William Young Farm Conterberg williams Masaso Tshamahinsi village Winnie Legodi Ga-kgobudi village resident Winnie Nkoko Ga-Matlala Zelly Molebale Ga-Kgobudi village Collin ANC - Sub Region (Mokopane) Limpopo Tourism Agency Rudzani SecretaryMM office) Mogalakwena Local Municipality Nicolene Regional Manager Northern Traansvaal Agricultural Union (NTLU) Duwelani (PLRO) Provincial Land Reform Officer Limpopo Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Limpopo Economic Development, Environment and Tourism Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix E: Intangible Heritage meeting attendance registers
Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix F: Identified Heritage Resources
Ref. no Resource Type Site location Description PLA1677/S.35-001 Stone Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Middle Stone Age lithics found on surface PLA1677/S.35-002 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Undiagnostic potsherd found on surface PLA1677/S.35-003 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Lower Grinding Stone and Upper Grinding Stone PLA1677/S.35-004 Stone Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Alluvial Middle Stone Age flakes with retouch PLA1677/S.35-005 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Undiagnostic potsherd and Lower Grinding Stone found on surface PLA1677/S.35-006 Iron Age Smelting Site TSF Option 2 Smelting site with terraced walls, middens, tuyere fragments and slag heap PLA1677/S.35-007 Stone Walling TSF Option 2 3 separate sections of infilled wall measuring 10 m; 11 m and 13 m and Lower Grinding Stone PLA1677/S.35-008 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Lower Grinding Stone found on surface PLA1677/S.35-009 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Lower Grinding Stone found on surface PLA1677/S.35-010 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Upper Grinding Stone found on surface PLA1677/S.35-011 Stone Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Alluvial Middle Stone Age quartzite flakes with retouch and cortex PLA1677/S.35-012 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 2 undiagnostic potsherds in animal burrows PLA1677/S.35-013 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 2 Undiagnostic potsherds found on surface PLA1677/S.35-014 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 3 Decorated worked potsherd and undiagnsotic potsherds found in animal burrow spoil heap PLA1677/S.35-015 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 3 Decorated potsherd and undiagnostic potsherd found in an animal burrow spoil heap PLA1677/S.35-016 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 3 Lower Grinding Stone found on surface PLA1677/S.35-017 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 3 Undiagnostic potsherd found in animal burrow spoil heap PLA1677/S.35-018 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 3 2 decorated potsherds and slag found in animal burrow spoil heap PLA1677/S.35-019 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 3 Five undiagnostic potsherds found in animla burrow spoil heap. One potsherd 1.5cm thick (possible tuyere pipe fragment) PLA1677/S.35-020 Stone Age Surface occurrence TSF Option 3 Alluvial Middle Stone Age flakes, blades with facetted platforms and retouch on all and cortex present PLA1677/S.35-021 Iron Age and Stone Age Surface occurrence TSF Option 3 Undiagnotsic potsherds and Middle Stone Age flakes found on decomposing calcrete layer PLA1677/S.35-022 Iron Age Surface Occurrence TSF Option 3 Lower Grinding Stone PLA1677/S.36-023 Single grave TSF Option 3 Informal stone dressed grave with Lower Grinding Stone, grave site has been tended recently PLA1677/S.35-024 Stone Age Surface occurrence TSF Option 3 Middle Stone Age alluvial lithics, points, flakes with retouch and cortex present PLA1677/S.36-025 Single grave Operational area Large headstone stone, stone dressing PLA1677/S.35-026 Stone Age Surface Occurrence Operational area Middle Stone Age flakes found on the surface PLA1677/S.35-027 Iron Age/Historical settlement Operational area Stone walled settlement with circular and rectangular foundations PLA1677/S.36-028 Single grave Operational area Stone dressed grave with a large stone headstone PLA1677/S.36-029 Burial Ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-030 Burial Ground Operational area 10 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-031 Burial Ground Operational area 20 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-032 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-033 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-034 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-035 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-036 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-037 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-038 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-039 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-040 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-041 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-042 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-043 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-044 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-045 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-046 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-047 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-048 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-049 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-050 Burial ground Operational area 2 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-051 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-052 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-053 Burial ground Operational area 11 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-054 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-055 Burial ground Operational area 10 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-056 Burial ground Operational area 6 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.35-057 Iron Age Surface Occurrence Operational area Undiagnsotic potsherds found on surface PLA1677/S.36-058 Burial ground Operational area 2 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-059 Burial ground Operational area 2 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-060 Burial ground Operational area Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-061 Burial ground Operational area 3 graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-062 Single grave Operational area One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-063 Single grave Operational area One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-064 Single grave Operational area One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-065 Single grave Operational area One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-066 Single grave Operational area One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-067 Burial Ground Operational area 8 graves within the burial ground PLA1677/S.36-068 Single grave Operational area One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-069 Single grave Operational area One grave within burial ground 6 graves in total, 2 formal granite headstone (Sarah Ledwaba Ramadimetja 1992/09/28; Johannes Malesela Ledwaba PLA1677/S.36-070 Burial ground Alternative Plant area 1962/08/11, four informal stone dressed graves PLA1677/S.35-071 Iron Age/Historical settlement Alternative Plant area Stone walling with circular and rectangular foundations, monolithic stone walling and gong rock PLA1677/S.36-072 Burial ground Alternative Plant area 7 graves with large stones as headstones painted white; one grave has a metal marker (Madimetsa Maleka Raphtsaga) PLA1677/S.36-073 Burial ground Alternative Plant area 4 formal graves within burial ground with stone walling present nearby, with decorated pottery One grave with granite headstone (In Loving Memory of Kapeye Lesetja Galane 1908/06/19-1966/03/20 Robala ka PLA1677/S.36-074 Single grave Alternative Plant area khutšo tlou 5 graves, 1 formal granite headstone (In Loving Memory of Raisibe Roti Martha Malindisa 1928/06/11-1956/10/15 buried PLA1677/S.36-075 Burial ground Alternative Plant area on 1956/10/17 Robala ka khutšo mokane) and 4 graves with stone dressing (2 of the graves had large white stones as headstones) 3 graves within burial ground.The small grave had a metal plate at the headstone and one of the adult burials had a large PLA1677/S.36-076 Burial ground Alternative Plant area metal bowl at the headstone. Decorated pottery was found next to the small grave and large undiagnostic pottery was identified next to one of the adult graves PLA1677/S.35-077 Stone walling TSF Option 2 pipeline Collapsed stone walling PLA1677/S.36-078 Single grave TSF Option 2 pipeline One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-079 Single grave TSF Option 2 pipeline One grave within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-080 Burial ground TSF Option 2 pipeline Undetermined amount of graves within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-081 Burial ground TSF Option 2 pipeline 6 graves within burial ground within burial ground PLA1677/S.36-082 Burial ground TSF Option 2 pipeline 7 graves within burial ground within burial ground Historical werf at enterence to Witvinger Nature Reserve, main residence approximatly 100m from N11, with barn or PLA1677/S.34-083 Historical werf TSF Option 3 pipeline outbuilding situated immediately adjacent to N11. Main residence surrounding by sisal plants, coral trees and naboom trees PLA1677/S.35-084 Iron Age Surface occurrence TSF Option 3 pipeline Undiagnostic potsherds found on surface PLA1677/S.36-085 Burial Ground TSF Option 3 pipeline Large fenced formal cemetery with undertermined amount of graves within burial ground Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix G: Impact Assessment
CONSTRUCTION PHASE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / HERITAGE VALUE Impact Assessment HERITAGE MITIGATION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / Impact Rating Impact Rating (after project mitigation) Heritage Resource Name, Type and Description Authenticity Before project mitigation After project mitigation
FIELD RATING MINIMUM REQUIRED MITIGATION Resource ID Resource Type Description Impact VALUE Social Artistic INTEGRITY Change Change Change Change Historic Nature of Nature of Scientific Probability Probability Duration of Intensity of Duration of Intensity of MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE Change (N/P) Change (1/-1) Consequence Consequence Scale of Change Scale of Change Reference in HIA Reference The construction of the proposed TSF Option 2 will destroy the site. In addition, any removal of vegetation and ground PLA1677/S.35-006 Iron Age Smelting Site Smelting site with terraced walls, middens and slag heap 7.1.2 5 5 5 5 2 10 N 7 7 7 15 7 103 - 7 5 2 11 3 32 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction clearing may expose more extensive deposit potentially existing subsurface.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-023 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-025 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
The construction of the infrastructure within the project will destroy the site. In addition, any removal of vegetation and PLA1677/S.35-027 Iron Age/Historical settlement Stone walling with circular and rectangular foundations 7.3.2 4 4 5 4 2 9 N 4 7 4 11 7 74 - 1 5 3 8 3 23 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction ground clearing may expose more extensive deposit potentially existing subsurface
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-028 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-029 Burial Ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-030 Burial Ground 10 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-031 Burial Ground 20 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-032 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-033 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-034 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. CONSTRUCTION PHASE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / HERITAGE VALUE Impact Assessment HERITAGE MITIGATION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / Impact Rating Impact Rating (after project mitigation) Heritage Resource Name, Type and Description Authenticity Before project mitigation After project mitigation
FIELD RATING MINIMUM REQUIRED MITIGATION Resource ID Resource Type Description Impact VALUE Social Artistic INTEGRITY Change Change Change Change Historic Nature of Nature of Scientific Probability Probability Duration of Intensity of Duration of Intensity of MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE Change (N/P) Change (1/-1) Consequence Consequence Scale of Change Scale of Change Reference in HIA Reference
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-035 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-036 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-037 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-038 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-039 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-040 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-041 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-042 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-043 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-044 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-045 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. CONSTRUCTION PHASE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / HERITAGE VALUE Impact Assessment HERITAGE MITIGATION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / Impact Rating Impact Rating (after project mitigation) Heritage Resource Name, Type and Description Authenticity Before project mitigation After project mitigation
FIELD RATING MINIMUM REQUIRED MITIGATION Resource ID Resource Type Description Impact VALUE Social Artistic INTEGRITY Change Change Change Change Historic Nature of Nature of Scientific Probability Probability Duration of Intensity of Duration of Intensity of MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE Change (N/P) Change (1/-1) Consequence Consequence Scale of Change Scale of Change Reference in HIA Reference
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-046 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-047 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-048 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-049 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-050 Burial ground 2 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-051 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-052 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-053 Burial ground 11 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-054 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-055 Burial ground 10 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-056 Burial ground 6 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. CONSTRUCTION PHASE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / HERITAGE VALUE Impact Assessment HERITAGE MITIGATION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / Impact Rating Impact Rating (after project mitigation) Heritage Resource Name, Type and Description Authenticity Before project mitigation After project mitigation
FIELD RATING MINIMUM REQUIRED MITIGATION Resource ID Resource Type Description Impact VALUE Social Artistic INTEGRITY Change Change Change Change Historic Nature of Nature of Scientific Probability Probability Duration of Intensity of Duration of Intensity of MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE Change (N/P) Change (1/-1) Consequence Consequence Scale of Change Scale of Change Reference in HIA Reference
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-058 Burial ground 2 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-059 Burial ground 2 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-060 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-061 Burial ground 3 graves within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-062 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-063 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-064 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-065 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-066 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-067 Burial Ground 8 graves within the burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-068 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. CONSTRUCTION PHASE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / HERITAGE VALUE Impact Assessment HERITAGE MITIGATION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / Impact Rating Impact Rating (after project mitigation) Heritage Resource Name, Type and Description Authenticity Before project mitigation After project mitigation
FIELD RATING MINIMUM REQUIRED MITIGATION Resource ID Resource Type Description Impact VALUE Social Artistic INTEGRITY Change Change Change Change Historic Nature of Nature of Scientific Probability Probability Duration of Intensity of Duration of Intensity of MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE Change (N/P) Change (1/-1) Consequence Consequence Scale of Change Scale of Change Reference in HIA Reference
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in the Operational Area. Potential sources of threats and risk include PLA1677/S.36-069 Single grave One grave within burial ground 7.3.3 - 4 - 5 2 9 N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation 6 burials, 2 formal granite headstone (Sarah Ledwaba clearance for the construction of infrastructure in Alternative PLA1677/S.36-070 Burial ground Ramadimetja 1992/09/28; Johannes Malesela Ledwaba 7.4.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 Plant area. Potential sources of threats and risk include N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction 1962/08/11, four informal stone dressed graves vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Stone walling with circular and rectangular foundations The construction of the plant will destroy the site. In addition, PLA1677/S.35-071 Iron Age/Historical settlement 7.4.1 4 4 4 5 2 9 N 4 7 4 11 7 74 - 1 5 3 8 3 23 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction and gong rock any removal of vegetation and ground clearing may expose more extensive deposit potentially existing subsurface. Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation 7 informal burials with large stones as headstones clearance for the construction of infrastructure in Alternative PLA1677/S.36-072 Burial ground painted white; one grave has a metal marker (Madimetsa 7.4.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 Plant area. Potential sources of threats and risk include N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction Maleka Raphtsaga) vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of infrastructure in Alternative 4 formal burials with stone walling present nearby, with PLA1677/S.36-073 Burial ground 7.4.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 Plant area. Potential sources of threats and risk include N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction decorated pottery vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation One formal burial with granite headstone (In Loving clearance for the construction of infrastructure in Alternative PLA1677/S.36-074 Burial ground Memory of Kapeye Lesetja Galane 1908/06/19- 7.4.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 Plant area. Potential sources of threats and risk include N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction 1966/03/20 Robala ka khutšo tlou vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
5 graves, 1 formal granite headstone (In Loving Memory Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation of Raisibe Roti Martha Malindisa 1928/06/11-1956/10/15 clearance for the construction of infrastructure in Alternative PLA1677/S.36-075 Burial ground buried on 1956/10/17 Robala ka khutšo mokane) and 4 7.4.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 Plant area. Potential sources of threats and risk include N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction informal with stone dressing (2 of the burials had large vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or white stones as headstones) alteration of burial site by construction workers on site.
3 informal burials, one child burial and 2 adults burials. Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation The child burial had a metal plate at the headstone and clearance for the construction of infrastructure in Alternative one of the adult burials had a large metal bowl at the PLA1677/S.36-076 Burial ground 7.4.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 Plant area. Potential sources of threats and risk include N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction headstone. Decorated pottery was found next to the child vandalism by workers on site, accidental destruction or burial and large undiagnostic pottery was identified next alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. to one of the adult burials
Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of pipeline. Potential sources of PLA1677/S.36-078 Burial ground One grave within burial ground 7.5.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of pipeline. Potential sources of PLA1677/S.36-079 Burial ground One grave within burial ground 7.5.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of pipeline. Potential sources of PLA1677/S.36-080 Burial ground Undetermined amount of graves witihn burial ground 7.5.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of pipeline. Potential sources of PLA1677/S.36-081 Burial ground 6 graves within burial ground 7.5.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of pipeline. Potential sources of PLA1677/S.36-082 Burial ground 6 graves within burial ground 7.5.2 - 4 - 5 2 9 threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, N 6 7 7 13 7 91 - 7 5 2 10 3 30 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. CONSTRUCTION PHASE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / HERITAGE VALUE Impact Assessment HERITAGE MITIGATION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE / Impact Rating Impact Rating (after project mitigation) Heritage Resource Name, Type and Description Authenticity Before project mitigation After project mitigation
FIELD RATING MINIMUM REQUIRED MITIGATION Resource ID Resource Type Description Impact VALUE Social Artistic INTEGRITY Change Change Change Change Historic Nature of Nature of Scientific Probability Probability Duration of Intensity of Duration of Intensity of MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE Change (N/P) Change (1/-1) Consequence Consequence Scale of Change Scale of Change Reference in HIA Reference Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation Farmstead complex at enterence to Witvinger Nature clearance for the construction of infrastructure associated with Reserve, main residence approximatly 100m from N11, the TSF Option 3 pipelines. Potential sources of threats and PLA1677/S.34-083 Historical werf with barn or outbuilding situated immediately adjacent to 7.6.1 - 1 - - 3 3 N 1 2 1 4 7 26 - 1 1 1 4 1 4 Field Rating IV C - General No site mitigation required risk include vandalism by workers on site, accidental N11. Main residence surrounding by sisal plants, coral destruction or alteration of werf by construction workers on trees and naboom trees. No access possible site. Immediate threats or risks include ground and vegetation clearance for the construction of pipeline. Potential sources of PLA1677/S.36-085 Formal cemetary Large fenced formal cemetery 7.6.2 - 5 - 5 2 10 threats and risk include vandalism by workers on site, N 6 7 7 14 7 99 - 7 5 2 11 3 32 Field Rating IV A - General Mitigation before destruction accidental destruction or alteration of burial site by construction workers on site. No direct impact or visual, noise or air pollution impacts will be National heritage nomination; Makapansgat World Heritage Site Cave complex 8 6 6 6 6 3 18 N 7 7 7 24 1 24 - 1 1 1 6 1 6 Grade I - National experienced on the WHS. conservation Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Platreef Mining Project on the farms Bultongfontein 866 LR, Turfspruit 241 KR, Macalacaskop 243 KR and Rietfontein 2 KS in Mokopane, Limpopo Province PLA1677
Appendix H: Chance Find Procedures
CHANCE FIND PROCEDURES (CFPS) FOR THE PLATREEF RESOURCES (PTY) LTD PROJECT, LIMPOPO PROVINCE, SOUTH AFRICA
PLATREEF RESOURCES (PTY) LTD
OCTOBER 2013
______Digby Wells and Associates (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (Subsidiary of Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd). Co. Reg. No. 2010/008577/07. Fern Isle, Section 10, 359 Pretoria Ave Randburg Private Bag X10046, Randburg, 2125, South Africa Tel: +27 11 789 9495, Fax: +27 11 789 9498, [email protected], www.digbywells.com
______Directors: A Sing*, AR Wilke, LF Koeslag, PD Tanner (British)*, AJ Reynolds (Chairman) (British)*, J Leaver*, GE Trusler (C.E.O) *Non-Executive ______
p:\projects\platreef\pla1677_esia\9_specialist_studies\hrm\6_hia\2. final reviewed\cfps_ver1.0.docx Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
This document has been prepared by Digby Wells Environmental. Report Title: Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa Project Number: PLA1677 CFPs Document
Name Responsibility Signature Date
Justin du Piesanie: CFPs Compiler October 2013 HRM Specialist
Shahzaadee Palaeontologist October 2013 Karodia
This report is provided solely for the purposes set out in it and may not, in whole or in part, be used for any other purpose without Digby Wells Environmental prior written consent.
ii Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
ACRONYMS
BGG Burial Grounds and Graves
CFPs Chance Find Procedures
CL Community Liaison
Digby Wells Digby Wells Environmental
EC Environmental Control
HIA Heritage Impact Assessment
HRM HRM Resources Management
HS Health and Safety
ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites
LIHRA Limpopo Heritage Resources Authority
MA Monitoring for Fossils
NHRA National Heritage Resources Act (Act No. 25 of 1999)
Platreef Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd
SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Authority
SAPS South African Police Service
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
iii Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1
2 DEFINITIONS ...... 1
3 CHANCE FIND PROCEDURES ...... 1
3.1 INITIAL IDENTIFICATION AND/OR EXPOSURE ...... 1
3.2 CHANCE FIND PROCEDURES: HERITAGE RESOURCES ...... 2
3.3 CHANCE FIND PROCEDURES: PALAEONTOLOGY ...... 2 3.3.1 Isolated Bone Finds ...... 2 3.3.2 Bone Cluster Finds ...... 3 3.3.3 Rescue Excavation ...... 4 3.3.4 Major Finds ...... 4 3.3.5 Exposure of Fossil Shell Beds ...... 5 3.3.6 Exposure of Fossil Wood and Peats ...... 6 3.3.7 Monitoring for Fossils ...... 6
3.4 CHANCE FIND PROCEDURES: BGG ...... 7 4 CONCLUSION ...... 8
iv Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to provide Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd (Platreef) and their contractors with the appropriate response guidelines (extracted and adapted from the National Heritage Resources Act (Act No. 25 of 1999) Regulations Reg No. 6820, GN: 548, taking into consideration international best practice based on World Bank, Equator Principles and the International Finance Corporation Performance Standards, 1972 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention), ICOMOS Guideline on Heritage Impact Assessment and the Australian ICOMOS Burra Charter (1999)) that should be implemented in the event of chance discovery of heritage resources. These guidelines or chance find procedures (CFPs) and fossil find procedures can be incorporated into Platreef policies that may have relevance during construction and operational phases The CFPs and FFPs presented by Digby Wells Environmental (Digby Wells) aim to avoid and/or reduce project risks that may result due to chance finds, whilst considering international best practice.
2 DEFINITIONS For simplicity, the term ‘heritage resource’ includes structures, archaeology, meteors, and public monuments as defined in the South African National Heritage Resources Act (Act No. 25 of 1999) (NHRA) Sections 34, 35, and 37. Procedures specific to palaeontological fossils (Section 35 of NHRA) and burial grounds and graves (BGG) as defined under NHRA Section 36 will be discussed separately as these require the implementation of separate criteria for CFPs.
3 CHANCE FIND PROCEDURES The following procedural guidelines must be considered in the event that previously unknown heritage resources or BGG are exposed or found during the life of the project.
3.1 Initial Identification and/or Exposure Heritage resources or BGG may be identified during construction or accidently exposed. The initial procedure when such sites are found aim to avoid any further damage. The following steps and reporting structure must be observed in both instances:
1. The person or group (identifier) who identified or exposed the burial ground must cease all activity in the immediate vicinity of the site; 2. The identifier must immediately inform his/her supervisor of the discovery; 3. The supervisor must ensure that the site is secured and control access; and
1
Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
4. The supervisor must then inform the relevant Platreef personnel responsible for at least the following portfolios: Community Liaison (CL), Environmental Control (EC) and Health and Safety (HS).
3.2 Chance Find Procedures: Heritage Resources In the event that previously unidentified heritage resources are identified and/or exposed during construction or operation of the Platreef Project, the following steps must be implemented subsequent to those outlined under Section 3.1 above: 1. The Digby Wells Environmental (Digby Wells) project manager and/or Heritage Resources Management (HRM) Unit must be notified of the discovery; 2. Digby Wells will assign a qualified specialist to consider the heritage resource, either via communicating with the EC Officer via telephone or email, or based on a site visit; 3. Appropriate measures will then be presented to Platreef; 4. Should the specialist conclude that the find is a heritage resource protected in terms of the NHRA (1999) Sections 34, 35, 37 and NHRA (1999) Regulations (Regulation 38, 39, 40), Digby Wells will notify the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) and/or the Limpopo Provincial Heritage Resources Agency (LIHRA) on behalf of Platreef; and 5. Based on the comments received from SAHRA and/or LIHRA, Digby Wells will provide Platreef with a Terms of References Report and relevant associated costs if necessary.
3.3 Chance Find Procedures: Palaeontology
3.3.1 Isolated Bone Finds In the process of digging excavations, isolated bones may be spotted in the hole sides or bottom, or as they appear on the spoil heap. By this is meant bones that occur singly, in different parts of the excavation. If the number of distinct bones exceeds six pieces, the finds must be treated as a bone cluster (below).
3.3.1.1 Response of personnel The following responses should be undertaken by personnel in the event of isolated bone finds: ■ Action 1: An isolated bone exposed in an excavation or spoil heap must be retrieved before it is covered by further spoil from the excavation and set aside; ■ Action 2: The site foreman and EC Officer must be informed;
2
Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
■ Action 3: The responsible field person (site foreman or EC Officer) must take custody of the fossil. The following information is to be recorded: . Position (excavation position); . Depth of find in hole; . Digital image of hole showing vertical section (side); and . Digital image of fossil. ■ Action 4: The fossil should be placed in a bag (e.g. a Ziploc bag), along with any detached fragments. A label must be included with the date of the find, position information, and depth; and ■ Action 5: The EC Officer is to inform the developer who then contacts the archaeologist and/or palaeontologist contracted to be on standby. The EC Officer is to describe the occurrence and provide images via email.
3.3.1.2 Response by Palaeontologist The palaeontologist will assess the information and liaise with the developer and the EC Officer and a suitable response will be established.
3.3.2 Bone Cluster Finds A bone cluster is a major find of bones (e.g. several bones in close proximity or bones resembling parts of a skeleton). These bones will likely be seen in broken sections of the sides of the hole and as bones appearing in the bottom of the hole and on the spoil heap.
3.3.2.1 Response of personnel The following responses should be undertaken by personnel in the event of bone cluster finds: ■ Action 1: Immediately stop excavation in the vicinity of the potential material. Mark or flag the position as well as the spoil heap that may contain fossils; ■ Action 2: Inform the site foreman and the EC Officer; and ■ Action 3: The EC Officer is to inform the developer who must then contact the archaeologist and/or palaeontologist contracted to be on standby. The EC Officer is then to describe the occurrence and provide images via email.
3.3.2.2 Response by Palaeontologist The palaeontologist will assess the information and liaise with the developer and the EC Officer and a suitable response will be established. It is likely that a Field Assessment by the palaeontologist will be carried out. It will be probably be feasible to avoid the find and continue to the excavation farther along, or proceed to the next excavation, so that the work schedule is minimally disrupted. The
3
Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
response time/scheduling of the Field Assessment is to be decided in consultation with the developer/owner and the environmental consultant. The Field Assessment could have the following outcomes: ■ If a human burial, the appropriate authority is to be contacted. The find must be evaluated by a human burial specialist to decide if Rescue Excavation is feasible, or if it is a Major Find. ■ If the fossils are in an archaeological context, an archaeologist must be contacted to evaluate the site and decide if Rescue Excavation is feasible, or if it is a Major Find. ■ If the fossils are in a palaeontological context, the palaeontologist must evaluate the site and decide if Rescue Excavation is feasible, or if it is a Major Find.
3.3.3 Rescue Excavation Rescue Excavation refers to the removal of the material from the “design” excavation. This would apply if the amount or significance of the exposed material appears to be relatively circumscribed and it is feasible to remove it without compromising contextual data. The time span for Rescue Excavation should be reasonable rapid to avoid any undue delays, e.g. one to three days and definitely less than one week. In principle, the strategy during the mitigation is to “rescue” the fossil material as quickly as possible. The strategy to be adopted depends on the nature of the occurrence, particularly the density of the fossils. The methods of collection would depend on the preservation or fragility of the fossil and whether in loose or in lithified sediment. These could include: ■ On-site selection and sieving in the case of robust material in sand; and ■ Fragile material in loose sediment would be encased in blocks using Plaster-of-Paris or reinforced mortar. If the fossil occurrence is dense and is assessed to be a “Major Find”, a carefully controlled excavation is required.
3.3.4 Major Finds A Major Find is the occurrence of material that, by virtue of quantity, importance and time constraints, cannot be feasibly rescued without compromise of detailed material recovery and contextual observations.
3.3.4.1 Management options for major finds In consultation with the developer/owner and the environmental consultant, the following options should be considered when deciding on how to proceed in the event of a Major Find. Option 1: Avoidance Avoidance of the Major Find through project redesign or relocation. This ensures minimal impact to the site and is the preferred option from a heritage resource management
4
Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
perspective. When feasible, it can also be the least expensive option from a construction perspective. The find site will require site protection measures, such as erecting fencing or barricades. Alternatively, the exposed finds can be stabilised and the site refilled or capped. The latter is preferred if excavation of the find will be delayed substantially or indefinitely. Appropriate protection measures should be identified on a site-specific basis and in wider consultation with the heritage and scientific communities. This option is preferred as it will allow the later excavation of the finds with due scientific care and diligence. Option 2: Emergency Excavation Emergency excavation refers to the “no option” situation where avoidance is not feasible due to design, financial and time constraints. It can delay construction and emergency excavation itself will take place under tight time constraints, with the potential for irrevocable compromise of scientific quality. It could involve the removal of a large, disturbed sample by an excavator and conveying this by truck from the immediate site to a suitable place for “stockpiling”. This material could then be processed later. Consequently, the emergency excavation is not the preferred option for a Major Find.
3.3.5 Exposure of Fossil Shell Beds
3.3.5.1 Response of personnel The following responses should be undertaken by personnel in the event of intersection with fossil shell beds: ■ Action 1: The site foreman and EC Officer must be informed; ■ Action 2: The responsible field person (site foreman or EC Officer) must record the following information: . Position (excavation position); . Depth of find in hole; . Digital image of the hole showing the vertical section (side); and . Digital images of the fossiliferous material. ■ Action 3: A generous quantity of the excavated material containing the fossils should be stockpiled near the site, for later examination and sampling; ■ Action 4: The EC Officer is to inform the developer who must then contact the archaeologist and/or palaeontologist contracted to be on standby. The EC Officer is to describe the occurrence and provide images via email.
5
Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
3.3.5.2 Response by Palaeontologist The palaeontologist will assess the information and liaise with the developer and the EC Officer and a suitable response will be established. This will most likely be a site visit to document and sample the exposure in detail, before it is covered up.
3.3.6 Exposure of Fossil Wood and Peats
3.3.6.1 Response of personnel The following responses should be undertaken by personnel in the event of exposure of fossil wood and peats: ■ Action 1: The site foreman and EC Officer must be informed; ■ Action 2: The responsible field person (site foreman or EC Officer) must record the following information: . Position (excavation position); . Depth of find in hole; . Digital image of the hole showing the vertical section (side); and . Digital images of the fossiliferous material. ■ Action 3: A generous quantity of the excavated material containing the fossils should be stockpiled near the site, for later examination and sampling; ■ Action 4: The EC Officer is to inform the developer who must then contact the archaeologist and/or palaeontologist contracted to be on standby. The EC Officer is to describe the occurrence and provide images via email.
3.3.6.2 Response by Palaeontologist The palaeontologist will assess the information and liaise with the developer and the EC Officer and a suitable response will be established. This will most likely be a site visit to document and sample the exposure in detail, before it is covered up.
3.3.7 Monitoring for Fossils A regular monitoring presence over the period during which excavations are made, by either an archaeologist or palaeontologist, is generally not practical. The field supervisor or foreman and workers involved in digging excavations must be encouraged and informed of the need to watch for potential fossil and buried archaeological material. Workers seeing potential objects are to report to the field supervisor who, in turn, will report to the EC Officer. The EC Officer will inform the archaeologist and/or palaeontologist contracted to be on standby in the case of fossil finds. To this end, responsible persons must be designated. This will include hierarchically:
6
Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
■ The field supervisor or foreman who is going to be most often in the field; ■ The EC Officer for the project; ■ The Project Manager Should the monitoring of excavations be stipulated in the Archaeological Impact Assessment and/or the Heritage Impact Assessment, the contracted Monitoring Archaeologist (MA) can also monitor for the presence of fossils and a make field assessment of any material brought to attention. The MA is usually sufficiently informed to identify fossil material and this avoids additional monitoring by a palaeontologist. In shallow coastal excavations, the fossils encountered are usually in an archaeological context. The MA then becomes the responsible field person and fulfils the role of liaison with the palaeontologist and coordinates with the developer and the EC Officer. If fossils are exposed in non-archaeological contexts, the palaeontologist should be summoned to document and sample/collect them.
3.4 Chance Find Procedures: BGG In the event that previously unidentified BGG are identified and/or exposed during construction or operation of the Platreef Project, the following steps must be implemented subsequent to those outlined under Section 3.1 above: 1. The Digby Wells project manager and/or the HRM Unit must immediately be notified of the discovery in order to take the required further steps: i. The local South African Police Service (SAPS) will be notified on behalf of Platreef; ii. Digby Wells will deploy a suitably qualified specialist to inspect the exposed burial and determine in consultation with the SAPS: The temporal context of the remains, i.e.: a. forensic, b. authentic burial grave (informal or older than 60 years, NHRA (1999) Section 36); or c. archaeological (older than 100 years, NHRA (1999) Section 38); and If any additional graves may exist in the vicinity. 2. Should the specialist conclude that the find is a heritage resource protected in terms of the NHRA (1999) Section 36 and NHRA (1999) Regulations (Regulation 38, 39, 40), Digby Wells will notify SAHRA and/or LIHRA on behalf of Platreef; 3. SAHRA/LIHRA may require that an identification of interested parties, consultation and /or grave relocation take place;
7
Chance Find Procedures (CFPs) for the Platreef Resources (Pty) Ltd Project, Limpopo Province, South Africa PLA1677 CFPs Document
4. Consultation must take place in terms of NHRA (1999) Regulations 39, 40, 42; and
5. Grave relocation must take place in terms of NHRA (1999) Regulations 34.
4 CONCLUSION
The CFP’s presented in this document serve as international best practice policy for the accidental discovery of heritage resources and BGG. Based on the definitions provided within this document and the proposed lines of communication, Platreef will be able to mitigate the accidental discovery of heritage resources and BGG throughout the various phases of the project. Where necessary, Digby Wells is available to assist with the recommendation of mitigations for the accidental discovery of heritage resources and BGG.
8