Olympus AH Eco Assessment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FLORAL AND GENERAL ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED RELOCATION OF THE DINGLETON TOWN WITH ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE FARM SEKGAME 461 EAST OF KATHU WITHIN THE NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE Prepared for Synergistics Environmental Services (Pty) Ltd 2012 Prepared by: Scientific Aquatic Services Report author S. van Staden (Pr. Sci. Nat) N. van de Haar (Pr.Sci. Nat) Report Reference: SAS 212055 Date: May 2012 Scientific Aquatic Services CC CC Reg No 2003/078943/23 Vat Reg. No. 4020235273 Cape Town Tel: 078 220 8571 082 866 9849 E-mail: [email protected] SAS 212055 – Floral Assessment May 2012 Declaration This report has been prepared according to the requirements of Section 33 (2) of the Environmental Impact Assessments Regulations, 2006 (GNR 385). We (the undersigned) declare the findings of this report free from influence or prejudice. Report Authors: Stephen van Staden Pr Sci Nat (Ecological Sciences) 400134/05 BSc. Hons (Aquatic Health) (RAU); M.Sc. Environmental Management (RAU). Field of expertise: Wetland, aquatic and terrestrial ecology. ___________________ Date:_ 02/04/2012___ Stephen van Staden Natasha van de Haar Pr Sci Nat (Botanical Science) 400229/11 M.Sc. Botany Field of expertise: Botanical specialist ___________________ Date:_ 02/04/2012___ Natasha van de Haar ii SAS 212055 – Floral Assessment May 2012 Executive summary Scientific Aquatic Services (SAS) was appointed to conduct a floral and general ecological assessment for the proposed relocation of the Dingleton town along with associated infrastructure to the farm Sekgame 461 east of the town of Kathu within the Northern Cape Province. Two areas were investigated as part of this assessment namely the existing Dingleton Town with surroundings as well as the proposed host site located on the farm Sekgame 461. Specific outcomes required from this report include the following: Habitat and community classification, including a description of the Present Ecological State of the two study areas; Floral inventories for the study area; Determine the presence of any red data species (flora) and the potential for such species to occur within the two study areas; Determine the presence and extent of sensitive habitats which will be affected; Discuss the spatial significance, from an ecological viewpoint, of the property and provide recommendations if required. In order to achieve the objectives of the report, the following assessment procedure/methodology was used: A desktop study to gain background information on the physical habitat, as well as generating potential floral biodiversity lists for the proposed development site and surrounding areas; Aerial photographs and digital satellite images were consulted prior to the field assessment and included an initial visual on-site assessment of the study area; A field assessment that identified the tree, grass, forb and exotic species that occur within each of the study areas; Description of the sensitivity of each site through application of indices such as the VIS index and through vegetation community analyses; Data analyses and reporting of all findings; Impact assessment according to a predefined impact assessment methodology. The following general conclusions were drawn upon completion of the floral survey: Both study areas fall within the Savanna Biome and Eastern Kalahari Bushveld Bioregion. When the boundary of the assessment site is superimposed on the vegetation types of the surrounding area, it is evident that the subject property falls within the Kathu Bushveld vegetation type (Musina & Rutherford, 2006). This vegetation type is considered to be of least concern with a target of 16% to be conserved. Both study areas fall within the Griqualand West Centre of Endemism (GWC). The vegetation of the GWC is still fairly intact, although extremely poorly conserved. It is therefore important that impacts that may result due to the proposed activities be adequately mitigated. The proposed host site is located adjacent to the town Kathu. It is therefore important to note that many farms to the north of Kathu were declared part of the Kathu Forest (Declaration of Kathu forest as a protected woodland under section 12 (1) (c) of the National Forests Act, 1998). After the field assessment of the areas earmarked for decommissioning and relocation activities it was possible to divide the study area into two specific habitat units, namely open veld and transformed habitat according to degree of landscape and vegetation transformation noted during the assessment. The complete PRECIS plant list for the grid references (2723CA and 2722DD) were obtained from SANBI that gave an indication of the plant species that would be expected to occur within each of the grids. No species are indicated as species of concern within the QDS 2723CA, with only Acacia erioloba listed as a “declining” floral species within the QDS 2722DD. Furthermore, individuals as well as possible habitat for floral species listed within schedule 3 and 4 of the Environmental and Conservation Ordinance no.19 (1974), as well as trees listed within section 15(1) of the National Forests Act, 1998 as amended in September 2011 were searched for during the assessment. Special attention was paid with the identification of three tree species protected under the National Forests Act known to occur within the Kuthu Bushveld vegetation type namely Acacia erioloba, Acacia haematoxylon and Boscia albitrunca (Steyn, 2007; van Rooyen, 2001). Of the three species Acacia erioloba was the most abundant and was encountered at both the area to be relocated and the designation area for the Dingleton town. Only one Acacia haematoxylon tree was identified within the proposed host site. iii SAS 212055 – Floral Assessment May 2012 Floral species listed as protected within Schedule 4 Environmental and Conservation Ordinance no.19 (1974) identified within the areas assessed are Aloe grandidentata, Aloe hereroensis and Boophane disticha. The VIS score calculated for the open veld habitat unit was 15 (Class C – Moderately modified). Although the open veld habitat unit within both study areas has seen relatively little anthropogenic activity, exotic species were noted and densities of forb and shrub species were not considered as uniformly spread as would be the case in pristine grassland. The transformed habitat unit calculated a very low score of -3.4 (Class E – Completely modified). The very low score can be expected due the number of exotic species within the Dingleton town as well as site clearing for residential developments. Areas also considered within the transformed habitat are areas significantly encroached by Acacia mellifera. A. mellifera encroachment has resulted in almost no natural species diversity and therefore a VIS score falling within Class E is considered representative Grass species diversity was relatively uniform throughout both study areas. However, the majority of the grass species encountered are indicative of past disturbance and only five species found are listed as indicators of the Kathu Bushveld vegetation type (Musina & Rutherford, 2006). Therefore, it can be concluded that vegetation transformation was evident within both study areas. The Dingleton town study area had the highest exotic species diversity, most probably due to landscaped gardens. Although the proposed host site had fewer species, it is still deemed important that ongoing alien invasion control be implemented in future. Prosopis glandulosa var. torreyana was considered the most invasive species noted at the time of the assessment. It is deemed very important that a species specific eradication plan is developed, if not already in place. This tree already dominates the northern portion of the Dingleton town study area, therefore if not eradicated and monitored it would lead to a significant loss of species within the surface rights area of the mine. All the species known to be of medicinal value are regarded as widespread and common for the region, except for Boophone disticha listed as a protected species within the Threatened and Protected species regulations (NEMBA, 2004) and Acacia erioloba listed as a protected tree species (National Forests Act (1998). At the time of the assessment the proposed host site showed relatively uniform grass species abundance and diversity. However, Acacia erioloba listed as a protected tree within the National Forests Act, 1998 as amended in 2011 densities increased significantly within the northern portion. Furthermore, the number of Aloe grandidentata, an aloe species listed as protected within Schedule 4 Environmental and Conservation Ordinance no.19 (1974), significantly increased within the extreme eastern portion of the study area. Therefore, the northern and eastern portions of the proposed host site are considered of higher ecological importance and sensitivity. It is recommended that these areas either be excluded from the proposed town layout plans or incorporated during landscaping of private and public gardens with special mention of larger Acacia erioloba trees. Acacia erioloba trees were identified throughout the Dingleton town study area. As a result the overall vegetation and landscape transformation were used to allocate sensitivity to various portions of the study area. The existing Dingleton town as well as northern portion where Prosopis glandulosa var. torreyana encroachment was severe are considered low sensitivity areas. Although Aloe grandidentata numbers increased within the centre portion