Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Mpumalanga Province Terrestrial

Author: Barbara Kasl E-mail: [email protected]

Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Mpumalanga Province

Terrestrial Fauna Biodiversity Impact Assessment

May 2021

Copyright is the exclusive property of the author. All rights reserved. This report or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express permission of the author except for the use of quotations properly cited and referenced. This document may not be modified other than by the author. Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Specialist Qualification & Declaration

Barbara Kasl (CV summary attached as Appendix A): • Holds a PhD in Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences from the University of the Witwatersrand; • Is a registered SACNASP Professional Ecological and Environmental Scientist (Pr.Sci.Nat. Registration No.: 400257/09), with expertise in faunal ecology; and • Has been actively involved in the environmental consultancy field for over 13 years.

I, Barbara Kasl, confirm that: • I act as independent consultant and specialist in the field of ecology and environmental sciences; • I have no vested interest in the project other than remuneration for work completed in terms of the Scope of Work; • I have presented the information in this report in line with the requirements of the Animal Species and Terrestrial Biodiversity Protocols as required under the National Environmental Management Act (107/1998) (NEMA) as far as these are relevant to the specific Scope of Work; • I have taken NEMA Principals into account as far as these are relevant to the Scope of Work; and • Information presented is, to the best of my knowledge, accurate and correct within the restraints of stipulated limitations.

17-05-2021

i Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Acronyms

ADU Animal Demographic Unit AI(S) Alien Invasive (Species) BGIS Biodiversity Geographic Information System CBA Critical Biodiversity Areas ESA Ecological Support Area IBA Important Bird Area IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature NEMA National Environment Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) NFEPA National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area NPAES National Protected Area Expansion Strategy PA Protected Area PES Present Ecological State QDGS Quarter Degree Grid Square RIVCON River Condition RL Red-listed SABAP South African Bird Atlas Project SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute SCC Species of Conservation Concern (specifically listed in the SANBI’s 2020 Species Guideline) SEI Site Ecological Importance SWSA Strategic Water Source Area TOP(S) Threatened or Protected (Species) UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization VMUS Virtual Museum

ii Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Executive Summary

General Introduction

South32 SA Coal Holdings (Pty) Limited: South Africa Energy Coal (Hereafter referred as ‘SAEC’) intends to undertake the relevant environmental authorisation processes in order to develop the underground mining through a trial phase project to exploit the available 5 Seam coal in the mining rights area. These processes will involve the compilation of the S&EIR, Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) and a WULA for the proposed mining activities.

The Colliery lies south-west of Ogies, within the Emalahleni Local Municipality, in the Nkangala District Municipality of Mpumalanga Province.

The proposed 5 Seam Mining Project activities will be undertaken within the following farm portions: Portion 3 of the Farm Cologne 34 IS, Portion 35 of the Farm Leeuwfontein 219 IR, Portion 40 of the Farm Schoongezicht 218 IR and Remaining Extent of Portion 2, Portion 3, 6, 16, 17 and 18 of the Farm Zondagsvlei 9 IS and Remaining Extent of the Farm Kleinzuikerboschplaat 5 IS.

Activities to be undertaken will involve the development and mining of the 5 Seam underground workings, construction of ventilation shaft, construction of the transfer chute from the existing conveyor belt, construction of a link road between Khutala Colliery and Klipspruit South (KPS/KHU Link Road), a coal stockpile area and associated water management infrastructure. The mine will use most of the existing infrastructure to support the proposed 5 Seam Mining Project.

Site Characterisation

The 5 Seam property boundary was assessed on the 25 November 2020 and the weather was sunny, warm and ideal for fauna surveys. The haul road area was surveyed on the 25 March 2021 on an overcast and cool day. The cool weather reduces faunal activity, particularly invertebrates and smaller vertebrates; although not ideal weather, it was deemed adequate in terms of surveying the modified areas proposed for the haul road. • The bulk of the site represents disturbed [alien invasive species (AIS), infrastructure] and (historically or currently) cultivated lands. • All areas designated as ‘other natural areas’ in the conservation plan represented grasslands, some historically disturbed grasslands or pastures (Disturbed Grasslands) and some indicating little to no direct historical disturbance (Grasslands). • All grassland units had patches of wetland vegetation, mostly disturbed and likely as a result of past land practices. These are not mapped but must be considered as additional habitat for fauna. The main riverine and wetland areas have been mapped as Moist Grasslands. • For the actual extent of the wetlands, the wetland report must be consulted.

iii Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

In terms of site findings the aquatic CBAs and associated wetland area and the aquatic ESAs and the connected farm dams, together with the connected, undisturbed terrestrial grassland provided the most significant fauna habitat in the survey area. Despite this, the site is isolated and severed from any natural ecological corridors in the greater area lowering the overall biodiversity value of the site in terms of terrestrial fauna.

Animal Species

The following is relevant in terms mammals: • The properties may support very limited TOP species, limited to protected and / or near threatened species. • Although endemic species are confirmed for the properties, none are restricted species and the area is not a central area of mammal endemism. In terms of birds: • The property provides habitat for a few TOP birds, predominantly aquatic and wetland species, but also a few grassland species, which are more likely to forage or temporarily utilise the area. • The site supports surface water resources and congregatory water birds may utilise the area during periods of good rainfall. • Although endemic species are confirmed for the properties, none are restricted species and the area is not a central area of avifaunal endemism. In terms of herpetofauna: • No significant TOP herpetofauna populations are expected on the property, limited to a protected and near threatened species. • None of the endemic species are restricted and the area is not considered important for herpetofauna endemism. In terms of invertebrates: • A single TOP spider was historically recorded in the QDGS and cannot be excluded from site. • No TOP invertebrates were noted on site.

Terrestrial Biodiversity Table A summarises the terrestrial fauna biodiversity findings. Table A: Terrestrial fauna biodiversity features and impact statement summaries Aspect Fauna findings Ecological The main ecological process is the plant-based primary production of ‘food’ and through

processes photosynthesis, which also utilises CO2 and releases O2, and forms the principal base of the food- chain in a terrestrial environment. Secondly, the associated contribution to the water cycle through evapotranspiration is also a significant ecological process provided by the plant life. Another important process is that of natural fires. As the natural fire cycles in South Africa’s grassland and savanna have already been impacted by humans, this is not evaluated further. Impact: No surface activities will result in the removal of undisturbed habitat and no significant impacts

iv Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Aspect Fauna findings expected to the ecological processes on site. Ecological The site provides a mixture of grassland and agricultural habitats, including farm dams and drivers: wetland areas associated with the drainage lines and streams. The grassland and moist grassland climate habitats are the predominant natural habitats none of which are targeted for direct change, AIS development. Other than avifauna activity, fauna activity was quite limited with very few signs infestation & noted despite the short, open grasslands and sparse cover under most circumstances. habitat The site already supports AIS species very common and widespread in South Africa. changes. Impact: Surface activities will not impact significantly on natural habitats and no significant impacts are expected to faunal habitat and the existing faunal assemblages. Where activities occur near to moist grasslands, such as along the haul road, the activities must proceed in a manner that will not cause indirect impacts (such as siltation during rainfall events) to these wetlands. The development is not expected to significantly alter the AI species dynamics. Ecological No special or critical ecological services provided by fauna were identified for the area and were services largely related to the usual services provided by fauna (prey-base in food chain, pest control, pollination and seed dispersal). Impact: No impacts are expected on faunal habitats and faunal assemblages and ecological services provided by these faunal assemblages should remain unaffected. Ecological The main ecological corridor is limited to the tributaries and wetlands of the Klippoortjiespruit, Corridors however these have been severed and terminate in the existing mining areas and only provide limited connectivity. Impact: The southern dam and the aquatic ESA within the development footprint still provide a smaller ecological corridor. No direct surface activities are planned within this ecological corridor. Impacts are therefore limited to possible indirect impacts such as potential surface subsidence which could alter water flow dynamics and may affect the quality of the habitat within this corridor. CBAs No terrestrial CBAs occur within the project boundary. Aquatic CBAs occur around the haul road area but are not within the development footprint. Impact: No direct impacts will occur to CBAs. The aquatic CBAs may experience indirect impacts such as vibrations, noise and dust, already experienced within these areas but will be exacerbated. The dust could become a significant impact if the coal component in the dust increases significantly enough to be a contaminating factor in the wetland. ESAs No terrestrial ESAs occur within the project boundary. Aquatic ESAs on site have been addressed under “ecological corridors” above. Impact: No impacts to terrestrial ESAs. Aquatic ESAs on site have been addressed under “ecological corridors” above. IBAs The Devon Grassland IBA is the nearest IBA, more than 30km south west of site. The Blesbokspruit IBA is approximately 50km south west of site. Impact: No impacts will occur to the IBAs. The site provides limited value to migrating or dispersing species from the IBAs. It must also be understood that as migrant and dispersing species, the species are very mobile and can easily escape the area. In addition the surrounds do provide alternative aquatic and grassland habitats. Any dispersing species from IBAs finding their way to the site are very unlikely to be significantly impacted, unless they are nesting or have chicks reducing their mobility. NFEPA Rivers are designated as moderately to largely modified in terms of their ecological state. The

v Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Aspect Fauna findings features Rank 2 wetland is the only significant NFEPA feature in terms of terrestrial fauna, but has been severed by mining and is fragmented into smaller wetland units (aquatic CBAs discussed above). The remaining wetlands within and near the project boundary are Rank 5 and Rank 6 NFEPA wetlands with little habitat for TOP species. Impact: As no surface activities are proposed, NFEPA features should not be directly impacted. A section of the NFEPA Rank 2 wetland falls within the proposed haul road, but is already impacted or absent within the relevant footprint and no additional significant direct impact is expected to the wetland. The aquatic CBAs contained within this rank 2 wetland must be spared significant indirect impacts (see CBAs above). The southern dam and the aquatic ESA within the development footprint are at highest risk from impacts related to potential surface subsidence and surface cracking which could alter water flow and completely alter the habitat within this area.

Site Ecological Importance and Overall Sensitivity

Overall site sensitivity, incorporating the SEI findings is presented in Plan A.

Plan A: Site Ecological Importance in terms of terrestrial fauna

vi Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Conclusion & recommendations

In terms of the proposed underground mining activities no additional mine-related surface activities are proposed within any areas supporting natural vegetation. The chute and stockpiles will be in a fully developed area of the mine. This, and the fact that the area has already been under-mined, means that no direct impacts are expected on fauna from proposed underground mining. Surface subsidence, cracks and sink holes are hazardous to fauna and will also alter habitat characteristics and must be managed in line with geological findings.

In terms of the haul road, it is largely within highly disturbed areas, even where it is adjacent to wetland areas, so no highly significant direct impacts are expected in terms of terrestrial fauna habitat. However some modification to the haul road and activities along the haul road are required to prevent unnecessary impact to important habitat and TOP species that may utilise the area.

The mine will continue with drilling to fine-tune the 5 Seam characteristics. Drilling is a short-term activity that will take place within a very active and noisy area and is only likely to impact on fauna within the quieter reaches of the Medium SEI area.

In terms of terrestrial fauna biodiversity, no additional faunal assessments or studies are deemed necessary. In terms of terrestrial fauna biodiversity, there is no reason for not authorising the activity as long as the following recommendations are adhered to: • Underground mining must be conducted in line with the geological mine plan designed to reduce the risk of surface subsidence in line with standard safety guidelines. • Any cracks and holes on surface must be filled and rehabilitated according to best practices. • Drilling must proceed very discretely through the Medium SEI areas and all sites within the Medium SEI areas must be rehabilitated to pre-drilling status. • The haul road must, at least, reduce its footprint as far as practically possible through Medium SEI areas. • The activities within and traffic along the haul road must be managed and the mitigation measures within this report applied to improve road visibility to truck drivers, reduce the risk of collisions with wildlife and allow species the chance to escape from approaching trucks, specifically where the road is adjacent to Medium SEI areas. • Coal dust must be managed to prevent coal dust contamination of the wetland area near the haul road. • Recommendations of the flora, wetland, surface water and groundwater specialist must be implemented on site. • The mitigation measures in this report and that of the flora report must be included within the environmental management plan report and implemented on site.

vii Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table of Contents

1. Introduction & Site Characterisation...... 1 1.1 Scope of Work...... 5 1.2 Relevant Legislation...... 5 2. Methodology...... 6 2.1 Desktop Ecological Status...... 6 2.2 TOP Species Desktop Lists...... 6 2.3 Site Assessment...... 7 2.4 Likelihood of TOP Species...... 7 2.5 Biodiversity Characterisation and Fauna Sensitivity Mapping...... 8 2.6 Fauna Impact Assessment...... 10 2.7 Limitations...... 10 3. Results...... 12 3.1 Mammals...... 16 3.2 Birds...... 20 3.3 Herpetofauna...... 26 3.4 Invertebrates...... 27 4. Terrestrial Biodiversity and Fauna Site Sensitivity...... 31 4.1 Terrestrial Biodiversity...... 31 4.2 Fauna Species...... 32 4.3 Site Ecological Importance...... 33 5. Fauna Impact Assessment...... 34 6. Fauna Management & Monitoring Plan...... 40 6.1 Invasive Species...... 41 7. Conclusion and Recommendations...... 42 8. References & Bibliography...... 44 8.1 Literature...... 44 8.2 Internet Sources...... 46

List of Tables Table 1: Ecologically significant features relevant to the site (“as-crow-flies” distances indicated)...... 1 Table 2: Criteria for assessing CI, FI and RR...... 8 Table 3: Matrix for determining BI...... 9 Table 4: Matrix for determining SEI...... 9 Table 5: Site Characterisation...... 14

viii Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 6: TOP and Endemic Mammals (Bold species are SCC – SANBI, 2020)...... 18 Table 7: TOP and Endemic Birds...... 23 Table 8: TOP and Endemic Herpetofauna (Bold species are SCC – SANBI, 2020)...... 28 Table 9: Invertebrates of interest (Shaded species are ADU species)...... 30 Table 10: Terrestrial fauna biodiversity features and preliminary impact statements...... 31 Table 11: Overall Site Ecological Importance (SEI) assessment...... 33 Table 12: Impact assessment criteria and ratings...... 35 Table 13: Significance of the impact and degree of irreversibility and loss of resource...... 36 Table 14: Impact 1: Destruction or contamination of significant and / or sensitive fauna habitat...... 37 Table 15: Impact 2: Hindrance, trapping, killing of fauna, focussing on TOP species...... 38 Table 16: Impact 3: General disturbance to fauna (noise, vibration, dust)...... 39 Table 17: Monitoring plan to be undertaken by EO...... 41

List of Plans Plan 1: Google Earth satellite imagery (October 2020) of project area and development areas...... 2 Plan 2: Site in relation to Important Bird Areas and Protected Areas (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)...... 3 Plan 3: Site in relation to National Freshwater Priority Areas (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)...... 3 Plan 4: Site and the provincial terrestrial biodiversity conservation plan (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)...... 4 Plan 5: Site and the provincial biodiversity aquatic conservation plan (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)...... 4 Plan 6: Main habitat units and GPS tracks...... 13 Plan 7: Site Ecological Importance in terms of terrestrial fauna findings...... 34

List of Appendices

Appendix A: CV, Qualification, SACNASP registration

Appendix B: Desktop fauna records (historical, ADU and SABAP2)

ix Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

1. Introduction & Site Characterisation

The Colliery lies south-west of Ogies, within the Emalahleni Local Municipality, in the Nkangala District Municipality of Mpumalanga Province.

The site ranks as very high for terrestrial biodiversity and based on the information from Table 1, the main trigger is the Threatened or Protected (TOP) ecosystem, which needs to be confirmed by the floral specialists, but based on the desktop information presented in Table 1 is unlikely to be present on site.

Table 1: Ecologically significant features relevant to the site (“as-crow-flies” distances indicated) Ecological area Description of feature relevant to the site International The nearest RAMSAR wetland is the Blesbokspruit, approximately 50km south Conservation west of site ( saramsar.com ) . No World Heritage Sites occur in the vicinity of the site ( whc.unesco.org ) . Important Bird The Devon Grassland IBA is the nearest IBA, more than 30km south west of site. Main Areas (IBAs) (Plan 2) threats include conversion of remaining natural habitat to crops / cultivation / coal mining. The large network of tar and gravel roads contributes to road kills. Urban- development is likely to be a future threat to the IBA (Marnewick et al., 2015). The Blesbokspruit IBA is approximately 50km south west of site. Main threats include reduction of habitat for wading species by reducing shallow open water. Impacts to terrestrial lands also affect the wetlands and reduces habitat for wetland specialists (Marnewick et al., 2015). The proposed mining development will not exacerbate threats faced by IBAs. Protected Areas (PA) No protected areas occur within 10km of site. No National Protected Area (Plan 2) (SANBI, Expansion Strategy (NPAES) occurs within 10km of site. BGIS) The site is not in a NFEPA water management sub-catchment. The largely

1 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Ecological area Description of feature relevant to the site National Freshwater modified (PES D) Wilge River is the nearest NFEPA river, approximately 1.4km Ecology Priority south of the farm boundary, but is not the receiving water body for the area. The Areas (NFEPAs) (Plan site drains eastwards into a non-NFEPA tributary flowing north-east into a series 3) (SANBI, BGIS). of dams. The flow of this system has been interrupted by opencast mining to the east. The drainage through the wetland around the proposed haul road has also been interrupted by opencast mining (depicted in Plan 5). This wetland is a Rank 2 wetland (within 500m of a TOP water bird locality). The remaining sections do still support TOP birds based on historical assessments in the area and form part of Khutala’s biodiversity management units. All remaining wetlands within and near the project are Rank 5 and Rank 6 NFEPA wetlands with little habitat for TOP species. Strategic Water No SWSAs occur within 10km of site. Source Area (SWSA) (SANBI, BGIS) Biome and The site falls within the Grassland Biome and the Eastern Highveld Grassland Ecosystem (SANBI, vegetation unit, which is also a Vulnerable Ecosystem (NEM:BA, GN1002, 2011). BGIS) Mpumalanga No terrestrial CBAs or ESAs occur within the project area. All areas are either Biodiversity Plan moderately or heavily modified or form part of “other natural areas”. Most of the (Plan 4 & Plan 5) aquatic areas also fall within these two categories, however there are narrow (SANBI, BGIS) aquatic ESAs associated with the non-NFEPA tributary flowing north-east in the 5 Seam property boundary and CBA wetlands associated with the wetlands around the proposed haul road. Quarter Degree Grid The site falls across QDGS 2628BB and QDGS 2629AA. All desktop data obtained Square (QDGS) from the citizen science sites have been sourced for these QDGS.

Plan 1: Google Earth satellite imagery (October 2020) of project area and development areas

2 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Plan 2: Site in relation to Important Bird Areas and Protected Areas (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)

Plan 3: Site in relation to National Freshwater Priority Areas (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)

3 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Plan 4: Site and the provincial terrestrial biodiversity conservation plan (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)

Plan 5: Site and the provincial biodiversity aquatic conservation plan (SANBI, BGIS Map Viewers)

4 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

1.1 Scope of Work

As per NEMA EIA Regulations (GNR982, 2017) and the requirements of the EIA Screening Tool Protocols for the Assessment and Reporting of Environmental Themes (GN320, March 2020), the following is relevant regarding the scope of work as far as it pertains to terrestrial fauna and the Terrestrial Biodiversity Theme (considering limitations): • Assess and comment on the significance of the terrestrial fauna habitat components and current general conservation status of the property in terms of SANBI BGIS data. • Comment on the likelihood of threatened or protected (TOP) fauna occurring on site. • Discuss important ecological drivers, processes and services as may be relevant. • Address site ecological importance in line with the animal species protocol guidelines and discuss site sensitivity based on site survey findings in relation to regional ecological setting. • Highlight potential risks on terrestrial fauna, with specific focus on TOP species. • Provide management recommendations to mitigate negative impacts of the activities on terrestrial fauna.

1.2 Relevant Legislation

Several Acts govern the environment and development in relation to the environment within South Africa. In terms of this study the following are relevant: • The National Environment Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998); and • The National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act, 2004. (Act 10 of 2004). NEM:BA and its regulations are of particular importance in terms of the fauna and flora ecosystems. The principal regulations considered within this report are: • The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (10/2004): Threatened or Protected Species Regulations. General Notice 152 of the 23/02/2007; • The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (10/2004): Publication of lists of species that are threatened or protected, activities that are prohibited and exemption from restriction. General Notice 151 of the 23/02/2007; • The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (10/2004): Alien and Invasive Species Lists. General Notice 1003 of 18 September 2020; and • National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (10/2004): Alien and Invasive Species Regulations. General Notice Regulation 1020 of 18 September 2020. In addition, the Mpumalanga Nature Conservation Act (Act No. 10 of 1998) provides for conservation of biological resources and lists the species protected within the province. This report does not delve further into this legislation, but any relevant requirements must be complied with regarding the proposed development.

5 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

2. Methodology

2.1 Desktop Ecological Status

The desktop assessment utilised predominantly SANBI BGIS data as detailed above, accompanied by Google Earth satellite imagery.

Amongst the prior studies reviewed the following are cited and utilised in the current report:  Khutala Biodiversity Action Plan compiled by Strategic Environmental Focus (SEF) in June 2014 (Reference No.: 505207).  Biodiversity Action Plan, Khutala Colliery: Mpumalanga Province, South Africa, 2017 compiled by Iggdrasil on behalf of Remediation and Environmental Monitoring (REM, 2018).  Biodiversity Assessment Associated with Khutala Colliery Expansion Project 2019, Mpumalanga, South Africa. Reviewed by Iggdrasil on behalf of Remediation and Environmental Monitoring (REM, 2019).

2.2 TOP Species Desktop Lists

A high level TOP species assessment was undertaken. The term TOP species (TOPS) was coined in terms of the threatened and protected species lists published under NEM:BA’s General Notice 151 of 2007 (GN151, 2007). In this report TOPS also includes threatened (Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered) Red-listed and IUCN (IUCNredlist.org) species (Near Threatened species are not included, but status is indicated where species is included as TOPS under other listings). Distribution and general information as presented in this report were sourced for: • Mammals [sourced from Child, et al. (2016) as presented in the mammal Red-list on SANBI.org.za, and the Endangered Wildlife Trust Red-listed mammal fact sheets on ewt.org.za/reddata; supplemented by Stuart and Stuart (2013), Stuart and Stuart (2015), Murray (2011), Monadjem et al. (2010a) and Monadjem et al. (2010b)]. • Birds [Taylor et al. (2015); supplemented by Chittenden et al. (2016), Sinclair et al. (2011) and the Roberts Multimedia Android Application]. • Reptiles [Bates, et al. (2014). Although an Atlas Project and not strictly a Red-listed species book, provides recent taxonomic names and more recent listings to the prior outdated Red- Data Book of 1988. Reptile information was supplemented by Tolley and Burger (2012)] • Frogs [sourced from Minter, et al. (2004) as presented in the frog Red-lists on FrogMap.adu.org.za and supplemented by du Preez and Carruthers (2009)]. • Invertebrates [also supplemented by Picker et al. (2012), Woodhall (2005) and SANBI Biodiversity Advisor Animal Checklists for ants, millipedes, Orthoptera and scarabs]: ◦ Butterflies [Mecenero et al. (2013) as obtained from the South African Butterfly Conservation Association lists]. ◦ Dragonflies (Samways & Simaika, 2016). ◦ Spiders (Dippenaar-Schoeman et al., 2010). ◦ Scorpions (Leeming, 2019).

6 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Endemic species for mammals, birds, reptiles and frogs (supplemented by information on inaturalist.org) were also indicated where relevant. Variation between sources on endemic species (just South Africa or South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland) is not seen as critical in terms of this report.

In order to determine recent fauna diversity data, various citizen science sites were consulted: • Mammal, amphibian, reptile and available invertebrate species lists for the QDGS over the last 10 year period from the Virtual Museum of the Animal Demographic Unit (VMUS.ADU.org). • Bird lists for the pentad (5° x 5° grid square) were obtained from the South African Bird Atlas Project (SABAP2.org). • Furthermore, iNaturalist (iNaturalist.org) was also consulted for presences of potential TOP species. Exotic and / or Alien Invasive (AI) Species (AIS) recorded in the area as per the citizen science sites are also discussed where relevant.

2.3 Site Assessment

Meanders were completed on the 25 November 2020 (5 seam application area) and on the 25 March 2021 (Klipspruit haul road) in all ‘Other Natural Areas’ (Plan 4), aquatic ESAs and CBAs (Plan 5) as well as any other area supporting natural vegetation. The southern dam, aquatic ESA and associated natural vegetation within the mine boundary were not surveyed as no access was granted to the mine. The southern half of the haul road was not surveyed due to access.

Any significant micro-habitats, fauna and signs of fauna within these meanders were noted.

2.4 Likelihood of TOP Species

For the desktop TOP species, a probability assessment to determine the likelihood of species occurring on site was completed. The probability assessment should be seen as a ranking system rather than an absolute and is designed to reduce subjectivity of results. Likelihood of occurrence was generally assessed as follows: • Confirmed : either through past surveys, citizen science sites and local knowledge where provided. • Likely : Distribution of the species occurs over the sites and the sites and immediate surrounds provide habitat, roosting and food requirements of the specific species. There is nothing to prevent the species from residing on site for a length of time (season or year). • Possible : Distribution of the species occurs over the sites but the specific habitat, roosting and/or food requirements are absent or sparse on site, but are present in the greater area. Species are not likely to reside on site, but may forage over or traverse the site. Species population is at low density over site. • Unlikely : Distribution is on the edge of site and habitat, roosting and/or food requirements are absent or sparse in the sites and surrounds. Species population is at low density and erratic over site. No recent records occur in the area.

7 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

2.5 Biodiversity Characterisation and Fauna Sensitivity Mapping

Comment and discussion is provided on the important ecological features, including ecological drivers, processes and services where these are relevant to terrestrial fauna. The site sensitivity in terms of fauna is discussed in relation to the ecological features identified during the desktop.

The Site Ecological Importance (SEI) is assessed and mapped as per the requirements of the Animal Species Environmental Assessment Guideline (SANBI, 2020). The assessment criteria and matrices are detailed in Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4. SEI is a function of the Biodiversity Importance (BI) of the receptor (e.g. species of conservation concern or the fauna community) and Receptor Resilience (RR), defined as the intrinsic capacity of the receptor to resist major damage from disturbance and / or to recover to its original state with limited or no human intervention (SEI = BI+RR). BI is a function of Conservation Importance (CI) (evaluated in accordance with recognised criteria as detailed in Table 2) and the Functional Integrity (FI) of the receptor (e.g. the vegetation/fauna community or habitat type), defined as the receptors’ current ability to maintain the structure and functions that define it, compared to its known or predicted state under ideal conditions (BI = CI+FI).

Table 2: Criteria for assessing CI, FI and RR Conservation Importance Functional Integrity Receptor Resilience Very Species confirmed / likely AND Very large (>100 ha) intact natural area. Species very likely to high restricted (< 10 km2) CR, EN, VU High connectivity and functional ecological remain during or Extremely / Critically Rare. corridors. impact / return after Globally significant populations No / minimal ecological impact with no impact ceases. of congregatory species (>10% signs of major past disturbance (e.g. of global population). ploughing). High Confirmed / likely CR, EN, VU Large (20 – 100ha) intact natural area. Species highly likely listed under criterion (B-E; if A Good connectivity with potentially to remain during then only if at <10 locations or functional ecological corridors. impact / return after <10 000 adults). Minor ecological impacts (e.g. few impact ceases. Globally significant populations livestock) with no signs of major past of congregatory species (1% - disturbance (e.g. ploughing); good <10% of global population). rehabilitation potential. Medium Confirmed or highly likely NT Medium (5 – 20ha) semi-intact natural Species moderately species. Presence of range- area. Narrow corridors of good connectivity likely to remain restricted species. / larger areas of poor connectivity. during impact / More than 50 % contains Minor ecological impacts; some major return after impact natural habitat for species of impacts (e.g. AIS) and signs of minor past ceases. conservation concern (SCC). disturbance; moderate rehabilitation potential. Low No confirmed or highly likely Small (1 – 5ha) area. Almost no connectivity Low likelihood of SCC or range-restricted species. but migration still possible across species remaining Less than 50 % contains natural transformed / degraded habitat; very busy during the impact / habitat with limited potential to surrounds. returning after support SCC. Several minor and major ecological impact ceases. impacts. Low rehabilitation potential. Very low No confirmed and highly Very small (<1 ha) area. No connectivity Species unlikely to unlikely SCC or range-restricted except for flying species. remain during the species. Several major current ecological impacts. impact / return once No natural habitat remaining. impact ceases.

8 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 3: Matrix for determining BI Biodiversity Importance CI Very High High Medium Low Very Low FI Very High Very High High High Medium Low High Very High High Medium Medium Low Medium High Medium Medium Low Very Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Very Low Very Low Medium Low Very Low Very Low Very Low

Table 4: Matrix for determining SEI SEI (Mitigation) BI Very High High Medium Low Very Low RR Very Low Very High Very High (Avoid) High (Avoid & Medium Low (Minimise (Avoid) Minimise) (Minimise & & Restore Restore Low Very High Very High (Avoid) High (Avoid & Medium Very Low (Avoid) Minimise) (Minimise & (Minimise) Restore Medium Very High High (Avoid & Medium Low (Minimise & Very Low (Avoid) Minimise) (Minimise & Restore (Minimise) Restore High High (Avoid & Medium Low (Minimise & Very Low Very Low Minimise) (Minimise & Restore (Minimise) (Minimise) Restore Very High Medium Low (Minimise & Very Low Very Low Very Low (Minimise & Restore (Minimise) (Minimise) (Minimise) Restore

The SEI ranks are utilised to generate the fauna sensitivity plan. This plan must be considered along with the floral sensitivity map to obtain an overall species sensitivity plan. In addition, the SEI ranks will inform mitigation as follows: • Very High – Avoidance mitigation: No destructive development activities should be considered. Offset mitigation not acceptable / not possible (i.e. last remaining populations of species, last remaining good condition patches of ecosystems / unique species assemblages. Destructive impacts for species / ecosystems where persistence target remains. • High – Avoidance mitigation wherever possible and Minimization mitigation: Changes to project infrastructure design to limit the amount of habitat impacted; limited development activities of low impact acceptable. Offset mitigation may be required for high impact activities. • Medium – Minimization and restoration mitigation: Development activities of medium impact acceptable followed by appropriate restoration activities. • Low – Minimization and restoration mitigation: Development activities of medium to high impact acceptable followed by appropriate restoration activities. • Very Low – Minimization mitigation: Development activities of medium to high impact acceptable and restoration activities may not be required.

9 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

2.6 Fauna Impact Assessment

Impact assessment is a predictive tool to identify aspects of a development that need to be prevented, altered or controlled in a manner to reduce the impact to the receiving environment, or determine where remediation activities will need to be incorporated into the overall development / activity plan. This does not mean that the impact will occur at the predicted significance.

The impact assessment methodology used is based on NEMA requirements [Appendix 3 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA Regulations)] and is presented under the impact assessment section. The following has been included: • Impact assessment in terms of the activities / development on terrestrial fauna biodiversity and species, including discussion on cumulative and residual impacts where relevant. • Presentation of mitigation measures for identified impacts. The mitigation actions considered the following: • STOP : These are activities that cannot continue until the necessary additional authorisations / legal requirements are obtained / met or the necessary operating procedures are compiled. Also includes activities that are considered fatal flaws where stipulated as such. These MUST be implemented. • MODIFY : These are development / activity aspects that must be considered for alteration or modification in order to reduce the impact on fauna. • CONTROL : These are mitigation actions that must be implemented to reduce the overall impact significance on fauna. • REMEDY : These are mitigation measures that focus on remedying impacts that may inadvertently occur on site. • Terrestrial fauna monitoring plan where this is relevant. • Concluding remarks and pertinent recommendations.

2.7 Limitations

Specialist studies are conducted to certain levels of confidence, and in all instances known and accepted methodologies have been used and confidence levels are generally high. This means that in most cases the situation described in the report is accurate at high certainty levels, but there exists a low probability that some aspects have not been identified / captured during the studies. Such situations cannot be avoided simply due to the nature of field work.

The SEI assessment proposed in SANBI’s guideline (SANBI, 2020) must be understood in terms of the activity (it is not a stand-alone assessment): • Unfortunately the SEI assessment requires a post-impact assessment (requires an activity to take place within the area in order to obtain the ecological importance of the area) which means that the ecological importance of an area varies depending on the type of activity and the level or density of activity that takes place in the specified area. A baseline rank would be more useful in terms of impact assessment methodologies (as described under NEMA), where the change in rank as a result of the activity would serve impact assessment better. • Due to the above, the ecological importance of a site that will not be directly or indirectly impacted (receptor resilience is very high) can only attain SEI scores of very low, low or medium. This is despite the fact that there are habitats in South Africa that are, from the

10 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

onset, ecologically important and highly sensitive environments (areas of endemism, streams and rivers, ridges). • Due to the fact that the SEI is activity-dependent, a sensitive habitat that is spared direct and indirect impact is likely to score a lower SEI than a general/slightly disturbed habitat that will be fully and permanently developed. • All persons reading this report must understand that the SEI rank in no way relates to the preference of the site for development (lower SEI ranks do not mean the site is preferred for development) and only goes to inform the level of mitigation and management required. The southern half of the 5 Seam property and the southern half of the haul road (Plan 1) were not surveyed due to access issues: • As the areas are not critical biodiversity areas and the underground mining will have minimal surface disturbance with strict subsidence management, the impact to the southern parts of the 5 Seam mine area is not deemed significant and this is not seen as a major flaw. • A wide mine road through highly disturbed mining areas occurs within the southern half of the proposed haul road and the area and this is not considered to have significant value in terms of terrestrial fauna. Almost every grassland unit had patches of wetland vegetation and the full classification and extent of these must be ascertained from the wetland study. In terms of this report they have not been further mapped and are only generally included in discussions as needed.

It must be stressed that the survey area is a much smaller area within the larger QDGS and Pentad areas utilised for desktop species, and species presented in these databases may not have been recorded at the specific site.

Rhinos and Elephants have not been evaluated within this report due to sensitivity of information. Larger herbivores and antelope are also excluded from more detailed discussion as many of these species are actively fenced in and managed within selected areas. As these species are largely restricted to reserves and farms this is not seen as a significant omission.

Some species are confirmed through signs rather than actual sightings. This is not always ideal as the age of the signs are not always known and many species have similar scat / tracks / marks on the environment and species cannot always be fully determined. The more signs the more confidence in the data. This limitation must be kept in mind where species are discussed based on signs.

There are inherent errors in mapping programmes which must be considered with all mapping information presented.

Citizen Science projects were used for bird (SABAP2) and animal (ADU) baseline data. When utilising data from Citizen Science projects, the following must be kept in mind: • Public interest in sites may be fickle, and may wane and increase, which could have a direct effect on the number of records available and therefore the number of species recorded. • Populated areas or popular tourist destinations may have more participants and therefore higher biodiversity data than less populated areas.

11 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

• Misidentification of species by the public cannot be excluded, but is not seen as a major problem as this is likely to be a consistent issue from year to year, and a degree of vetting does take place. • It must also be considered that animals observed in captivity may be recorded by citizens. Such animals should not be considered part of the natural biodiversity but as the data provided by citizen science sites do not make such distinctions, it cannot be separated from the biodiversity data presented in this report. SANBI’s Biodiversity Advisor Animal Checklist website stipulates specifically that the Checklist author and the SANBI website must be cited in order to ensure that the intellectual input of scientists is acknowledged. The Checklist authors and dates of compilation could not be found for the lists consulted and thus only the web-site and name of the list is referenced. The site can be visited for the specific authors of the species discussed in this report.

Due to the low resolution of some distribution maps and the mobility of animals, distribution data utilised to present animal lists are not 100% accurate. Proper distribution data for the TOP invertebrates is scant and it is difficult to conclusively state if every species does or does not occur in the area.

On this note, the invertebrate list provided is likely to contain many species that will not occur in the area, but due to the lack of specific distribution data, these have been retained as a cautionary approach.

3. Results

From Table 1 the only significant desktop features included the small aquatic Ecological Support Areas (ESAs) associated with the tributary on the south-eastern project area and the potential for a TOP ecosystem. The CBA wetlands around the haul road are also critical habitats, but are not targeted for physical development. Therefore desktop biodiversity features of relevance to terrestrial fauna is limited to the stream and dams and the areas of remaining natural habitat (Plan 4).

12 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Plan 6: Main habitat units and GPS tracks

In terms of the habitat units represented in Plan 6, the following must be noted: • All grassland units had patches of wetland vegetation, mostly disturbed and likely as a result of past land practices (agricultural and mining infrastructure). These are not mapped but must be considered as habitat for fauna. • The areas overlapping existing mine infrastructure areas are extrapolated from Google Earth imagery as no access was granted to the mine (southern extent of haul road and area around the mine’s existing PCD). • The disturbed area on the far western side is extrapolated from partial visibility across the conveyor belt and Google Earth Imagery. • The disturbed area on the far eastern side of the 5 Seam mining area is extrapolated from Google Earth Imagery, but is an extension of the surveyed area. • For the actual extent of the areas designated as moist grasslands the wetland report must be consulted.

13 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 5: Site Characterisation Photograph Habitat Unit & Characterisation Grassland Most of the “other natural areas” are grasslands of varying degrees of disturbance. The grassland units are considered least disturbed, showing little signs of historical mining or agricultural activity. Some grasslands showed signs of overgrazing. Arboreal habitats are limited to isolated trees / tree clusters. Substrates are largely sandy loams and suitable for most burrowing species, although more burrowing was noted in the disturbed grasslands. It is possible that past underground mining (potential surface vibrations) and current land use (trampling by cattle, crop farming, neighbouring mining activities) dissuaded burrowers from using much of these units. Moist grassland The tributary and associated dams in the north-eastern area of the 5 Seam site support moist grassland within the flood plains of the tributary and dams. The systems provide good aquatic and wetland habitat including open water, reed beds, open shores with sparse vegetation and some muddy banks and grassy verges. Some nearby invasive trees provide some limited arboreal habitat. The site is part of a larger riverine corridor which has been severed in the north-east by mining. Birds were making 5 Seam area floodplain use of the dam fringes including a TOP bird. The wetland area near the haul road which supports aquatic CBAs is also severed and isolated, but large sections of this wetland area still provide good habitat for owls (Marsh Owl confirmed for the general area; historical data indicated African Grass Owl also active in the area).

Wetland area near the haul road Dams Dams of varying sizes occur around the area, largely built and utilised for agricultural requirements. These are often connected to streams and drainage lines creating small aquatic ecological corridors within the larger terrestrial setting. The dams cumulatively provide a variety of aquatic and wetland habitats, including open water, dense reed beds, limited emergent vegetation and grassy banks and muddy banks. The southern-most dam is the mine’s existing PCD and was not surveyed. Disturbed grassland Most of the “other natural areas” are grasslands of varying degrees of disturbance. The disturbed grasslands include grasslands that appear to have been pastures, fragmented grasslands that have suffered edge effects or have been disturbed due to general activity in the area. They generally experience disturbance and noise

14 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Photograph Habitat Unit & Characterisation (conveyor / roads / mining) and would support tolerant fauna species. No or very limited arboreal habitats occur within these areas. Substrates were largely sandy loams, suitable for burrowing species (mostly Yellow Mongoose and Savanna Hare). Clay substrates dominated in the wetter areas where minimal burrowing was noted, but rodent scat suggested that small mammals forage in these areas. Haul road area between two stands of AIS The small stretch of wetland adjacent to the proposed haul road area just north of the existing opencast pit and south of a farm dam has been designated as a disturbed grassland as the area is paddocked and bermed off. The area does serve a good buffer between the remnant Rank 2 NFEPA wetland and mining areas.

Disturbed moist grassland at haul road between mine and dam to the north. Cultivated areas Much of the area has been or is currently cultivated. Although cultivated lands are considered disturbed, they do still provide fauna with habitat, food and refuge. Crop fields also provide connectivity between natural habitat units. Crops are cyclic and will be utilised by different species at different times, with the more ubiquitous species being those typical of the agricultural setting and tolerant of the ongoing changes in habitat and the agricultural activities. AIS stands The stands of alien invasive trees are considered as modified habitats, but do provide some fauna habitat. A handful of TOP species may utilise these alien invasive trees; mainly, the tall trees are utilised as perches by raptors. Some AIS stands were associated with farmsteads and mining areas and have been incorporated into disturbed areas.

Disturbed areas Old mine infrastructure areas, farmsteads and any areas where infrastructure covers a substantial area are considered as disturbed areas. Even though these are man-modified areas they are still utilised by generalist and highly tolerant fauna.

15 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

The complete desktop fauna lists as extracted from the various citizen science sites are included in Appendix B. The TOP and endemic species extracted from this list are further discussed below. Each faunal vertebrate group discusses, as relevant, the TOP species, endemic and restricted species and the AIS, focussing on species that are highly likely to occur on site for extended periods and therefore most likely to be exposed to the development and potential impacts. Invertebrates are discussed more generally but TOP species lists are included.

3.1 Mammals

In terms of the ADU list (Appendix B), the following is relevant: • Unidentified species on the ADU list have not been included in this report. • Species names are indicated as per the latest mammal Red-Lists (Child et al., 2016). Past surveys indicated that the Cape Spiny Mouse (Acomys subspinosus) occurs on site, but the area is not within the species distribution range and is indicated as the Spiny Mouse (Acomys spinosissimus) in Appendix B.

3.1.1 Site Species

Table 6 indicates species confirmed for site based on sightings or unique signs. Some unconfirmed rodent droppings and feeding signs were noted, assumed to belong to Rhabdomys sp. (R. dilectus), based on overall habitat, but cannot be confirmed. The following species are TOPS, endemic and provincially protected: • Serval (Leptailurus serval) (GN151 Protected). Tracks belonging to a cat and of a size fitting the Serval (too large for the feral domestic cats in the area) were noted along the road in the disturbed grassland near the haul road. The species was on the move through the area and is not likely to be resident in the area and most likely moving between wetlands. The species is active, and has been photographed on camera traps, in the greater area (REM, 2019). Main threats to the species include loss and degradation of wetlands and associated grasslands. Wetlands generally harbour high rodent densities compared with other habitat types, and form the core areas of Serval home ranges; disruption to such habitats reduces prey-base (Ramesh et al., 2016). • Blesbok (Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi) (Endemic). Species is threatened by selective breeding and hybridisation (Dalton et al., 2016). • Steenbok (Raphicerus campestris). No major threats to this species, but minor threats include subsistence hunting, range restriction through erection of fences, and loss of habitat through poor ranch management (Palmer et al., 2016).

3.1.2 Historical & Likely TOP & Endemic Species

The previously recorded TOP and endemic mammals for the area and those with distributions across the area are indicated in Table 6. Prior studies have included the Black-footed Cat (Felis nigripes) as a cautionary species, but it is unlikely to occur in the specific area and has been excluded in terms of this report. The Red Rock Rabbit (Pronolagus sp.) is also unlikely in the specific area due to lack of adequate rocky habitat and is also excluded from further assessment. The following endemic species has been previously recorded (past fauna surveys and ADU) in the area and could utilise the survey area:

16 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

• Pretoria Mole-rat (Cryptomys pretoriae) (Endemic). Species is not threatened but is occasionally persecuted as agricultural, garden and golf-course pest (Bennett et al., 2016). Other TOP and endemic species likely on site for more extended period rather than just brief foraging excursions or rests include: • Southern African Hedgehog (Atelerix frontalis) (GN151 Protected). Main threats include habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation from urban sprawl and agriculture. Also threatened by illegal harvesting from the wild for food, or for sale as pets and traditional medicine (Light et al., 2016). • Honey Badger (Mellivora capensis) (GN151 Protected). Main threats to the species arises from conflict and persecution by bee farmers (Begg et al., 2016). • Forest Shrew (Myosorex varius) (Endemic). The main threat to Forest Shrew is the loss or degradation of moist, productive areas such as wetlands and rank grasslands within suitable habitat. Climate change is also seen as a threat (Taylor et al., 2016). • Southern Reedbuck (Redunca arundinum) (GN151 Protected). Impacted in the past by habitat transformation and degradation associated with agricultural activities and settlements. On agricultural land, they are subjected to possible persecution due to damage to pastures and crops. Also susceptible to hunting, snaring and poaching (du Plessis et al., 2016).

3.1.3 Alien & Exotic Species

No exotic or AI species have been recorded for the QDGS. It is expected that domestic animals will utilise the site and cows and sheep were the primary stock animals noted on site. Feral cats also occur in the area.

3.1.4 Ecological Services

The various ecosystem services provided by the historical, confirmed and likely fauna are fairly typical and include: • Regulator of prey and / or predator numbers. • Significant prey-base for predators / raptors. • Control of potential vermin, pests and AI species, including potential vectors for disease. • Seed dispersal. • Ecosystem engineers: Burrowers (for refuge, habitat or simply digging for tubers / roots). Diggings and burrows affect flow of resources, trapping materials that change soil chemical, physical nature and moisture, creating a mosaic of varied and regenerating habitat patches. • Some burrows create refuge for other species as dens or to escape fires. • Vectors for disease.

17 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 6: TOP and Endemic Mammals (Bold species are SCC – SANBI, 2020) Common name Scientific name Endemism SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN MP Protected Schedule Site species Serval (tracks) Leptailurus serval Protected NT Blesbok Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi Endemic NT Steenbok Raphicerus campestris 2: Protected Game Duiker, Common Sylvicapra grimmia Gerbil, Highveld (burrows) Gerbilliscus sp. (most likely G.brantsii) Mongoose, Slender (scat) Herpestes sanguineus Mongoose, Yellow (burrows & scat) Cynictis penicillata Hare, Savanna Lepus sp. (most likely L. Victoriae) Mole-rat, Pretoria (burrows) Crytomys pretoriae TOP and Endemic Species historically recorded within the greater area / QDGS Cat, Black-footed Felis sp. (F. nigripes as cautionary sp.) Protected Vulnerable Vulnerable Mole-rat, Pretoria Cryptomys pretoriae Endemic Rabbit, Hewitt’s Red Rock Pronolagus sp. (P. saundersiae Endemic indicated) Likely TOP and Endemic species Reedbuck, Southern Redunca arundinum Protected 2: Protected Game Honey Badger (Ratel) Mellivora capensis Protected 2: Protected Game Hedgehog, Southern African Atelerix frontalis Protected NT 2: Protected Game Shrew, Forest Myosorex varius Endemic Possible TOP and Endemic Species Oribi Ourebia ourebia Endangered Endangered 2: Protected Game Fox, Cape Vulpes chama Protected Hyaena, Brown Parahyaena brunnea Protected NT NT 2: Protected Game Otter, Spotted-necked Hydrictis maculicollis Protected Vulnerable NT 2: Protected Game Aardwolf Proteles cristata 2: Protected Game Waterbuck Kobus ellipsiprymnus ellipsiprymnus 2: Protected Game

18 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Common name Scientific name Endemism SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN MP Protected Schedule Klipspringer Oreotragus oreotragus 2: Protected Game Aardvark Orycteropus afer 2: Protected Game Otter, Cape Clawless Aonyx capensis NT NT 2: Protected Game Unlikely TOP and Endemic Species Leopard Panthera pardus Vulnerable Vulnerable Vulnerable 4: Protected Wild Animals Wildebeest, Black Connochaetes gnou Endemic Protected 2: Protected Game Reedbuck, Southern Mountain Redunca fulvorufula Endangered Endangered 2: Protected Game Shrew, Maquassie Musk Crocidura maquassiensis Vulnerable Rat, Robert’s Marsh Dasymys robertsii Vulnerable Giraffe Giraffa camelopardalis giraffa Vulnerable 2: Protected Game Eland, Common Tragelaphus oryx 2: Protected Game Buffalo, African Savanna Syncerus caffer 4: Protected Wild Animals Rat, Tete Veld Aethomys ineptus Possible endemic Mole, Highveld Golden Amblysomus septentrionalis Endemic NT NT AIS / Exotic Speciesrecorded in the area None listed NT: Near Threatened

19 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

3.2 Birds

The Mpumalanga Province lists several indigenous birds as Schedule 2: Protected Game and the list is too extensive to incorporate in this report. The proposed development does not intend any specific scheduled activities involving birds, but the legislation must be consulted and complied with should any bird species need to be handled under any circumstances.

The site does support grassland, but much of it is disturbed and it is unlikely that the TOP species would utilise the area extensively. Devon Grassland IBA trigger species, which have been included in the overall TOPS assessment, include (Marnewick et al., 2015): • Globally threatened species: Blue Crane (Anthropoides paradiseus), Secretarybird (Sagittarius serpentarius), Blue Korhaan (Eupodotis caerulescens), Black-winged Pratincole (Glareola nordmanni) and Black Harrier (Circus maurus). • Regionally threatened species: African Grass Owl (Tyto capensis), Greater Flamingo (Phoenicopterus roseus) and African Marsh Harrier (Circus ranivorus). The Blesbokspruit IBA does not specifically support threatened species but does support water and wetland species (Marnewick et al., 2015). Therefore species dispersing from the IBA may utilise the site, but the habitat available on site is very limited and very disturbed. The IBA species include: • Wetland species: Lesser Flamingo (Phoeniconaias minor) and Greater Flamingo (Phoenicopterus roseus). • Water birds: Goliath Heron (Ardea goliath), Purple Heron (Ardea purpurea), African Spoonbill (Platalea alba), Glossy Ibis (Plegadis falcinellus), Pied Avocet (Recurvirostra avosetta), Red-knobbed Coot (Fulica cristata) and White-winged Tern (Chlidonias leucopterus). • Wetland raptors: African Marsh Harrier (Circus ranivorus) and African Grass Owl (Tyto capensis).

3.2.1 Site species

No endemic species were confirmed for the site (Table 7), but the following TOP species is confirmed: • Yellow-billed Stork (Mycteria ibis) (RL Endangered). Species feeds on fish, frogs, insects, worms and crustaceans. Ecosystem services are limited but may contribute to aquatic pest control and possibly control of AI fish. Threats include loss of wetland habitats, including wetland systems of pans, marshes and floodplains used for foraging. Loss of suitable trees for roosting/nesting also threatens species at is known breeding locations in northern KwaZulu Natal (Taylor et al., 2015).

3.2.2 Historical & Likely TOP & Endemic Species

The TOP and endemic birds recorded for the pentad and those with distributions across the area are indicated in Table 7. Many of the historically recorded species are wetland and aquatic habitat specialists and may utilise the area periodically, although the representative habitat units on site are not extensive and largely disturbed. The following TOP and endemic species have been historically recorded in the area (SABAP and past surveys) and could utilise the site:

20 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

• Southern Bald Ibis (Geronticus calvus) (Endemic) (GN151 Vulnerable; RL Vulnerable; IUCN Criteria C Vulnerable; Global Population <4 000). Species is threatened by poachers taking eggs and nestlings, by pesticides and poisoning, and habitat destruction and degradation (Taylor et al., 2015). • African Marsh Harrier (Circus ranivorus) (GN151 Protected; RL Endangered). Main threats include deterioration and loss of wetlands, primarily draining and damming of wetlands. Also threatened by poor land management practices and direct disturbance by humans during the breeding season (Taylor et al., 2015). • Secretarybird (Sagittarius serpentarius) (RL Vulnerable; IUCN Vulnerable). Main threats include loss and degradation of grassland habitat through poor grazing and fire management, bush encroachment, urban development and agriculture. Also threatened by trade, hunting and nest raiding, collisions with power-lines, drowning in sheer-walled reservoirs and wind-farms (Taylor et al., 2015). • Maccoa Duck (Oxyura maccoa) (IUCN Vulnerable). Threats include draining of wetlands, pollution through bio-accumulation and AIS infestation. Water quality changes that alter their food source could also impact population numbers (Taylor et al., 2015). • Caspian Tern (Sterna caspia) (RL Vulnerable). Main threats to the species include disturbance during the breeding season, egg collection and predation of eggs by predators, including domestic animals. Also threatened by extreme weather that affects water levels (climate change) and bio-accumulation of heavy metals, pesticides and pollution which may also affect breeding success (Taylor et al., 2015). • South African Cliff Swallow (Hirundo spilodera) (Endemic). • African Pied Starling (Spreo bicolor) (Endemic). • Cape Weaver (Ploceus capensis) (Endemic). The following TOP and endemic species are likely on site: • African Grass Owl (Tyto capensis) (GN151: Vulnerable, RL Vulnerable). The species was confirmed to utilise moist grasslands in the greater area (SEF, 2014). Main threats include loss and degradation of grassland and wetland habitat through afforestation, mining, urban development, and agriculture. Also disruption to nesting sites and eggs (Taylor et al., 2015). • Blue Korhaan (Eupodotis caerulescens) (Endemic) (GN151 Vulnerable). Species has a range restricted to the grasslands, and threats to the Grassland Biome may put pressure on the species (Taylor et al., 2015). • Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni) (GN151 Vulnerable). Species mainly faces threats in Europe and Asia, but also locally threatened by control of insects through pesticides, felling of tall trees and collisions with vehicles (Taylor et al., 2015).

3.2.3 Alien & Exotic Species

Three categorised alien invasive species (GN1003, 2020) and one exotic species have been recorded in the area (SABAP). All are Category 3 species which are common species, occurring throughout South Africa and often associated with human settlements. Only the Common Myna is confirmed for site.

3.2.4 Ecological Services

Many bird species do not specifically contribute to ecosystem functioning, but cumulatively insectivores, predators of small mammals, birds and fish will contribute to control ofpest

21 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021 invertebrates, pest rodents, alien avifauna and alien fish. Furthermore, the cumulative foraging on aquatic invertebrates (largely water-birds) and terrestrial invertebrates means a degree of control of potential disease-carrying vectors.

The various specific ecosystem services provided by avifauna include pollination and seed dispersal. Scavenging birds play a critical role in waste removal and nutrient recycling and reduce the risk of diseases that could arise from carrion. In addition birds and eggs are food sources to other fauna in the food chain and some species are critical for the survival of parasitic nesters.

22 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 7: TOP and Endemic Birds Common name Scientific name Endemism SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN Site species Stork, Yellow-billed Mycteria ibis Endangered Bishop, Southern Red Euplectes orix Cisticola, Zitting Cisticola juncidis Crow, Pied Corvus albus Dove, Laughing Spilopelia senegalensis Egret, Cattle Bubulcus ibis Egret, Intermediate Egretta intermedia Goose, Egyptian Alopochen aegyptiacus Guineafowl, Helmeted Numida meleagris Heron, Grey Ardea cinerea Honeyguide, Lesser Indicator minor Ibis, African Sacred Threskiornis aethiopicus Ibis, Hadeda Bostrychia hagedash Kite, Black-shouldered (-winged) Elanus caeruleus Lapwing, Blacksmith Vanellus armatus Lapwing, Crowned Vanellus coronatus Lark, Spike-heeled Chersomanes albofasciata Masked-weaver, Southern Ploceus velatus Myna, Common Acridotheres tristis Owl, Marsh Asio capensis Pipit, African Anthus cinnamomeus Quelea, Red-billed Quelea quelea Sparrow, Cape Passer melanurus Spurfowl, Swainson's Pternistis swainsonii Swallow, Greater Striped Hirundo cucullata Swift, White-rumped Apus caffer

23 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Common name Scientific name Endemism SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN Tern, Whiskered Chlidonias hybrida Thick-knee, Spotted Burhinus capensis Widowbird, Long-tailed Euplectes progne TOP and Endemic Species recorded in the greater area Ibis, Southern Bald Geronticus calvus Endemic Vulnerable Vulnerable Vulnerable Harrier, African Marsh Circus ranivorus Protected Endangered Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius Vulnerable Vulnerable Tern, Caspian Sterna caspia Vulnerable Duck, Maccoa Oxyura maccoa NT Vulnerable Swallow, South African Cliff Hirundo spilodera Breeding Endemic Starling, African Pied Spreo bicolor Endemic Weaver, Cape Ploceus capensis Endemic Likely TOP and Endemic species Owl, African Grass Tyto capensis Vulnerable Vulnerable Korhaan, Blue Eupodotis caerulescens Endemic Vulnerable NT Kestrel, Lesser Falco naumanni Vulnerable Possible TOP and Endemic Species Pelican, Pink-backed Pelecanus rufescens Endangered Vulnerable Crane, Blue Anthropoides paradiseus Endemic Endangered NT Vulnerable Stork, Black Ciconia nigra Vulnerable Vulnerable Lark, Botha’s Spizocorys fringillaris Endemic Endangered Endangered Falcon, Lanner Falco biarmicus Vulnerable Korhaan, White-bellied Eupodotis senegalensis Vulnerable Thrush, Sentinel Rock Monticola explorator Endemic NT Falcon, Sooty Falco concolor Vulnerable Lark, Eastern Long-billed Certhilauda semitorquata Endemic White-eye, Cape Zosterops virens Endemic Rock-thrush, Cape Monticola rupestris Endemic

24 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Common name Scientific name Endemism SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN Sunbird, Greater Double-collared Cinnyris afer Endemic Unlikely TOP and Endemic Species Crane, Wattled Bugeranus carunculatus Critically Endangered Critically Endangered Vulnerable Eagle, Martial Polemaetus bellicosus Vulnerable Endangered Vulnerable Harrier, Black Circus maurus Endangered Endangered Eagle, Verreaux's Aquila verreauxii Vulnerable AIS / Exotic Speciesrecorded in the area Dove / Pigeon, Rock Columa livia Category 3# Mynah, Common (Confirmed) Acridotheres tristis Category 3# Sparrow, House Passer domesticus Category 3# Goose, Greylag (Domestic) Anser anser Exotic NT: Near Threatened # GN1003, 2020, South African AIS List

25 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

3.3 Herpetofauna

In terms of the ADU list (Appendix B) the following is relevant: • Omitted species are excluded from this report. • The species names used in this report are as per Bates et al. (2014) and du Preez and Carruthers (2009). The Mpumalanga Province lists several indigenous non-serpentine reptiles as Schedule 2: Protected Game and the list is too extensive to incorporate in this report. The proposed development does not intend any specific scheduled activities involving reptiles, but the legislation must be consulted and complied with should any species need to be handled under any circumstances.

3.3.1 Site Species

Only the Rinkhals (Hemachatus haemachatus) is confirmed for the area. No TOP species or endemic species are confirmed for the site (Table 8).

3.3.2 Historical & Likely TOP & Endemic Species

The previously recorded TOP and endemic herpetofauna for the area and those with distributions across the area are indicated in Table 8. No rocky habitat was observed on site and species requiring exclusively rocky habitats have been listed as unlikely to occur on site. The following TOP and endemic species have been previously recorded in the greater area: • Transvaal Thick-toed Gecko (Pachydactylus affinis) (Endemic – Partially Restricted). • Delalande's Sandveld Lizard (Nucras lalandii) (Endemic). • Giant Bullfrog (Pyxicephalus adspersus) (GN151 Protected). Species is threatened by loss and degradation of its wetland and neighbouring terrestrial habitat. Other TOP and endemic species that are likely to occur on site include: • Coppery Grass Lizard (Chamaesaura aenea) (Endemic). Habitat transformation has impacted on species numbers and the species is close to being listed as Vulnerable (Bates et al., 2014). • Eastern Ground Agama (Agama aculeata distanti) (Endemic). • Aurora House Snake (Lamprophis aurora) (Endemic). • Common Slug-eater (Duberria lutrix lutrix) (Endemic). • Olive Ground Snake (Lycodonomorphus inornatus) (Endemic). • Rattling Frog (Semnodactylus wealii) (Endemic). • Clicking Stream Frog (Strongylopus grayii) (Endemic).

3.3.3 Alien & Exotic Species

No AIS or exotic species were identified from ADU lists or iNaturalist.

26 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

3.3.4 Ecological Services

Many of the herpetofauna species feed on arthropods and will cumulatively contribute to control of invertebrate numbers, including aquatic invertebrates that may be vectors for disease. Many reptiles and frogs are also food source to many birds and mammals, as well as other reptile species.

3.4 Invertebrates

A summary of TOP and provincially protected invertebrates with distribution ranges over and near the survey area are included in Table 9, with ADU desktop species (no iNaturalist species) highlighted. It must be stressed that the distribution of many species are unknown and it is very possible that species in Table 9 do not occur in the area and possibly the province (these are indicated as such). They have been included as a cautionary measure. Furthermore, in many instances, entire Family or Genera are listed. In such cases a full species evaluation is not possible or would be too extensive.

Of the TOP ADU species confirmed for the QDGS (indicated in bold in Table 9), the spider is a burrowing species, and more active at night and it is unlikely to be encountered during day-time surveys. The species cannot be excluded from site.

27 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 8: TOP and Endemic Herpetofauna (Bold species are SCC – SANBI, 2020) Common name Scientific name Endemism SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN Site species Rinkhals Hemachatus haemachatus TOP and Endemic Species recorded in the greater area Lizard, Delalande's Sandveld Nucras lalandii Endemic Gecko, Transvaal Thick-toed Pachydactylus affinis Endemic PR Bullfrog, Giant Pyxicephalus adspersus Protected NT Likely TOP and Endemic species Lizard, Coppery Grass Chamaesaura aenea Endemic NT Agama, Eastern Ground Agama aculeata distanti Endemic Snake, Aurora House Lamprophis aurora Endemic Slug-eater, Common Duberria lutrix lutrix Endemic Snake, Olive Ground Lycodonomorphus inornatus Endemic Frog, Rattling Semnodactylus wealii Endemic Stream Frog, Clicking Strongylopus grayii Endemic Possible TOP and Endemic Species Snake, Striped Harlequin Homoroselaps dorsalis Endemic NT Snake, Spotted Harlequin Homoroselaps lacteus Endemic Skink, Thin-tailed Legless Acontias gracilicauda Endemic Toad, Raucous Amietophrynus rangeri Endemic Unlikely TOP and Endemic Species Python, Southern African Python natalensis Protected Seps, Breyer’s Long-tailed Tetradactylus breyeri Endemic PR Vulnerable Tortoise, Lobatse Hinged-back Kinixys lobatsiana Vulnerable Snake, Western Natal Green Philothamnus natalensis occidentalis Endemic Skink,Cregoi’s Legless Acontias breviceps Endemic Gecko, Black-potted Dwarf Lygodactylus nigropunctatus nigropunctatus Endemic PR Lizard, Van Dam’s Dragon Smaug vandami Endemic PR

28 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Common name Scientific name Endemism SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN Gecko, Spotted Dwarf Lygodactylus ocellatus ocellatus Endemic PR Lizard, Common Crag Pseudocordylus melanotus melanotus Endemic PR AIS / Exotic Species recorded in the area No AIS or exoticspecies recorded on ADU or iNaturalist NT: Near Threatened PR: Partially Restricted

29 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 9: Invertebrates of interest (Shaded species are ADU species) Order Family Scientific name SA GN151 SA Red-list IUCN MP Protected Species Araneae Theraphosidae Harpactira gigas Protected 7: Invertebrates Araneae Theraphosidae Harpactira hamiltoni Protected 7: Invertebrates Araneae Theraphosidae Pterinochilus lugardi Protected 7: Invertebrates Scorpiones Liochelidae Opisthacanthus validus Protected Scorpiones Scorpionidae Opistophthalmus glabrifrons Protected Spirostreptida Spirostreptidae Doratogonus barbatus* Vulnerable Spirostreptida Spirostreptidae Doratogonus furculifer* Endangered Spirostreptida Spirostreptidae Doratogonus precarius* Vulnerable Coleoptera Carabidae Dromica sp. Protected Coleoptera Carabidae Graphipterus assimilis** Protected Coleoptera Carabidae Manticora sp. Protected Coleoptera Carabidae Megacephala asperata** Protected Coleoptera Carabidae Megacephala regalis** Protected Coleoptera Carabidae Prothyma guttipennis** Protected Coleoptera Lucanidae Nigidius auriculatus** Protected Coleoptera Lucanidae Prosopocoilus petitclerci** Protected Coleoptera Scarabaeidae Ichnestoma sp. Protected Orthoptera Tettigoniidae Clonia lalandei* Vulnerable Orthoptera Tettigoniidae Peringueyella rentzi* Endangered Orthoptera Tettigoniidae Thoracistus peringueyi* Critically Endangered * Distribution within province unknown ** General distribution unknown

30 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

4. Terrestrial Biodiversity and Fauna Site Sensitivity

As per the species assessment guidelines (SANBI, 2020), this section must be read together with the floral sensitivity plan to ensure a comprehensive terrestrial biodiversity sensitivity plan is obtained.

4.1 Terrestrial Biodiversity

Table 10 summarises the terrestrial fauna biodiversity findings as required under the terrestrial biodiversity protocol.

Table 10: Terrestrial fauna biodiversity features and preliminary impact statements Aspect Fauna findings Ecological The main ecological process is the plant-based primary production of ‘food’ and through processes photosynthesis, which also utilises CO2 and releases O2, and forms the principal base of the food-chain in a terrestrial environment. Secondly, the associated contribution to the water cycle through evapotranspiration is also a significant ecological process provided by the plant life. Another important process is that of natural fires. As the natural fire cycles in South Africa’s grassland and savanna have already been impacted by humans, this is not evaluated further. Impact: No surface activities will result in the removal of undisturbed habitat and no significant impacts expected to the ecological processes on site. The limited impact to disturbed habitat will have little impact on ecological processes of relevance to terrestrial fauna. Ecological The site provides a mixture of grassland and agricultural habitats, including farm dams and drivers: wetland areas associated with the drainage lines and streams. The grassland and moist climate grassland habitats are the predominant natural habitats none of which are targeted for direct change, development. Other than avifauna activity, fauna activity was quite limited with very few signs AIS noted despite the short, open grasslands and sparse cover under most circumstances. infestation The site already supports AIS species very common and widespread in South Africa. & habitat Impact: changes. Surface activities will not impact significantly on natural habitats and no significant impacts are expected to faunal habitat and the existing faunal assemblages. Where activities occur near to moist grasslands, such as along the haul road, the activities must proceed in a manner that will not cause indirect (such as siltation during high rainfall events) impacts to these wetlands. The development is not expected to significantly alter the AI species dynamics. Ecological No special or critical ecological services provided by fauna were identified for the area and were services largely related to the usual services provided by fauna (prey-base in food chain, pest control, pollination and seed dispersal). Impact: No impacts are expected on faunal habitats and faunal assemblages and ecological services provided by these faunal assemblages should remain unaffected. Ecological The main ecological corridor is limited to the tributaries and wetlands of the Klippoortjiespruit, Corridors however these have been severed and terminate in the existing mining areas and only provide limited connectivity. Impact: The southern dam and the aquatic ESA within the development footprint still provide a smaller ecological corridor. No direct surface activities are planned within this ecological corridor. Impacts are therefore limited to possible indirect impacts such as potential surface subsidence which could alter water flow dynamics and may affect the quality of the habitat within this corridor.

31 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Aspect Fauna findings CBAs No terrestrial CBAs occur within the project boundary. Aquatic CBAs occur around the haul road area but are not within the development footprint. Impact: No direct impacts will occur to CBAs. The aquatic CBAs may suffer indirect impacts such as vibrations, noise and dust, already experienced within these areas but will be exacerbated. The dust could become a significant impact if the coal component in the dust increases significantly enough to be a contaminating factor in the wetland. ESAs No terrestrial ESAs occur within the project boundary. Aquatic ESAs on site have been addressed under “ecological corridors” above. Impact: No impacts to terrestrial ESAs. Aquatic ESAs on site have been addressed under “ecological corridors” above. IBAs The Devon Grassland IBA is the nearest IBA, more than 30km south west of site. The Blesbokspruit IBA is approximately 50km south west of site. Impact: No impacts will occur to the IBAs. The site provides limited value to migrating or dispersing species from the IBAs. It must also be understood that as migrant and dispersing species, the species are very mobile and can easily escape the area. In addition the surrounds do provide alternative aquatic and grassland habitats. Any dispersing species from IBAs finding their way to the site are very unlikely to be significantly impacted, unless they are nesting or have chicks reducing their mobility. PAs No formally or informally protected areas lie within 10km of site. Impact: No impacts expected to PAs. NPAES No NPAES occur within 10km of site Impact: No impacts are expected on NPAES. SWSA No SWSAs within 10km of site. Impact: No impacts are expected on SWSAs. NFEPA Rivers are designated as moderately to largely modified in terms of their ecological state. The features Rank 2 wetland is the only significant NFEPA feature in terms of terrestrial fauna, but has been severed by mining and is fragmented into smaller wetland units (aquatic CBAs discussed above). The remaining wetlands within and near the project boundary are Rank 5 and Rank 6 NFEPA wetlands with little habitat for TOP species. Impact: As no surface activities are proposed, NFEPA features should not be directly impacted. A section of the NFEPA Rank 2 wetland falls within the proposed haul road, but is already impacted or absent within the relevant footprint and no additional significant direct impact is expected to the wetland. The aquatic CBAs contained within this rank 2 wetland must be spared significant indirect impacts (see CBAs above). The southern dam and the aquatic ESA within the development footprint are at highest risk from impacts related to potential surface subsidence and surface cracking which could alter water flow and completely alter the habitat within this area.

4.2 Fauna Species

The following is relevant in terms mammals: • The properties may support very limited TOP species, limited to protected and / or near threatened species.

32 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

• Although endemic species are confirmed for the properties, none are restricted species and the area is not a central area of mammal endemism. In terms of birds: • The property provides habitat for a few TOP birds, predominantly aquatic and wetland species, but also a few grassland species, which are more likely to forage or temporarily utilise the area. • The site supports surface water resources and congregatory water birds may utilise the area during periods of good rainfall. • Although endemic species are confirmed for the properties, none are restricted species and the area is not a central area of avifaunal endemism. In terms of herpetofauna: • No significant TOP herpetofauna populations are expected on the property, limited toa protected and near threatened species. • None of the endemic species are restricted and the area is not considered important for herpetofauna endemism. In terms of invertebrates: • A single TOP spider was historically recorded in the QDGS and cannot be excluded from site. • No TOP invertebrates were noted on site.

4.3 Site Ecological Importance

In general, the site sensitivity is in agreement with the Mpumalanga conservation plan, although the ‘other natural area’ designated in the west of the 5 Seam area was also historically ploughed and should be considered as part of the old lands or modified lands. The “other natural area” intersecting the proposed haul road has already been impacted by mining and can be considered heavily modified within the footprint area.

Table 11 summarises the determination of the site’s ecological importance in terms of terrestrial fauna (as detailed under Section 2.5 of the report and represented in Plan 7). As underground mining has occurred in the area and the road exists in the area (will be expanded and traffic may increase), these are not a new activities in the area and the existing fauna are expected to remain on site (high to very high RR). Disturbed grasslands are rated as having Very Low SEI; however the small stretch of disturbed grassland north of the existing opencast pit at the proposed haul road has been increased to Medium SEI and activity in this area must be minimised to maintain the buffer role the area currently serves between the wetland and mining areas.

Table 11: Overall Site Ecological Importance (SEI) assessment Evaluation unit CI FI BI RR SEI Rating Grasslands High High High High Medium (Minimise & Restore) Moist grasslands High High High High Medium (Minimise & Restore) Disturbed grasslands Low Medium Low Very high Very Low (Minimise) Dams High High High High Medium (Minimise & Restore) Cultivated Low Low Low Very high Very Low (Minimise) AIS stands Very low Very low Very low Very high Very Low (Minimise) Disturbed / developed Very low Very low Very low Very high Very Low (Minimise)

33 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Plan 7: Site Ecological Importance in terms of terrestrial fauna findings

5. Fauna Impact Assessment

A detailed project description was provided and the following is relevant: • The application area includes four farm portions. The 5 Seam will be mined via underground methods and from the information provided will overlie past underground mine areas. Additional ventilation shaft may be required. This means that: ◦ The proposed underground will be shallower than prior underground mining and it is possible that surface vibrations may be more prevalent and may impact fauna within the physical development footprint, although this is not expected to be significant in terms of existing fauna diversity tolerant of ongoing agricultural and mining activities within the area. • It is assumed that the mining will be completed in a manner that will consider the pillar layout of existing underground mined areas to reduce the risk of surface subsidence. As subsidence will be tackled as a geological impact, it is outside the scope of this specialist study and is not further evaluated, but: ◦ It must be understood that subsidence will alter the surface topographical features, which will in turn alter water flow and the vegetationcharacteristics, ultimately altering faunal habitats. ◦ Cracks and holes created through subsidence are direct danger to fauna. • The mine proposes to upgrade an existing mine road (southern half of the proposed haul road) and farm and service roads adjacent to the existing conveyor (northern half of the proposed haul road) to a formalised linkage haul road for coal conveyance by truck. ◦ Most of the habitat has been impacted and loss of habitat is not considered significant. The areas designated as Medium SEI along the haul road should be avoided and activity

34 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

adjacent to these areas must be strictly managed to prevent indirect impacts to the adjacent wetlands. ◦ As existing roads are being developed, the fauna species and communities should not be impacted significantly. The volume of trucks that will be required to move the necessary coal tonnages means that haul roads will be used during the night. Although not confirmed to occur during the site assessment, the wetland area provides good habitat to the TOP African Grass Owl. These species are known to perch on roads and road verges where rodents are easily spotted and awareness must be generated with truck drivers and truck traffic on the haul road must be managed. • The project description provided alluded to additional drilling, but no drilling plan was provided. Drilling is therefore generally assessed and the following is relevant: ◦ Moving drilling equipment through the site will damage fauna habitat. ◦ Drilling will generate noise, but the mining and crop farming activities in the area already contribute to a busy and noisy environment and the additional noise from drilling is not expected to significantly impact on faunal populations. ◦ Drilling requires lubrication in the form of hydrocarbons and contaminated runoff can pollute the environment and downstream aquatic environment during rainfall events. • As an active underground mine, most of the supporting infrastructure is in place and additional infrastructure is limited to the use of and development within the existing infrastructure area: ◦ Existing ROM silo to be modified to accommodate the handling and transfer of 5 Seam coal, which will be achieved by means of a diversion chute / transfer conveyor / hopper. ◦ No changes are required to the existing coal stockpile, which can accommodate 10 000t/m (Tonnes per month) of coal and has existing infrastructure such as water and waste management facilities to accommodate loading with a front-end loader onto road haul trucks. Impact assessment procedure was provided by the principal EAP to standardise the process and the criteria (Table 12and Table 13). The impacts are further assessed in Table 14 to Table 16.

Table 12: Impact assessment criteria and ratings Intensity / Magnitude Rating Insignificant: impact is of a very low magnitude 1 Low: impact is of low magnitude 2 Medium: impact is of medium magnitude 3 High: impact is of high magnitude 4 Very high: impact is of highest order possible 5 Frequency Rating Seldom: impact occurs once or twice 1 Occasional: impact occurs every now and then 2 Regular: impact is intermittent but does not occur often 3 Often: impact is intermittent but occurs often 4 Continuous: the impact occurs all the time 5 Duration Rating Very short-term: impact lasts for a very short time (less than a month) 1 Short-term: impact lasts for a short time (months but less than a year) 2 Medium-term: impact lasts for the for more than a year but less than the life of operation. 3 Long-term: impact occurs over the operational life of the proposed extension. 4 Residual: impact is permanent (remains after mine closure) 5

35 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Extent Rating Limited: impact affects the mining area 1 Small: impact extends to the neighbouring farmers 2 Medium: impact extends to surrounding farmers beyond the immediate neighbours 3 Large: impact affects the area covered by the municipal area 4 Very Large: The impact affects an area larger than the municipal area 5 Probability Rating Highly unlikely: the impact is highly unlikely to occur 0.2 Unlikely: the impact is unlikely to occur 0.4 Possible: the impact could possibly occur 0.6 Probable: the impact will probably occur 0.8 Definite: the impact will occur 1.0

The significance of the impact (detailed in Table 13) is dependent on the consequence and the probability that the impact will occur. • Impact significance = (consequence x probability) Where: • Consequence = (severity + extent)/2 • Severity = [intensity + frequency + duration]/3

Table 13: Significance of the impact and degree of irreversibility and loss of resource Significance Rating Very Low (≤1) Impact is negligible. No mitigation required. Impact is of a low order. Mitigation could be considered to reduce impacts. But does Low (1≤2) not affect environmental acceptability. Impact is real but not substantial in relation to other impacts. Mitigation should be Moderate (2≤3) implemented to reduce impacts. High (3≤4) Impact is substantial. Mitigation is required to lower impacts to acceptable levels. Impact is of the highest order possible. Mitigation is required to lower impacts to Very High (4≤5) acceptable levels. Potential Fatal Flaw. Degree of irreversibility of the impact Low Completely reversible: Reverses with minor rehabilitation & negligible residual affects Moderate Reversible: Requires mitigation and rehabilitation to ensure reversibility High Irreversible: Cannot be rehabilitated completely/rehabilitation not viable Degree of loss resource Low Fauna biodiversity recovers with no / limited intervention over specific time. Moderate Resource will recover with rehabilitation / intervention over specific time. High Resource cannot be recovered, or will require extensive rehabilitation / intervention.

36 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Table 14: Impact 1: Destruction or contamination of significant and / or sensitive fauna habitat The most significant units are the grasslands, aquatic corridors and small wetland buffer areas designated as Medium SEI (Plan 7) and forms the focus area in terms of impact assessment. Only limited areas will potentially be directly impacted and includes small areas around the haul road and potential drilling sites during construction phase and small areas at potential risk from subsidence during operational phase. Indirect impacts, particularly contamination by coal dust, within these units must also be prevented. Without Mitigation With Mitigation Construction & Operational Phase Magnitude Medium (3) Low (2) Frequency Often (4) Regular (3) Duration Long-term (4) Short-term (2) Severity =(M+F+D)/3 3.7 2.3 Extent Small (2) Limited (1) Consequence =(S+E)/2 2.8 1.65 Probability Definite (1.0) Possible (0.6) Significance =CxP Moderate (2.8) Very Low (0.99) Status -ve -ve Decommissioning Phase Magnitude Medium (3) Low (2) Frequency Occasional (2) Occasional (2) Duration Short-term (2) Short-term (2) Severity =(M+F+D)/3 2.3 2 Extent Small (2) Limited (1) Consequence =(S+E)/2 2.15 1.5 Probability Possible (0.6) Unlikely (0.4) Significance =CxP Low (1.29) Very Low (0.6) Status -ve -ve

Is Impact Reversible? Moderate Irreplaceable loss of resource? Moderate Can impact be mitigated? Yes Mitigation: STOP: Any drilling in wetland areas (as per the wetland assessment) cannot proceed until the necessary authorisations are obtained under the National Water Act (NWA) and NEMA. MODIFY: Diverge the haul road to avoid the Medium SEI areas as far as possible; where this is not possible minimise the road footprint within Medium SEI areas. Any drilling camps or storage/parking areas that may be required will be established in Very Low SEI areas. As far as practically possible conduct drilling in the Medium SEI area during the dry season to reduce risk of run-off related impacts. As far as possible place ventilation shafts in area of low SEI; otherwise minimise the footprint for access to and development of the ventilation shaft. CONTROL: Drilling within the Medium SEI area must proceed in a discrete manner, pick the shortest cumulative route (taking into account wetlands and other potential, flora-based no-go areas) and utilise the same tracks in and out. Ensure containment of contaminating substances at drill sites. Conduct underground mining in a manner that will manage the risk for surface cracking and subsidence. REMEDY: Where tracks have damaged areas extensively in Medium SEI areas, then these areas will be rehabilitated according to standard soil and flora remediation practices. All activity areas will be rehabilitated to their pre-drilling status once activities in the area are completed. All spills will be lifted and all litter will be collected for disposal at the mine. Daily inspection and clean up of coal spills and other spills and litter must be completed along the haul road, particularly in areas adjacent to wetlands to prevent contamination of these habitats.

37 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Cumulative Impact: Indiscriminate and uncontrolled activities within the upstream areas could cause sedimentation and contamination of the downstream rivers and dams, alter the aquatic environment and impact on downstream environments. Residual Impacts: Sedimentation could alter drainage patterns within the downstream aquatic ecosystems, reduce water holding capacity and increase water temperature in the long term. This would compromise aquatic habitats and associated neighbouring terrestrial habitats and alter species dynamics, especially those of water birds.

Table 15: Impact 2: Hindrance, trapping, killing of fauna, focussing on TOP species Although species are mobile, a limited number of TOP species may traverse the area and activities must be managed in a manner that protects these species. Of particular concern is the potential for the African Grass Owl to forage around and on the haul road. Without Mitigation With Mitigation Operational Phase Magnitude Very high (5) Low (2) Frequency Regular (3) Seldom (2) Duration Long-term (4) Short-term (2) Severity =(M+F+D)/3 4 2 Extent Small (2) Small (2) Consequence =(S+E)/2 3 2 Probability Definite (0.8) Possible (0.6) Significance =CxP Moderate (2.4) Low (1.2) Status -ve -ve Decommissioning Phase Magnitude Low (2) Insignificant (1) Frequency Occasional (2) Occasional (2) Duration Short-term (2) Short-term (2) Severity =(M+F+D)/3 2 1.7 Extent Small (2) Limited (1) Consequence =(S+E)/2 2 1.3 Probability Possible (0.6) Unlikely (0.4) Significance =CxP Low (1.2) Very Low (0.5) Status -ve -ve

Is Impact Reversible? Moderate Irreplaceable loss of resource? High Can impact be mitigated? Yes Mitigation: STOP: No deliberate killing or trapping of indigenous fauna is allowed on site, unless trapping is done by a permitted specialist to remove the specimen from the area. MODIFY: Place ruts and / or speed bumps along the road where it is adjacent to Medium SEI areas (+100m either side) to reduce truck speed on the haul road along these sections. The noise should also alert animals in the area and afford them the opportunity to escape. Illuminate the road with soft lights (bright white lights will attract too many insects which may in turn attract the rodents to the haul road) where it is adjacent to Medium SEI areas (+100m either side). The lights should aim to illuminate the road for the drivers to spot potential owls and avoid them. Reduce the speed limit from 40km/hr to 30km/hr along the haul road where it lies adjacent to the medium SEI area and 100m either side. If it can be enforced, then this reduction of speed limit can be applied from sundown to sunrise only; if it cannot be enforced it must be permanently applied to the relevant sections of haul road. CONTROL: All contractors on site must undergo environmental awareness training which must include the

38 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

prohibition of any harm or hindrance to any indigenous fauna species and educate the staff on potential TOP species, specifically the African Grass Owl. How such information is communicated to contractors will depend on the mine’s internal processes of communicating its EMP commitments (induction, environmental meetings, focus group meetings, etc). Ensure safe speed limits on the haul road and safe working conditions in the development area. REMEDY: Contracts with contractors must specify actions that will be taken against contractors who do not conduct activities in line with the EMP. Should any fauna be trapped within the development area, activities will cease and permitted specialists brought in to safely remove the animals from site. This will reduce chance of nocturnal species utilising the road and will improve visibility to truck drivers. This will only be effective with reduced speed limits. Monitor TOPS observed to enter the site and adapt activities as needed to ensure these species are not negatively impacted by the development; this must even consider ceasing activities for a required period until the species leaves the area. Monitor the road at least every 2 weeks to record road kills and adapt activities as needed if high road kills are observed. Cumulative Impact: As long as the sensitive areas remain undeveloped and intact then no cumulative impacts are expected on terrestrial fauna species which will have habitat available for retreat. Residual Impact: Destruction of any TOPS (or prey-base of TOPS) could cause a cascade affect on populations and, in extreme circumstances, local extinctions.

Table 16: Impact 3: General disturbance to fauna (noise, vibration, dust) The existing mining and crop farming activities in the area already contribute to a busy and noisy environment and the additional noise from drilling and general construction along the road is not expected to significantly impact on the agricultural faunal communities. Without Mitigation With Mitigation Operational Phase Magnitude Medium (3) Low (2) Frequency Regular (3) Regular (3) Duration Short-term (2) Short-term (2) Severity =(M+F+D)/3 2.7 2.3 Extent Small (2) Limited (1) Consequence =(S+E)/2 2.3 1.7 Probability Probable (0.8) Possible (0.6) Significance =CxP Low (1.9) Low (1) Status -ve -ve Decommissioning Phase Magnitude Low (2) Insignificant (1) Frequency Occasional (2) Occasional (2) Duration Short-term (2) Short-term (2) Severity =(M+F+D)/3 2 1.7 Extent Small (2) Limited (1) Consequence =(S+E)/2 2 1.3 Probability Possible (0.6) Unlikely (0.4) Significance =CxP Low (1.2) Very Low (0.5) Status -ve -ve

Is Impact Reversible? Low Irreplaceable loss of resource? Low Can impact be mitigated? Yes Mitigation: MODIFY: Utilise quieter equipment where feasible.

39 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

As far as practically possible conduct drilling in the Medium SEI area during the dry season. Fewer fauna will be around (migrants will be gone, lower water levels will reduce water bird populations) and fauna are less likely to be nesting or have youngsters. CONTROL: Wet the haul road regularly through spraying with water during times of high dust generation. Noisy point-sources should be enclosed and equipment / machinery fitted with silencers where possible. Only conduct activities during the peak day-time activity periods. All equipment / machinery will be serviced and maintained within operating specifications to prevent excessive noise. REMEDY: All activity areas will be rehabilitated to their pre-drilling status once activities in the area completed to reduce risk of excessive dust. Daily inspection and clean up of coal spills must be completed along the haul road, particularly in areas adjacent to Medium SEI areas to prevent coals dust contamination of moist grassland habitats. Cumulative Impact: No significant cumulative impacts are foreseen and the existing fauna will either remain on site during drilling or will return to site soon after drilling / construction. Residual Impacts: No significant residual impacts are foreseen and the existing fauna will either remain on site during drilling or will return to site soon after drilling / construction.

6. Fauna Management & Monitoring Plan

The objectives of the management plan are as follows: • To prevent the unnecessary destruction of natural habitat and animal life within the development area and to maintain ecological connectivity to neighbouring sites and, where possible, to regional ecological corridors. • Not to unnecessarily or deliberately alienate or hinder the movement of fauna in the area or to harm any animal life found on the property. • To maintain existing fauna biodiversity and prevent the skewing of fauna communities as far as possible. A monitoring plan and an adaptive management approach must be implemented in order to ensure effective mitigation measures are applied at all times. The specific mitigation measures are highlighted in the impact tables above (Table 14 to Table 16) and the minimum monitoring plan is indicated in Table 17. In addition to the measures above, the following general measures must also be applied during the underground mining of the 5 Seam: • Underground mining must be conducted in line with the geological mine plan designed to reduce the risk of surface subsidence in line with standard safety requirements. • Any cracks and holes on surface must be filled and rehabilitated according to best practices. • Rehabilitation of cracks and sink holes in the wetland and ESA areas must take into account the surface features and replicate these as far as possible to ensure unimpaired water flow through the system. • Environmental awareness training must include the prohibition of any harm or hindrance to any indigenous fauna species and the consequences of such actions. • Allow unhindered movement of fauna to allow them the opportunity to freely leave activity areas. • Ensure safe speed limits in the development area and no open fires.

40 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

• Do not feed wild life and ensure that all food and food waste, including domestic waste, is placed in sealed containers and not exposed on site. Ensure that the outside areas are kept clean and tidy and provide adequate waste removal services to prevent the attraction of rats and other alien scavenging species to the site. • Regularly (daily) inspect the haul road and clear coal spills and clear coal fines to reduce coal dust contamination to the neighbouring wetland areas. An Environmental Officer (EO) must be appointed to ensure construction activities are in line with environmental management plan and authorisation requirements, including the mitigation and management measures stipulated within this report. Inspection, records of issues and corrective measures and sign-off will form part of the EO’s responsibilities.

Table 17: Monitoring plan to be undertaken by EO Monitoring Action Frequency Ensure all proposed mitigation measures detailing proposed modifications Once-off have been incorporated into the final plans and operational procedures and sign off onthese. A surface monitoring and rehabilitation plan must be in place to monitor for Monthly potential cracks and holes on surface. Generally monitor any TOP species that may enter the area and ensure Weekly if species are species are not under threat from mine-related activities. observed on site. Monitor the haul road adjacent to the Medium SEI areas to record road kills Every 2 weeks and adapt activities as needed if high road kills are observed. Inspect Medium SEI areas and ensure these are in a natural state with no Immediately after dumping, excavations, excessive coal dust or obstructions to fauna mobility. drilling is completed at said site Apply monitoring and auditing requirements stipulated in NWA & NEMA As stipulated in the authorisations as relevant. authorisations

6.1 Invasive Species

The Alien and Invasive Species Regulations published under GNR598 (2014) list aliens under various categories, including: • Category 1a Listed Invasive Species are those species listed as such by notice in terms of section 70(1)(a) of NEM:BA as species which must be eradicated. • Category 1b Listed Invasive Species are those species listed as such by notice in terms of section 70(1)(a) of NEM:BA as species which must be controlled. • Category 2 Listed Invasive Species are those species listed by notice in terms of section 70(1) (a) of NEM:BA as species which require a permit to carry out a restricted activity within an area specified in the Notice or an area specified in the permit, as the case may be. If no permit for these species then are are to be treated as Category 1 species. • Category 3 Listed Invasive Species are species that are listed by notice in terms of section 70(1)(a) of NEM:BA, as species which are subject to exemptions (regarding possession of such species) in terms of section 71(3) and prohibitions (importing, transporting, handling, breeding, releasing) in terms of section 71A of Act, as specified in the Notice.

41 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

In terms of the findings of this study, only Category 3 alien invasive avifauna species were identified for the QDGS. These bird species have extensive distributions in South Africa and all are closely related to human settlements and no proper control programmes have been implemented in South Africa for these species (Picker and Griffiths, 2011).

7. Conclusion and Recommendations

The only significant desktop features included the small aquatic Ecological Support Areas (ESAs) associated with the tributary on the south-eastern project area and the potential for a TOP ecosystem. The CBA wetlands around the haul road are also critical habitats, but are not targeted for physical development. In terms of site findings the aquatic CBAs and associated wetland area and the aquatic ESAs and the connected farm dams, together with the connected terrestrial grassland provided the most significant fauna habitat in the survey area. Despite this, the site is isolated and severed from any natural ecological corridors in the greater area lowering the overall biodiversity value of the site in terms of terrestrial fauna.

Only very limited TOP species are likely to utilise the site for any length of time, and most are highly mobile avifauna which are very capable of fleeing the area should they feel threatened in any way. The isolated habitat unit is still of value to birds, including the confirmed Yellow-billed Stork and highly likely African Grass Owl.

42 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

• Drilling must proceed very discretely through the Medium SEI areas and all sites within the Medium SEI areas must be rehabilitated to pre-drilling status. • The haul road must, at least, reduce its footprint as far as practically possible through Medium SEI areas. • The activities within and traffic along the haul road must be managed and the mitigation measures within this report applied to improve road visibility to truck drivers, reduce the risk of collisions with wildlife and allow species the chance to escape from approaching trucks, specifically where the road is adjacent to Medium SEI areas. • Coal dust must be managed to prevent coal dust contamination of the wetland area near the haul road. • Recommendations of the flora, wetland, surface water and groundwater specialist must be implemented on site. • The mitigation measures in this report and that of the flora report must be included within the environmental management plan report and implemented on site.

43 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

8. References & Bibliography

8.1 Literature Bates, M.F., Branch, W.R., Bauer, A.M., Burger, M, Marais, J., and Alexander, G.J. & De Villiers, M.S. (Eds) (2014). Atlas and red list of the reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Suricata 1. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

Begg CM, Begg KS, Power RJ, van der Merwe D, Camacho G, Cowell C, Do Linh San E. (2016). A conservation assessment of Mellivora capensis . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa.

Bennett N (2016). A conservation assessment of Cryptomys spp . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Child, M. F.; Raimondo, D.; Do Linh San, E.; Roxburgh, L.; Davies-Mostert, H. (2016). The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa.

Chittenden, H.; Davies, G.; Weiersbye, I. 2016. Roberts Bird Guide. 2nd Edition. The John Voelcker Bird Book Fund: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 920602 01 7.

Dalton D, Parrini F, Viljoen P, Gaylard A, Peinke D, Mallon D. (2016). A conservation assessment of Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Dippenaar-Schoeman A.S.; Haddad C.R. ; Foord S.; Lyle R.; Lotz L.; Helberg L.; Mathebula S.; van den Berg A; Marais P.; van den Berg A.M. ; Van Niekerk E. & Jocqué R. (2010): First Atlas of the Spiders of South Africa (Arachnida: Aranae). South African National Survey of Arachnida Technical Report 2010: version 1. du Plessis J, Peel M, Child MF. (2016). A conservation assessment of Redunca arundinum . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. du Preez, L,; Carruthers, V. 2009. A Complete Guide to the Frogs of Southern Africa. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 77007 446 0.

Leeming, J. (2019). Scorpions of Southern Africa. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 77584 652 9.

44 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Light J, Pillay N, Avenant NL, Child MF 2016. A conservation assessment of Atelerix frontalis . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Marnewick MD, Retief EF, Theron NT, Wright DR, Anderson TA. (2015). Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas of South Africa. Johannesburg: BirdLife South Africa.

Matthee C, Wilson B, Robinson TJ, Child MF. (2016). A conservation assessment of Pronolagus spp. In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Mecenero, S., Ball, J. B., Edge, D. A., Hamer, M. L., Henning, G. A., Kruger, M., Williams, M. C. (2013). Conservation assessment of butterflies of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland: Red List and Atlas. Saftronics (Pty) Ltd., Johannesburg and Animal Demography Unit, Cape Town.

Minter, L.R., Burger, M., Harrison, J.A., Braack, H.H., Bishop, P.J. and Kloepfer, D. (Eds). (2004). Atlas and Red Data book of the frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Si/Mab Series #9. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Monadjem, A.; Taylor, P.J.; Cotterill, F.P.D.; Schoeman, M.C. 2010a. Bats of Southern and Central Africa: A biogeographic and Taxonomic Synthesis. Wits University Press: Johannesburg. ISBN 978 1 86814 508 9.

Monadjem, A.; Taylor, P.J.; Denys, C.; Cotterill, F.P.D. 2010b. Rodents of Sub-Saharan Africa: A biogeographic and Taxonomic Synthesis. de Gruyter: Berlin. ISBN 978 3 11 038923 4.

Murray, K. (2011). Scatalogue. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 77007 955 7

Palmer G, Birss C, du Toit JT. (2016). A conservation assessment of Raphicerus campestris . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Picker, M.; Griffiths, C. 2011. Alien & Invasive Animals: A South African Perspective. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 77007 823 9.

Picker, M.; Griffiths, C.; Weaving, A. 2012. Field Guide to Insects of South Africa. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 92057 225 9.

Ramesh T, Downs CT, Power RJ, Laurence S, Matthews W, Child MF. (2016). A conservation assessment of Leptailurus serval . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies- Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Remediation and Environmental Monitoring (REM). (2018). Biodiversity Action Plan, Khutala Colliery: Mpumalanga Province, South Africa, 2017. February 2018.

45 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

Remediation and Environmental Monitoring (REM). (2019). Biodiversity Assessment Associated with Khutala Colliery Expansion Project 2019, Mpumalanga, South Africa (7th March 2019).

Samways, M.J. & Simaika, J.P. 2016. Manual of Freshwater Assessment for South Africa: Dragonfly Biotic Index. Suricata 2. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

SANBI (South African National Biodiversity Institute). 2020. Draft Species Environmental Assessment Guideline. Guidelines for the implementation of the Terrestrial Flora (3c) & Terrestrial Fauna (3d) Species Protocols for environmental impact assessments in South Africa. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. Version 1.0.

Sinclair, I.; Hockey, P.; Ryan, P. 2011. Sasol Birds of Southern Africa. 4th Edition. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 43170 144 5.

Strategic Environmental Focus (SEF). (2014). Khutala Colliery: Biodiversity Action Plan. Junen 2014. Reference. No. 505207.

Stuart, C.; Stuart, M. 2013. A field Guide to the Tracks & Signs of Southern, Central & East African Wildlife. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 9781770073609.

Stuart, C.; Stuart, M. 2015. Stuarts’ Field Guide to Mammals of Southern Africa including Angola, Zambia & Malawi. 5th Edition. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 77584 111 1.

Tarboton, W. 2014. Roberts Nests & Eggs of Southern African Birds. The John Voelcker Bird Book Fund: Cape Town. ISBN 978 0 620 50629 8.

Taylor, M.R., Peacock, F. and Wanless, R.M. (2015). Red Data book of birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Johannesburg: Birdlife South Africa.

Taylor P.J., Willows-Munro S, Baxter R, Monadjem A, Child MF. 2016. A conservation assessment of Myosorex varius . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Tolley, K.; Burger, M. 2012. Chameleons of Southern Africa. Struik Nature: Cape Town. ISBN 978 1 92057 286 0.

Wilson B, Sliwa A, Drouilly M.(2016). A conservation assessment of Felis nigripes . In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa.

Woodhall, S. (2005). Field guide to butterflies of South Africa. Cape Town: Struik Nature. ISBN 978 1 92054 481 2.

8.2 Internet Sources • Checklist of South African Scarabaeinae. Animal checklist website (http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org/research-and-modelling/checklists-and-encyclopaedia- of-life/south-african-animal-checklist/), accessed 5 November 2019.

46 Khutala 5-Seam Mining Project: Terrestrial Fauna Impact Assessment Report May 2021

• Checklist of South African Diplopoda. Animal checklist website (http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org/research-and-modelling/checklists-and-encyclopaedia- of-life/south-african-animal-checklist/), accessed 30 April 2019. • Checklist of South African Hymenoptera, Ants. Animal checklist website (http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org/research-and-modelling/checklists-and-encyclopaedia- of-life/south-african-animal-checklist/), accessed 30 April 2019. • Checklist of South African Orthoptera. Animal checklist website (http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org/research-and-modelling/checklists-and-encyclopaedia- of-life/south-african-animal-checklist/), accessed 30 April 2019. • ewt.org.za/reddata : Endangered Wildlife Trust for information pertaining to Red-listed mammals. • inaturalist.org : For supplementary information on species distribution (accessed 2020-12- 09). • iucnredlist.org : For the IUCN Red List status of species. • sabap2.adu.org.za: Southern African Bird Atlas Project for Quarter Degree Grid species list accessed on the 2020-11-24. • SANBI.org.za: For geographic information related to protected and sensitive ecosystems and environments, such as National Freshwater Priority Areas (NFEPA), Fish Sanctuaries and important catchments under NFEPA, Biodiversity and Conservation Plans, Important Bird Areas (IBA). • saramsar.com : For information on SA RAMSAR sites • vmus.adu.org.za/: Animal Demography Unit, Virtual Museum: ◦ FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). FrogMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=FrogMAP on 2020-11-24. ◦ FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). LepiMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=LepiMAP on 2020-11-24. ◦ FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). MammalMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=MammalMAP on 2020-11-24. ◦ FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). OdonataMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=OdonataMAP on 2020-11-24. ◦ FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). ReptileMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=ReptileMAP on 2020-11-24. ◦ FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). ScorpionMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=ScorpionMAP on 2020-11-24. ◦ FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). SpiderMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=SpiderMAP on 2020-11-24. • whc.unesco.org : for information on SA World Heritage Site

47 Appendix A: CV, Qualification, SACNASP registration Curriculum Vitae

BARBARA KASL

Personal Information . Full Name: Barbara Kasl . Qualifications: PhD (Animal, Plant and Environmental Science) . E-mail: [email protected]

Education – ±10 years Tertiary Institute: University of the Witwatersrand . 2002-2004: PhD (Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences) . 1999-2001: MSc (upgraded to PhD) . 1998: B.Sc. Hon. (Zoology and Botany) . 1995-1998: BSc (Zoology and Botany) MSc AND PhD - South African Sugar Experiment Station (SAHRA) – On site research for MSc and PhD degree to determine habitat management strategies to control sugarcane borer (Eldana saccharina) in South African sugarcane (Mnt. Edgecombe, R. S. A.). . Systematic and orderly work habits, which extended into the field, greenhouse and laboratory experiments, and associated data capturing. . Gained competency on statistical programmes (Statistica, Origin and Excel). . Data assessment, presentation and discussion of findings through written reports, presentations and posters. . Good computer literacy and fully competent in MS Office.

Professional Experience – ±12 years

02/2017 - Current: Self-employed as fauna specialist & environmental consultant . Fauna impact assessments and management and monitoring plans for various developments requiring NEMA authorisation. . Terrestrial alien invasive fauna management plans. . Working closely with ecologists on a variety of projects requiring specialists terrestrial fauna input. . Gauteng & North West Provincial Biodiversity Outlook Reports – Terrestrial Fauna input. . Generic environmental management plans for the Working for Ecosystems and Landcare projects (ongoing). . Consulting on projects requiring Environmental Authorisation, including Mineral Authorisations. . Review of various environmental documentation. 01/2008 – 02/2017: CABANGA CONCEPTS: Environmental Scientist / Principal Consultant Requested to join the company as an environmental consultant specialising in all environmental authorisation processes and related documents. I am one of three principal members/shareholders of Cabanga Concepts. . One of two principal report reviewers of external reports supplied by subcontractors [soil assessments, ecological (terrestrial and aquatic) assessments groundwater and surface water assessments, heritage and cultural resource assessments to name a few] and internal reports compiled by staff. . Overall project manager regarding mineral rights application processes as well as environmental authorisation processes in South Africa, including management of a team of external (sub- consultants) and internal specialists. Including overview of budget and spending of the budget during the life of the project. . Compilation of proposals and associated budgets for various environmental requirements made by new and existing clients. . Principal EMP report compiler and reviewer for a World Bank mining project in Rwanda, including review of external specialist reports. Familiar with IFC, Equator Principals. . . Compilation of environmental applications and documents required under the various environmental acts (environmental act, waste act, air quality act and water act) in South Africa. This includes scoping reports, impact assessment reports, environmental management plans, environmental monitoring reports, environmental pre-feasibility reports and bankable feasibility studies, integrated water and waste management plans, audit reports, due diligence assessments, reports on monitoring findings (water quality, dust levels, ambient noise). . Compilation of various audit reports including EMP Audits, Legal Compliance Audits, Due Diligences, Integrated Water and Waste Management Plan Audits, Licence and Permitting Audits. . Compilation of draft sensitivity plans for internal GIS specialists to refine. . Compiled a detailed and comprehensive alien invasive management plan for principal invasive plant species in the Highveld region of South Africa. . Keep up-to-date with environmental legislation and relevant application processes. . Keep up-to-date on various standards, norms and management requirements released through official organisations and institutes. 09/2004 – 11/2007: DIGBY WELLS & ASSOCIATES (Now DIGBY WELLS ENVIRONMENTAL): Unit Manager / Acting Department Head: Biophysical Department . Initially hired as entomologist and fauna specialist. . Responsible in completion of full fauna assessments and eventually compilation of overall ecological reports. . Received training in full environmental authorisation processes including compilation of EIA and EMP reports. . Various sub-Saharan environmental projects included Etoile Mine in DRC, Randgold Mine in Mali, Valencia uranium green-field mine in Namibia, Mmamabula coal mine and power plant in Botswana. . Unit Manager for the Ecology Unit including management of a flora and wetland specialist. . Acting Department Head and management of the Biophysical Department which included the Ecology Unit and Atmospheric Environment Unit. 2001-2003: Various University and Temp Research Jobs in Entomology 2001: Private Tutor - Private tutoring for first year student. 1993-1998: Part-Time Jobs

Professional Memberships and Affiliations . 2011 – current: Registered Professional Environmental And Ecological Scientist . 2015 – 2017: EAPSA Certified Environmental Assessment Practitioner . 1999, 2001 & 2008 – current: Entomological Society of South Africa . 2008-2011: International Association for Impact Assessment . 1998: Zoological Society of Southern Africa

Courses Attended April 2017: Alien invasive species identification and management course in KZN organised through Kay Montgomery. October 2010: NEM: Air Quality Act course through IMBEWU Sustainability Legal Specialists (Pty) Ltd August 2009: NEMA and NEMWA course through ECOLAW November 2007: Environmental Impact Assessment Training February/March 2007: Project Management for Non-Project Managers Course through Astro Tech September 2006: Unilever Introduction to Managing Environmental Water Quality - Practical, Theoretical and Policy; through Institute for Water Research – RHODES University. September 2005: Non-credited course in River health and SASS5 rapid methodology of water quality assessment through NEPID Consultants May 2005: Snake Identification and Snakebite Treatment Course

Appendix B: Desktop fauna records (historical, ADU and SABAP2)

Family Common name Taxon name MAMMALS Rodentia Mouse, Spiny Acomys spinosissimus Carnivora Jackal, Black-backed Canis mesomelas Cetartiodactyla Wildebeest, Blue Connochaetes taurinus Eulipotyphla Shrew, Swamp Musk Crocidura mariquensis Rodentia Mole-rat, Pretoria Crytomys pretoriae Carnivora Mongoose, Yellow Cynictis penicillata Cetartiodactyla Blesbok Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi Carnivora Cat, Wild Felis sp. (F. nigripes or F. sylvestris) Carnivora Genet, Small-spotted Genetta genetta Rodentia Gerbil, Highveld Gerbilliscus brantsii (possibly G. leucogaster) Carnivora Mongoose, Slender Herpestes sanguineus Rodentia Porcupine, Cape Hystrix africaeaustralis Carnivora Mongoose, White-tailed Ichneumia albicauda Carnivora Serval Leptailurus serval Lagomorpha Hare, Savanna Lepus saxatilis (now assumed to be L. victoriae / L. capensis) Cetartiodactyla Bushpig Potamochoerus larvatus Pronolagus sp. (Distribution indicates P. Lagomorpha Rabbit, Hewitt’s Red Rock saundersiae, possibly P. radensis) Cetartiodactyla Duiker, Common Sylvicapra grimmia Rodentia Squirrel, Cape Ground Xerus inauris REPTILES Gekkonidae Gecko, Transvaal Thick-toed Pachydactylus affinis Lacertidae Lizard, Delalande's Sandveld Nucras lalandii Elapidae Rinkhals Hemachatus haemachatus Scincidae Skink, Cape Trachylepis capensis Scincidae Skink, Speckled Rock Trachylepis punctatissima Typhlopidae Snake, Bibron’s Blind Afrotyphlops bibronii Lamprophiidae Snake, Brown House Boaedon capensis Lamprophiidae Snake, Mole Pseudaspis cana Lamprophiidae Snake, Spotted Grass Psammophylax rhombeatus FROGS Pyxicephalidae Bullfrog, Giant Pyxicephalus adspersus Pipidae Platanna, Common Xenopus laevis Pyxicephalidae River Frog, Delalande’s Amieta quecketti BIRDS Accipitridae Buzzard, Common Buteo buteo Accipitridae Buzzard, Steppe Buteo vulpinus Accipitridae Eagle, Black-chested Snake Circaetus pectoralis Accipitridae Harrier-Hawk, African Polyboroides typus Accipitridae Harrier, African Marsh Circus ranivorus Accipitridae Kite, Black-shouldered Elanus caeruleus Acrocephalidae Reed-warbler, African Acrocephalus baeticatus Family Common name Taxon name Acrocephalidae Warbler, Lesser Swamp Acrocephalus gracilirostris Alaudidae Lark, Melodious Mirafra cheniana Alaudidae Lark, Pink-billed Spizocorys conirostris Alaudidae Lark, Red-capped Calandrella cinerea Alaudidae Lark, Rufous-naped Mirafra africana Alaudidae Lark, Spike-heeled Chersomanes albofasciata Alcedinidae Kingfisher, Giant Megaceryle maximus Alcedinidae Kingfisher, Pied Ceryle rudis Anatidae Duck, African Black Anas sparsa Anatidae Duck, Fulvous Whistling Dendrocygna bicolor Anatidae Duck, Knob-billed Sarkidiornis melanotos Anatidae Duck, Maccoa Oxyura maccoa Anatidae Duck, White-backed Thalassornis leuconotus Anatidae Duck, White-faced Whistling Dendrocygna viduata Anatidae Duck, Yellow-billed Anas undulata Anatidae Goose, Egyptian Alopochen aegyptiacus Anatidae Goose, Greylag (Domestic) Anser anser Anatidae Goose, Spur-winged Plectropterus gambensis Anatidae Pochard, Southern Netta erythrophthalma Anatidae Shelduck, South African Tadorna cana Anatidae Shoveler, Cape Anas smithii Anatidae Teal, Cape Anas capensis Anatidae Teal, Hottentot Anas hottentota Anatidae Teal, Red-billed Anas erythrorhyncha Anhingidae Darter, African Anhinga rufa Apodidae Swift, African Palm Cypsiurus parvus Apodidae Swift, Little Apus affinis Apodidae Swift, White-rumped Apus caffer Ardeidae Egret, Cattle Bubulcus ibis Ardeidae Egret, Great Egretta alba Ardeidae Egret, Intermediate Egretta intermedia Ardeidae Egret, Little Egretta garzetta Ardeidae Heron, Black Egretta ardesiaca Ardeidae Heron, Black-crowned Night Nycticorax nycticorax Ardeidae Heron, Black-headed Ardea melanocephala Ardeidae Heron, Goliath Ardea goliath Ardeidae Heron, Grey Ardea cinerea Ardeidae Heron, Purple Ardea purpurea Ardeidae Heron, Squacco Ardeola ralloides Burhinidae Thick-knee, Spotted Burhinus capensis Charadriidae Lapwing, African Wattled Vanellus senegallus Charadriidae Lapwing, Blacksmith Vanellus armatus Charadriidae Lapwing, Crowned Vanellus coronatus Charadriidae Plover, Kittlitz's Charadrius pecuarius Charadriidae Plover, Three-banded Charadrius tricollaris Ciconiidae Stork, White Ciconia ciconia Ciconiidae Stork, Yellow-billed Mycteria ibis Cisticolidae Cisticola, Cloud Cisticola textrix Family Common name Taxon name Cisticolidae Cisticola, Levaillant's Cisticola tinniens Cisticolidae Cisticola, Wing-snapping Cisticola ayresii Cisticolidae Cisticola, Zitting Cisticola juncidis Cisticolidae Neddicky Cisticola fulvicapilla Cisticolidae Prinia, Black-chested Prinia flavicans Cisticolidae Prinia, Tawny-flanked Prinia subflava Coliidae Mousebird, Red-faced Urocolius indicus Columbidae Dove, Cape Turtle Streptopelia capicola Columbidae Dove, Laughing Spilopelia senegalensis Columbidae Dove, Namaqua Oena capensis Columbidae Dove, Red-eyed Streptopelia semitorquata Columbidae Dove, Rock Columba livia Columbidae Pigeon, Speckled Columba guinea Corvidae Crow, Pied Corvus albus Cuculidae Cuckoo, Diderick Chrysococcyx caprius Cuculidae Cuckoo, Red-chested Cuculus solitarius Estrildidae Finch, Red-headed Amadina erythrocephala Estrildidae Quailfinch, African Ortygospiza atricollis Estrildidae Waxbill, Common Estrilda astrild Estrildidae Waxbill, Orange-breasted Amandava subflava Falconidae Falcon, Amur Falco amurensis Falconidae Kestrel, Greater Falco rupicoloides Falconidae Kestrel, Rock Falco rupicolus Fringillidae Canary, Black-throated Crithagra atrogularis Fringillidae Canary, Yellow Crithagra flaviventris Fringillidae Canary, Yellow-fronted Crithagra mozambica Hirundinidae Martin, Brown-throated Riparia paludicola Hirundinidae Martin, Common House Delichon urbicum Hirundinidae Martin, Rock Hirundo fuligula Hirundinidae Martin, Sand Riparia riparia Hirundinidae Swallow, Barn Hirundo rustica Hirundinidae Swallow, Greater Striped Hirundo cucullata Hirundinidae Swallow, South African Cliff Hirundo spilodera Hirundinidae Swallow, White-throated Hirundo albigularis Laniidae Fiscal, Common (Southern) Lanius collaris Laniidae Shrike, Lesser Grey Lanius minor Laniidae Shrike, Red-backed Lanius collurio Laridae Gull, Grey-headed Larus cirrocephalus Laridae Tern, Caspian Sterna caspia Laridae Tern, Whiskered Chlidonias hybrida Laridae Tern, White-winged Chlidonias leucopterus Locustellidae Rush-warbler, Little Bradypterus baboecala Lybiidae Barbet, Black-collared Lybius torquatus Lybiidae Barbet, Crested Trachyphonus vaillantii Macrosphenidae Grassbird, Cape Sphenoeacus afer Malaconotidae Bokmakierie, Bokmakierie Telophorus zeylonus Meropidae Bee-eater, White-fronted Merops bullockoides Monarchidae Flycatcher, African Paradise Terpsiphone viridis Family Common name Taxon name Motacillidae Longclaw, Cape Macronyx capensis Motacillidae Pipit, African Anthus cinnamomeus Motacillidae Pipit, Plain-backed Anthus leucophris Motacillidae Wagtail, Cape Motacilla capensis Muscicapidae Chat, Anteating Myrmecocichla formicivora Muscicapidae Chat, Familiar Cercomela familiaris Muscicapidae Flycatcher, Spotted Muscicapa striata Muscicapidae Robin-chat, Cape Cossypha caffra Muscicapidae Stonechat, African Saxicola torquatus Muscicapidae Wheatear, Capped Oenanthe pileata Muscicapidae Wheatear, Mountain Oenanthe monticola Nectariniidae Sunbird, Amethyst Chalcomitra amethystina Numididae Guineafowl, Helmeted Numida meleagris Otididae Korhaan, Northern Black Afrotis afraoides Passeridae Sparrow, Cape Passer melanurus Passeridae Sparrow, House Passer domesticus Passeridae Sparrow, Southern Grey-headed Passer diffusus Phalacrocoracidae Cormorant, Reed Phalacrocorax africanus Phalacrocoracidae Cormorant, White-breasted Phalacrocorax carbo Phasianidae Francolin, Red-winged Scleroptila levaillantii Phasianidae Quail, Common Coturnix coturnix Phasianidae Spurfowl, Swainson's Pternistis swainsonii Phoenicopteridae Flamingo, Greater Phoenicopterus ruber Phoenicopteridae Flamingo, Lesser Phoenicopterus minor Phoeniculidae Wood-hoopoe, Green Phoeniculus purpureus Phylloscopidae Warbler, Willow Phylloscopus trochilus Picidae Wryneck, Red-throated Jynx ruficollis Ploceidae Bishop, Southern Red Euplectes orix Ploceidae Bishop, Yellow-crowned Euplectes afer Ploceidae Masked-weaver, Southern Ploceus velatus Ploceidae Quelea, Red-billed Quelea quelea Ploceidae Sparrow-weaver, White-browed Plocepasser mahali Ploceidae Weaver, Cape Ploceus capensis Ploceidae Weaver, Village Ploceus cucullatus Ploceidae Widowbird, Fan-tailed Euplectes axillaris Ploceidae Widowbird, Long-tailed Euplectes progne Ploceidae Widowbird, White-winged Euplectes albonotatus Podicipedidae Grebe, Great Crested Podiceps cristatus Podicipedidae Grebe, Little Tachybaptus ruficollis Pycnonotidae Bulbul, Dark-capped Pycnonotus tricolor Rallidae Coot, Red-knobbed Fulica cristata Rallidae Crake, Black Amaurornis flavirostra Rallidae Crake, Corn Crex crex Rallidae Moorhen, Common Gallinula chloropus Rallidae Swamphen, African Porphyrio madagascariensis Recurvirostridae Avocet, Pied Recurvirostra avosetta Recurvirostridae Stilt, Black-winged Himantopus himantopus Sagittariidae Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius Family Common name Taxon name Sarothruridae Flufftail, Red-chested Sarothrura rufa Scolopacidae Godwit, Black-tailed Limosa limosa Scolopacidae Ruff / Reeve Philomachus pugnax Scolopacidae Sandpiper, Wood Tringa glareola Scolopacidae Snipe, African Gallinago nigripennis Scolopacidae Stint, Little Calidris minuta Strigidae Owl, Marsh Asio capensis Sturnidae Myna, Common Acridotheres tristis Sturnidae Starling, African Pied Spreo bicolor Sturnidae Starling, Cape Glossy Lamprotornis nitens Sturnidae Starling, Red-winged Onychognathus morio Sturnidae Starling, Wattled Creatophora cinerea Threskiornithidae Ibis, African Sacred Threskiornis aethiopicus Threskiornithidae Ibis, Glossy Plegadis falcinellus Threskiornithidae Ibis, Hadeda Bostrychia hagedash Threskiornithidae Ibis, Southern Bald Geronticus calvus Threskiornithidae Spoonbill, African Platalea alba Turdidae Thrush, Karoo Turdus smithi Viduidae Indigiobird, Dusky Vidua funerea Viduidae Whydah, Pin-tailed Vidua macroura