FAUNA & FLORA SPECIALIST IMPACT ASSESSMENT: NUWEVELD WEST WIND ENERGY FACILITY PRODUCED FOR AURECON First Draft April 2020 Revised October 2020 [email protected] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Red Cap Energy Pty Ltd (Red Cap) is proposing to develop three wind farms on a 35,000ha site situated about ~65km north of Beaufort West along the R381 to Loxton, in the Beaufort West Local Municipality, Central Karoo District Municipality, Western Cape. Aurecon South Africa are conducting the required EIA process and 3Foxes Biodiversity Solutions has been appointed to provide a specialist terrestrial fauna and flora specialist study of the proposed three wind farms as part of the EIA applications, one of them being the Nuweveld West Wind Farm which this study deals with. The purpose of the Nuweveld West Terrestrial Biodiversity Report is to describe and detail the ecological features of the proposed site; provide an assessment of the ecological sensitivity of the affected area and identify the likely impacts that may be associated with the development of a wind farm on the site. Several site visits as well as a desktop review of the available ecological information for the area was conducted in order to identify and characterise the ecological features of the site. Overall, the Nuweveld West site is considered generally favourable for development of the wind farm. Although there are some constrained areas where development should be minimised, there are large tracts of the site that are considered medium or low sensitivity and where development would have a low impact. Although impacts on the Riverine Rabbit are a potential concern, its presence on the escarpment is unlikely and the total extent of available habitat is low. Nevertheless, the high threat status associated with this species demands a conservative approach and no turbines or buildings (incl. substation and associated battery facility) should be located within the feature or buffer areas around the identified habitat features. With this avoidance in place, long-term impacts on Riverine Rabbits are likely to be low. The site also has a confirmed population of the Endangered Mountain Reedbuck and the development is likely to result in some transient impact on this species. The local population is however small and unlikely to be compromised by the development. In order to better understand the responses of these two species and fauna more generally to the development of the wind farm, it is recommended that that funding is provided towards a Fauna Monitoring Programme to be implemented at the site. The purpose of the monitoring would not be to directly inform or alter the operation of the current wind farm as a form of mitigation, but rather that the opportunity is used to collect baseline information on the manner in which fauna react to the construction and operation of a wind farm so that this information can be used to reduce potential conflict between wind farms and fauna more generally in the karoo and especially in areas where these conflicts may be potentially of greater consequence. The most significant impacts associated with the Nuweveld West WEF would occur during the construction phase as a result of disturbance and habitat loss. Long-term operational impacts would be lower and restricted to low-level operational disturbance and turbine noise effects. Although there are some CBA1 areas within the site that would be affected by the development, a review of the basis and validity of these reveals that they are not irreplaceable and the general mitigation and avoidance of sensitive features identified as part of this assessment would be effective at maintaining the ecological functioning of the site. As such, the potential impacts of the development on CBAs are considered acceptable. In terms of cumulative impacts, the area has experienced no impact from wind farm development to date with the result that the wider area is still largely intact and the contribution of the current development to cumulative impact would be minor. Nuweveld North WEF – Fauna & Flora Specialist Scoping Study 2 The overall footprint of the development is well within the set limits of acceptable change and as such, there are no fatal flaws in this regard. There are no impacts associated with the development of the Nuweveld West WEF that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level. As such, should all the proposed mitigation be implemented, this development is deemed acceptable from an ecological impact perspective. It is thus the reasoned opinion of the specialist that there the Nuweveld West WEF development should be allowed to proceed to the EIA phase. Nuweveld North WEF – Fauna & Flora Specialist Scoping Study 3 COMPLIANCE WITH APPENDIX 6 OF THE 2014 EIA REGULATIONS, AS AMENDED Addressed in the Requirements of Appendix 6 – GN R326 2014 EIA Regulations, 7 April 2017 Specialist Report 1. (1) A specialist report prepared in terms of these Regulations must contain- a) details of- i. the specialist who prepared the report; and 6 ii. the expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae; b) a declaration that the specialist is independent in a form as may be specified by 7 the competent authority; c) an indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report was Section 1 prepared; (cA) an indication of the quality and age of base data used for the specialist report; Section 2 (cB) a description of existing impacts on the site, cumulative impacts of the Section 3 proposed development and levels of acceptable change; d) the date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season Section 2.3 to the outcome of the assessment; e) a description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or carrying out Section 2 the specialised process inclusive of equipment and modelling used; f) details of an assessment of the specific identified sensitivity of the site related to the proposed activity or activities and its associated structures and Section 3 infrastructure, inclusive of a site plan identifying site alternatives; g) an identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers; Section 3 h) a map superimposing the activity including the associated structures and infrastructure on the environmental sensitivities of the site including areas to be Section 3 avoided, including buffers; i) a description of any assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in Section 2.3 knowledge; j) a description of the findings and potential implications of such findings on the Section 3 impact of the proposed activity or activities; k) any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr; Section 6 l) any conditions for inclusion in the environmental authorisation; Section 7 m) any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or environmental Section 6 authorisation; n) a reasoned opinion- i. whether the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised; (iA) regarding the acceptability of the proposed activity or activities and Section 6 ii. if the opinion is that the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised, any avoidance, management and mitigation measures that should be included in the EMPr, and where applicable, the closure plan; o) a description of any consultation process that was undertaken during the course See Main Report of preparing the specialist report; p) a summary and copies of any comments received during any consultation See Main Report process and where applicable all responses thereto; and Nuweveld North WEF – Fauna & Flora Specialist Scoping Study 4 q) any other information requested by the competent authority. 2) Where a government notice gazetted by the Minister provides for any protocol or Since Government minimum information requirement to be applied to a specialist report, the requirements Notice No. 320 has as indicated in such notice will apply. been gazetted, a verification report (Annex 5) and protocols (Annex 7)= and Annex 8) aligned with the requirements have been included in this report Nuweveld North WEF – Fauna & Flora Specialist Scoping Study 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 2 Compliance with Appendix 6 of the 2014 EIA Regulations, as Amended .................................................. 4 Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................................... 6 List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. 8 Short CV/Summary of Expertise – Simon Todd ........................................................................................ 10 Specialist Declaration ............................................................................................................................... 12 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Scope of Study .......................................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Approach & Assessment Philosophy ........................................................................................ 14 1.3 Relevant Aspects of the Development ....................................................................................