Ecological Impact Assessment

ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

RAMOTSHERE MOILOA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY (RMLM) BERG AND DROOGE STREET RESIDENTIAL EXTENSION, ZEERUST, NORTH WEST

ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

Prepared for:

Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality

Prepared by:

JULY 2019

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

REVISIONS TRACKING TABLE

CES Report Revision and Tracking Schedule Document Title: Ecological Impact Assessment for the Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality (RMLM) Berg and Drooge Street Residential Development, Zeerust, North West. Client Name & Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality (RMLM) Address:

Status: Final

Issue Date: 12 July 2019

Lead Author: Mr Aidan Gouws

Reviewers: Ms Tarryn Martin and Ms Amber Jackson Study Leader/ Registered Environmental Assessment Practitioner – Approval: No. of hard No. electronic Report Distribution Circulated to copies copies

Ramotshere Moiloa Local 1 Municipality

Report Version Date

12 July 2019

This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of CES’s appointment and contains intellectual property and proprietary information that is protected by copyright in favour of CES. The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the prior written consent of CES. This document is prepared exclusively for use by CES’s client. CES accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes for which it was prepared. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part), use or [email protected] rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written www.cesnet.co.za permission of CES. The document is subject to all confidentiality, copyright, trade secrets rules and intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) ii

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

AUTHOR AND SPECIALIST

Mr Aidan Gouws, Environmental Consultant and Ecological Specialist

Aidan obtained his MSc in Environmental Science (Cum laude) from Rhodes University, having conducted research on the spatio-temporal dynamics of Acacia dealbata invasions and broader land-use and cover changes in the northern Eastern Cape, funded through a study bursary awarded by the Agricultural Research Council (ARC). Prior to this, he obtained his BSc Honours in Geographical and Environmental Sciences (Cum laude) from the University of Pretoria, studying plant ecology and EIA methodology amongst others. He is also member of the Golden Key Honours Society. Aidan joined CES in 2018 and has been involved in several projects, including Basic Assessments, Full Scoping and Environmental Impact Assessments, Environmental Audits and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) Audits. He works from the Johannesburg office and his interests include the general Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process, GIS mapping, ecological studies and the Public Participation Process (PPP).

Ms Tarryn Martin, Principal Environmental Consultant and Report Review (Pri.Sci.Nat.)

Tarryn holds a BSc (Botany and Zoology), a BSc (Hons) in African Vertebrate Biodiversity and an MSc with distinction in Botany from Rhodes University. Tarryn’s Master’s thesis examined the impact of fire on the recovery of C3 and C4 Panicoid and non-Panicoid grasses within the context of climate change for which she won the Junior Captain Scott-Medal (Plant Science) for producing the top MSc of 2010 from the South African Academy of Science and Art as well as an Award for Outstanding Academic Achievement in Range and Forage Science from the Grassland Society of Southern Africa. Tarryn specialises in conducting vegetation assessments including vegetation and sensitivity mapping to guide developments and thereby minimise their impacts on sensitive vegetation. She has conducted a number of vegetation and impact assessments in South Africa for renewable energy EIAs and assisted with the botanical baseline survey for the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority Polihali Dam. She has also conducted a number of vegetation surveys, to IFC standards, in Mozambique, has also worked on a Critical Habitat Assessment for Sasol in Inhambane Province and has co- designed and implemented the Terrestrial Monitoring Program for Kenmare, MOMA, a heavy minerals mine in Mozambique.

Ms Amber Jackson, Principal Environmental Consultant and Report Review

Amber is a Principal Environmental Consultant and has been employed with CES for the last 7 years. She has an MPhil in Environmental Management and has a background in both Social and Ecological work. Her undergraduate degrees focused on Ecology, Conservation and Environment with particular reference to landscape effects on Herpetofauna, while her masters focused on the environmental management of social and ecological systems. During her time at CES Amber has worked extensively in South Africa and Mozambique managing a number of Environmental and Social Impact Assessments. Amongst which she has conducted large scale faunal impact assessments in the both South Africa and northern of Mozambique to both national standards and international lenders standards (AfDB, EIB and IFC), alone and assisted by and to Prof Bill Branch. Her interests include, lenders requirements, range

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) iii

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

limitation, island biogeography, ecology as well as land use and natural resource management.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) iv

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

LIST OF ACRONYMS

CBA Critical Biodiversity Area CES CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services ECO Environmental Control Officer ESA Ecological Support Area GIS Geographical Information System IAP Invasive Alien Plant IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature NEMBA National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act NWBMA North West Biodiversity Management Act NWBSP North West Biodiversity Sector Plan QDS Quarter Degree Square READ North West Department of Rural, Environment and Agricultural Development RMLM Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality SA South Africa SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute SCC Species of Conservation Concern TOPS Threatened or Protected Species

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) v

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality (RMLM) proposes to facilitate the extension of the residential area on the corner of Berg and Drooge Street – RE Portion 5 of Farm Hazia JP No 240, Zeerust, North West Province. Zeerust is located approximately 70km north-east of Mafikeng, 130km west of Rustenburg and 130km south south-east of Gaborone.

The 12.65ha area will be subdivided into approximately 100 stands. Stands will be sold to prospective residents who will then construct their own housing. Adjacent municipal services, including water, electricity, waste removal and roads will be extended into the site.

The proposed site is a green field’s site zoned for agriculture and comprised of degraded to near intact indigenous vegetation. The clearing of indigenous vegetation and transformation of open space into residential housing requires an environmental licence. The municipality will be responsible for the clearing and pegging of the site, as well as the extension of services.

The project site and surrounding areas were described using a two-phased approach. Firstly, a desktop assessment of the site was conducted in terms of current vegetation classifications and biodiversity programmes and plans. Secondly, a site visit was conducted in summer on 18 and 19 February 2019 to assess the site-specific ecological state, current land-use, identify potential sensitive ecosystems and identify plant species associated with the proposed project activities. The site visit also served to identify potential impacts of the proposed development and its impact on the surrounding ecological environment.

Using available spatial data it as determined that the project site falls within the Zeerust Thornveld vegetation type (Mucina and Rutherford, 2012) and within an area classified as an Ecological Support Area (ESA) 2, with a small portion falling within an area classified as a Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) 1.

The field survey confirmed that Zeerust Thornveld vegetation type occurs throughout the site and is considered to be moderately degraded, particularly near Drooge Street due to the edge effects from the road, i.e. people walking through the site, using the site for illegal dumping as well as for grazing livestock. This vegetation type ranges from being open thornveld throughout most of the site to a small patch of closed thornveld towards the south eastern portion of the site. The tree canopy ranges from 3-4m with emergent trees at about 5-6m. The understory is dominated by a grass layer interspersed with some herbs.

Dominant tree and shrub species include Euclea spp., Searsia lancea, Senegalia caffra, Vachellia spp., Vangueria infausta, Tarchonanthus camphoratus, Grewia flava, Gardenia volkensii var. volkensii and Ziziphus mucronata. Low growing shrubs include Asparagus africanus, Asparagus cf. laricinus and Felicia filifolia, which are interspersed with herbs such as Lippia javanica, Aneilema aequinoctiale, Chascanum hederaceum, Cyanotis speciosa, Elionurus muticus, Hibiscus microcarpus, Lasiosiphon kraussianus, Oxalis obliquifolia, Polygala hottentotta, Senecio venosus, Solanum campylacanthum and Verbena spp. The dominant grasses include Aristida congesta, Eragrostis curvula, Cymbopogon pospischilii, Heteropogon contortus, Panicum maximum and Tragus berteronianus.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) vi

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Four invasive alien plant species were recorded on site. All four species are listed as a category 1b species according to the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004): Alien and Invasive Species Lists, 2016. Species listed as 1b under the regulations require compulsory control as part of an invasive species control programme. This means that no permits are issued for the use of this species and they must be removed and destroyed by the landowner in conjunction with a government sponsored invasive species management programme.

The indigenous species recorded at the site were compared to the South African Red Data List, the TOPS list and the NWBMA, No 4. of 2016. Forty-eight species recorded on site appeared in the South African Red Data List, however all were categorised as ‘Least Concern’ species. None of the species recorded on site were SCCs in terms of the TOPS and NWBMA Schedule 2 lists. However, if species of conservation concern are found on site during the construction phase, then these species will require permits for their destruction and/or relocation.

Approximately 23 amphibian species, 19 reptile species, bird species and 110 mammal species have distribution ranges that coincide with the project site (ADU, 2019; Lepage, 2019; IUCN, 2019;) of which 20 bird and 13 mammal species are of conservation concern. However, it is very unlikely that any of these SCC occur within the development site due to limited suitable habitat and limited food/water sources. It is therefore more likely that they are found in the adjacent natural areas. Evidence of smaller mammals, such as small antelope and monkeys was found during the site visit. Scat was found during the site visit and expected to be from a Bushbuck, as well as the spoors of an antelope species. The skull of a Vervet monkey was also found and cattle were observed grazing on site. Smaller mammals like field mice, porcupines, aardvark, etc. may also occur within or around the project site, although they were not observed during the site assessment.

The project site is classified as an area of moderate sensitivity as it is moderately degraded to near intact and there is some infestation of alien species but it still provides refugia for small mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians and there are key indigenous species present. This area could successfully be rehabilitated back to its original state but the likelihood of that is doubtful given that it is used as an illegal dumping site and for grazing livestock.

Ten impacts were identified. Four impacts have a low negative significance, five have a moderate negative significance and one has a low positive significance before mitigation. With mitigation measures three impacts can be reduced from moderate to low significance.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) vii

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Without mitigation With mitigation

1, 10% 1, 10% 2, 20%

5, 50% 4, 40%

7, 70%

Moderate - Low - Low + Moderate - Low - Low +

The proposed development area will affect approximately 12.65ha of Zeerust Thornveld. The site is moderately degraded due to the disturbances caused by access road usage, grazing cattle, illegal dumping and the invasion of alien species. It is highly recommended that all invasive alien plant species in and around the proposed area are removed and the vacant erven should monitored for re-invasion between the clearance and construction phases.

The ecological impacts of all aspects for the construction of the proposed new Berg/Drooge residential development were assessed. The entire site is designated as moderately sensitive due to the vegetation remaining largely intact, despite being somewhat degraded. In light of the general degradation of the site, the absence of species of conservation concern on site and the extent of the vegetation types outside of the development area, the proposed development is considered to be ecologically acceptable, provided that mitigation measures provided in this report are implemented.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) viii

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

SPECIALIST CHECKLIST

Section NEMA 2014 Regs - Appendix 6(1) Requirement Position in report

1 A specialist report prepared in terms of these Regulations must contain—

(a) details of-

(i) the specialist who prepared the report; and Page iii

(ii) the expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist Appendix D report including a curriculum vitae; (b) a declaration that the person is independent in a form as may Appendix D be specified by the competent authority; (c) an indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the Chapter 1 report was prepared; (d) the date and season of the site investigation and the Section 1.3 and relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment; Section 2.1

(e) a description of the methodology adopted in preparing the Chapter 2 report or carrying out the specialised process; (f) the specific identified sensitivities of the site related to the Chapter 3 and 4 activity and its associated structures and infrastructure; (g) an identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers; Chapter 4

(h) a map superimposing the activity including the associated Figure 4.1 structures and infrastructure on the environmental sensitive of the site including areas to be avoided, including buffers; (i) a description of any assumptions made and any uncertainties Section 1.4 or gaps in knowledge; (j) a description of the findings and potential implications of Chapter 5 such findings on the impact of the proposed activity, including identified alternatives on the environment; (k) any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr; Chapter 5

(l) any conditions for inclusion in the environmental Chapter 6 authorization; (m) any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or Chapter 5 and 6 environmental authorisation; (n) a reasoned opinion- Chapter 6 (i) as to whether the proposed activity or portions thereof should be authorized and (ii) if the opinion is that the proposed activity of portion 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 Refer to Basic undertaken during the course of preparing the specialist Assessment Report report;

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) ix

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Section NEMA 2014 Regs - Appendix 6(1) Requirement Position in report

(p) a summary and copies of any comments received during any Refer to Basic consultation process and where applicable all responses Assessment Report thereto; and (q) any other information requested by the competent authority. None for the ecological report

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) x

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 1

1.1 Project description and Locality ...... 1 1.2 Objectives and terms of reference ...... 2 1.3 Limitations and assumptions ...... 3 2 METHODOLOGY ...... 4

2.1 The assessment ...... 4 2.2 Species of conservation concern ...... 4 2.3 Sample site selection ...... 4 2.4 Vegetation mapping ...... 5 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ...... 7

3.1 Description of the biophysical environment ...... 7 3.2 Current land use ...... 8 3.3 North West Biodiversity Sector Plan ...... 9 3.4 Description of the vegetation ...... 11 3.4.1 National vegetation map: expected vegetation types ...... 11 3.4.2 Vegetation types recorded on site ...... 12 3.4.3 Alien species recorded on site ...... 14 3.4.4 Species of conservation concern recorded on site ...... 15 3.5 Description of the fauna ...... 15 3.5.1 Amphibians ...... 15 3.5.2 Reptiles ...... 15 3.5.3 Birds ...... 16 3.5.4 Mammals ...... 18 4 BIODIVERSITY AND SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT ...... 20

4.1 Sensitivity analysis ...... 20 4.2 Site sensitivity ...... 20 5 IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT ...... 22

5.1 Construction phase ...... 22 5.1.1 Impact 1: Loss of vegetation communities ...... 22 5.1.2 Impact 2: Loss of biodiversity ...... 22 5.1.3 Impact 3: Loss of floral species of conservation concern ...... 23 5.1.4 Impact 4: Habitat fragmentation ...... 23

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) xi

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

5.1.5 Impact 5: Invasion of invasive alien plant species ...... 24 5.1.6 Impact 6: Soil erosion ...... 25 5.1.7 Impact 7: Dust ...... 25 5.1.8 Impact 8: Loss of faunal habitat ...... 26 5.2 Operation phase...... 26 5.2.1 Impact 1: Creation of garden habitats ...... 26 5.2.2 Impact 2: Effects on surrounding faunal species ...... 27 5.3 Alternative options ...... 27 6 IMPACT STATEMENT, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 32

6.1 Conclusion and recommendations ...... 32 6.2 Specialist statement ...... 32 7 REFERENCES ...... 34

8 APPENDIX A: IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 36

9 APPENDIX B: BOTANICAL SPECIES LIST ...... 39

10 APPENDIX C1: AMPHIBIANS ...... 41

11 APPENDIX C2: REPTILES ...... 42

12 APPENDIX C3: AVIFAUNA ...... 44

13 APPENDIX C4: MAMMALS ...... 57

14 APPENDIX D: SPECIALIST DECLARATION AND CURRICULUM VITAE ..... 61

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) xii

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 Criteria used for the analysis of the sensitivity of the site...... 5 Table 3-1 Categories in the NWBSP (2015) ...... 9 Table 3-2 List on invasive alien species found within the proposed development area...... 15 Table 3-3 Bird SCC with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. 17 Table 3-4 Endemic birds with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site...... 17 Table 3-5 Mammal SCC with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site...... 19 Table 5-1 Proposed alternatives for the development ...... 28 Table 8-1 Ranking of evaluation criteria...... 37 Table 8-2 Matrix used to determine the overall significance of the impact based on the likelihood and effect of the impact...... 37 Table 8-3 Description of Environmental Significance Ratings and associated range of scores...... 37 Table 9-1 List of botanical species recorded on site...... 39 Table 10-1 Amphibians with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site...... 41 Table 11-1 Reptiles with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. 42 Table 12-1 Birds with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. .... 44 Table 13-1 Mammals with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site...... 57

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Proposed site for the Berg/Drooge street residential development...... 1 Figure 1-2 Locality map showing the position of Zeerust Town in relation to other major centres...... 2 Figure 3-1 Elevation profile of the proposed site. The highest point to the east is 1 470m asl and the lowest at the Drooge street border of the proposed development is 1 250m asl...... 7 Figure 3-2 Biodiversity Sector Plan for the project site...... 11 Figure 3-3 National Vegetation Map showing the vegetation type (Zeerust Thornveld) that will be affected by the residential development (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006)...... 12 Figure 3-4 Vegetation map of the project site. 12.65ha of Zeerust Thornveld will be impacted by the proposed residential development...... 13 Figure 3-5 Proximity of proposed development site to Important Birding Areas (IBAs)...... 17 Figure 4-1 Sensitivity map showing the site as an area of moderate sensitivity...... 21 Figure 6-1 Summary of the significance of impacts in the absence of mitigation measures (left) and the significance of impacts after the implementation of mitigations measures (right)...... 32

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) xiii

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCALITY

Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality (RMLM) proposes to facilitate the extension of the residential area on the corner of Berg and Drooge Street (Figure 1-1) – RE Portion 5 of Farm Hazia JP No 240, Zeerust, North West Province. Zeerust is located approximately 70km north- east of Mafikeng, 130km west of Rustenburg and 130km south south-east of Gaborone (Figure 1-2).

Figure 1-1 Proposed site for the Berg/Drooge street residential development.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 1

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Figure 1-2 Locality map showing the position of Zeerust Town in relation to other major centres.

1.2 OBJECTIVES AND TERMS OF REFERENCE

The specific terms of reference for the botanical assessment are as follows:  Describe and map the vegetation types in the project site.  Describe the floral biodiversity and record the plant species that occur in each vegetation type.  Describe biodiversity and ecological state of each vegetation unit.  Establish and map sensitive vegetation areas showing the suitability for urban development, developable area and no-go areas.  Identify species of conservation concern.  Identify alien plant species, assess the invasive potential and recommend management procedures.  Identify and assess the impacts of development on the site’s natural vegetation in terms of habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation of key ecosystems and, where feasible, provide mitigation measures to reduce these impacts.

The specific terms of reference for the faunal assessment are as follows:  Undertake a desktop assessment to identify and list faunal species likely to occur in the study region using available distribution data (Animal Demography Unit, 2019; Lepage, 2019; IUCN, 2019).  Record any faunal species or evidence of species observed on site.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 2

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

 Identify and assess the impacts of development on the site’s fauna in terms of habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation of key ecosystems and, where feasible, provide mitigation measures to reduce these impacts.

1.3 LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS

This report is based on current available information and, as a result, the following limitations and assumptions are implicit:  The report is based on a project description received from the client.  A detailed faunal survey was not conducted. The faunal survey was mainly a desktop study, using information from previous ecological surveys conducted in the area and this was supplemented by recording animal species that were observed during the site survey.  Species of Conservation Concern (SCC) are difficult to find and difficult to identify, thus species described in this report do not comprise an exhaustive list. It is almost certain that additional SCCs will be found during construction and operation of the development.  Sampling could only be carried out at one stage in the annual or seasonal cycle. The survey was conducted at the end of the flowering season and therefore some early flowering plants may not have been flowering. Consequently, some plant species may have gone undetected. However, the time available in the field, and information gathered during previous surveys, was sufficient to provide enough information to decide on the status of the affected area.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 3

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 THE ASSESSMENT

The project site and surrounding areas were described using a two-phased approach. Firstly, a desktop assessment of the site was conducted in terms of current vegetation classifications and biodiversity programmes and plans. This included the consideration of:  The South African Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2012);  The North West Biodiversity Sector Plan (NWBSP) 2015 (READ, 2015); and  Available literature on the regional vegetation.

Further to the above, a site visit was conducted in summer on 18 and 19 February 2019 to assess the site-specific ecological state, current land-use, identify potential sensitive ecosystems and identify plant species associated with the proposed project activities. The site visit also served to identify potential impacts of the proposed development and its impact on the surrounding ecological environment.

Information on the general area and plant species was also generated using historical records for the area. This information has been used to supplement the findings of this report.

2.2 SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN

Data on the known distribution and conservation status for each potential species of conservation concern has to be obtained to develop a list of ‘Species of Concern’. These species are those that may be impacted significantly by the proposed activity. In general these will be species that are already known to be threatened or at risk, or those that have restricted distributions (endemics) with a portion (at least 50%) of their known range falling within the project site i.e. strict endemic and near endemic species. Species that are afforded special protection, notably those that are protected by NEMBA (No. 10 of 2004), NWBMA (2016) Schedule 2, the National Forest Act or which occur on the South African Red Data List. According to SANBI (2019), SCCs include those belonging the following Red List categories: Extinct in the Wild (EW); Regionally Extinct (RE); Critically Endangered, Possibly Extinct (CR PE); Critically Endangered (CE); Endangered (EN); Vulnerable (VU); Near Threatened (NT); Critically Rare; Rare; Declining; or, Data deficient – Insufficient Information (DDD). This excludes species categorised as ‘Least Concern’.

2.3 SAMPLE SITE SELECTION

A sampling protocol was developed that would enable us to evaluate the existing desktop interpretations of the vegetation of the project site, to improve on them if necessary, and to add detailed information on the plant communities present. The protocol took into account the amount of time available for the study, the accessibility of different parts of the area, and limitations such as the seasonality of the vegetation.

A stratified random sampling approach was adopted, whereby initial assumptions were made about the diversity of vegetation, based on Google Earth, spatial planning tools and available literature and the area stratified into these basic types. In this way the time available was used

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 4

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

much more efficiently than in random sampling, but there is a risk of bias and the eventual results may simply ‘prove’ the assumptions.

In general, the stratification of the site was influenced by obvious features of the vegetation, such as the presence of conspicuous species or vegetation structure. These factors may be largely independent of the floristic make-up of the vegetation, and by definition the biological communities present. Sample plots were analysed by determining the dominant species in each plot, as well as any alien invasive species and potential SCCs occurring within the plots. Nine sample points were selected for the site, as shown in Figure 3-4.

Vegetation communities were then described according to the dominant species recorded from each type, and these mapped and assigned a sensitivity score.

2.4 VEGETATION MAPPING

This section of the report explains the approach to determining the ecological sensitivity of the project site on a broad scale. The approach identifies zones of high, medium and low sensitivity according to a system developed by CES and used in numerous proposed development studies. It must be noted that the sensitivity zonings in this study are based solely on ecological (primarily vegetation) characteristics and social and economic factors have not been taken into consideration. The sensitivity analysis described here is based on 10 criteria which are considered to be of importance in determining ecosystem and landscape sensitivity. The method predominantly involves identifying sensitive vegetation or habitat types, topography and land transformation (Table 2-1).

Although very simple, this method of analysis provides a good, yet conservative and precautionary assessment of the ecological sensitivity.

Table 2-1 Criteria used for the analysis of the sensitivity of the site. MODERATE LOW SENSITIVITY HIGH SENSITIVITY CRITERIA SENSITIVITY 1 10 5 Undulating; fairly Complex and uneven 1 Topography Level, or even steep slopes with steep slopes Vegetation - Restricted to a Restricted to a 2 Extent or habitat Extensive particular region/zone specific locality / site type in the region Conservation Well conserved Not well conserved, Not conserved - has a 3 status of fauna/ independent of moderate high conservation flora or habitats conservation value conservation value value Species of One or more No endangered or conservation None, although endangered and vulnerable species, 4 concern - occasional regional vulnerable species, or some indeterminate or Presence and endemics more than 2 endemics rare endemics number or rare species Habitat Extensive areas of Reasonably extensive fragmentation preferred habitat areas of preferred Limited areas of this 5 leading to loss of present elsewhere in habitat elsewhere and habitat, susceptible to viable region not susceptible habitat susceptible to fragmentation populations to fragmentation fragmentation

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 5

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

MODERATE LOW SENSITIVITY HIGH SENSITIVITY CRITERIA SENSITIVITY 1 10 5 Moderate diversity, High species diversity, Biodiversity Low diversity, or 6 and moderately high complex plant and contribution species richness species richness animal communities Site is hidden or Site is visible from Visibility of the barely visible from any some or a few vantage Site is visible from site or landscape 7 vantage points with points but is not many or all angles or from other the exception in some obtrusive or very vantage points. vantage points cases from the sea. conspicuous. Large possibility of Erosion Very stable and an Some possibility of erosion, change to the potential or area not subjected to erosion or change due 8 site or destruction due instability of the erosion. to episodic events. to climatic or other region factors. Site is difficult to Rehabilitation There is some degree Site is easily rehabilitate due to the potential of the of difficulty in 9 rehabilitated. terrain, type of habitat area or region rehabilitation of the or species required to site. reintroduce. Disturbance due There is some degree The site is hardly or to human Site is very disturbed of disturbance of the very slightly impacted 10 habitation or or degraded. site. upon by human other influences disturbance. (Alien invasives)

A Geographical Information System (GIS) map was drawn up and with the aid of a satellite image the sensitive regions and vegetation types could be plotted. The description of the sample plots helped to map the vegetation, and these descriptions as well as sensitivity ratings were illustrated on the resultant maps.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 6

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

3 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT

3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Zeerust has a local steppe climate, characterised by semi-arid conditions and low rainfall year round, with peak rainfall occurring in January (110mm) and annual rainfall averaging 583mm. The average annual temperature is 18.5ºC with the warmest month occurring in January (mean = 24.0ºC) and the coolest month in July (mean = 10.9ºC). Frost occurs relatively frequently during winter, with approximately 23 frost days annually.

The proposed development is located along a west-facing slope on the foothills of the Klein Marico River Valley on the north-eastern fringe of suburban Zeerust. The slope is gentle to moderate, with an altitudinal range of approximately 220m from the Drooge street border of the proposed site to the highest immediate peak (Plate 3-1; Figure 3-1).

Rocky outcrops and ridges of the Klein Marico River Valley Gentle to moderate slope Mixed open shrubland to low closed woodlands

Plate 3-1 Photo illustrating the topography and general vegetation of the site.

Elevation of proposed site Highest immediate peak

Figure 3-1 Elevation profile of the proposed site. The highest point to the east is 1 470m asl and

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 7

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

the lowest at the Drooge street border of the proposed development is 1 250m asl.

3.2 CURRENT LAND USE

The farm is owned by the local municipality and is currently zoned for agriculture. The project site is characterised by degraded (near the road) to near intact (towards the reservoir) vegetation. The site appears to be used as an illegal dumping ground for rubble, garden waste and household refuse (Plate 3-2). It is also used for grazing of livestock (Plate 3-3). The site is also intersected by dirt roads, which provide access to the adjacent farm to the north and the reservoir to the south.

Plate 3-2 Photo illustrating the current land use of the site as a dumping ground.

Plate 3-3 Photo illustrating the current land use of the site for grazing of livestock.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 8

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

3.3 NORTH WEST BIODIVERSITY SECTOR PLAN

The NWBSP (2015) is a biodiversity and spatial planning tool, which outlines areas containing important biodiversity needed to meet national and provincial biodiversity targets. This is achieved by identifying a network of Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) and Ecological Support Areas (ESAs) in the province based on a systematic biodiversity plan. In general, CBAs are described as natural or near-natural areas that are important for preserving both biodiversity pattern and ecological process, whereas ESAs are semi-natural or transformed areas that at least retain some ecological function (Table 3-1). More than half of the province is covered by CBAs (29.1%) and ESAs (27.6%) collectively, with the remainder covered by Other Natural Areas (18%), areas with no natural habitat remaining (23%) and a small portion covered by Protected Areas (2.3%).

Table 3-1 Categories in the NWBSP (2015) Category Management objectives

Protected areas As per protected areas management plan

CBA1 Maintain in a natural or near-natural state that maximises the retention of biodiversity pattern and ecological process:

 Ecosystems and species fully or largely intact and undisturbed.  These are areas with high irreplaceability or low flexibility in terms of meeting biodiversity pattern targets. If the biodiversity features targeted in these areas are lost then targets will not be met.  These are biodiversity features that are at, or beyond, their limits of acceptable change. CBA2 Maintain in a natural or near-natural state that maximises the retention of biodiversity pattern and ecological process:

 Ecosystems and species fully or largely intact and undisturbed.  Areas with intermediate irreplaceability or some flexibility in terms of meeting biodiversity targets. There are options for loss of some components of biodiversity in these landscapes without compromising the ability to achieve biodiversity targets, although loss of these sites would require alternative sites to be added to the portfolio of CBAs.  These are biodiversity features that are approaching but have not passed their limits of acceptable change. ESA1 Maintain in at least a semi-natural state as ecologically functional landscapes that retain basic natural attributes:

 Ecosystem still in a natural, near-natural state or semi-natural state, and has not been previously developed.  Ecosystems moderately to significantly disturbed but still able to maintain basic functionality.  Individual species or other biodiversity indicators may be severely disturbed or reduced.  These are areas with low irreplaceability with respect to biodiversity pattern targets only. ESA2 Maintain as much ecological functionality as possible (generally these areas have been substantially modified):

 Maintain current land use or restore area to a natural state.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 9

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Category Management objectives

 Ecosystem NOT in a natural or near-natural state  Ecosystem significantly disturbed but still able to maintain some ecological functionality.  Individual species or other biodiversity indicators are severely disturbed or reduced and these are areas that have low irreplaceability with respect to biodiversity pattern targets only;  These are areas with low irreplaceability with respect to biodiversity pattern targets only. These areas are required to maintain ecological processes especially landscape connectivity. Other Natural Areas Production landscapes and No Natural Habitat Remaining  Manage land to optimise sustainability utilisation of natural areas

According to the NWBSP (2015), the residential development will impact 12.05ha of an Ecological Support Area (ESA) 1, as well as a small portion (0.0022ha) of a Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) 2 (Figure 3-2).

ESA 1 are “areas with low irreplaceability with respect to biodiversity pattern targets”, which includes moderately to significantly disturbed ecosystems in a natural, near-natural or semi- natural state, where “individual species or other biodiversity indicators may be severely disturbed or reduced” (READ, 2015). The management of these areas should be to “maintain in a functional state, avoid intensification of existing land uses (e.g. intensive agriculture including game breeding, settlement and mining/industry are not desired), and rehabilitate to a natural or near-natural state, where possible” (READ, 2015). The affected ESA 1 areas include a biodiversity corridor, as well as hills and ridges (READ, 2015).

CBA 2 are “areas with intermediate irreplaceability or some flexibility in terms of meeting biodiversity targets. There are options for loss of some components of biodiversity in these landscapes without compromising the ability to achieve biodiversity targets, although loss of these sites would require alternative sites to be added to the portfolio of CBAs” (READ, 2015). According to the NWBSP (2015), “these are biodiversity features that are approaching but have not passed their limits of acceptable change”, where the management objective is to “maintain in a natural or near-natural state that maximises the retention of biodiversity pattern and ecological process” (READ, 2015). The affected CBA in the northern corner of the site and surrounding slopes are important habitats for plants.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 10

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3-2 Biodiversity Sector Plan for the project site.

3.4 DESCRIPTION OF THE VEGETATION

3.4.1 National vegetation map: expected vegetation types

Mucina and Rutherford (2006) developed the National Vegetation map as part of a South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) funded project: “It was compiled to provide floristically based vegetation units of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland at a greater level of detail than had been available before.” The map was developed using a wealth of data from several contributors and has allowed for the best national vegetation map to date, the last being that of Acocks developed over 50 years ago. This project had two main aims:  to determine the variation in and units of southern African vegetation based on the analysis and synthesis of data from vegetation studies throughout the region, and  to compile a vegetation map. The aim of the map was to accurately reflect the distribution and variation on the vegetation and indicate the relationship of the vegetation with the environment. For this reason the collective expertise of vegetation scientists from universities and state departments were harnessed to make this project as comprehensive as possible.

The map and accompanying book describes each vegetation type in detail, along with the most important species including endemic species and those that are biogeographically important. This is the most comprehensive data for vegetation types in South Africa. Only one type of vegetation type will be impacted by the residential development, Zeerust Thornveld (Figure 3-3).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 11

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

The Zeerust Thornveld is primarily found in North West Province, running from the Lobatsi River plains through Zeerust to the Pilansberg flats. The vegetation is characterised by deciduous, open to dense short thorny woodlands dominated by Senegalia and Vachellia (previously Acacia) species, with a graminoid-dominated herbaceous layer on deep, basic, clay soils between ridges. Although only 4% is statutory conserved of the targeted 19%, SANBI considers this vegetation type as Least Threatened. It is estimated that 16% has been transformed by agriculture and urban development.

The other vegetation type present in the general vicinity is the Dwarsberg-Swartruggens Mountain Bushveld which is characteristically variable in structure depending on the topography and habitat, with combinations of tree and shrub layers and a dense grass layer, as well as bush clumps. This vegetation type is listed as Least Threatened.

Figure 3-3 National Vegetation Map showing the vegetation type (Zeerust Thornveld) that will be affected by the residential development (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006).

3.4.2 Vegetation types recorded on site

The proposed development site is comprised of a single vegetation type, namely Zeerust Thornveld (Figure 3-4).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 12

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3-4 Vegetation map of the project site. 12.65ha of Zeerust Thornveld will be impacted by the proposed residential development.

Zeerust Thornveld This vegetation type occurs throughout the site and is considered to be moderately degraded, particularly near Drooge Street due to the edge effects from the road, i.e. people walking through the site, using the site for illegal dumping as well as for grazing livestock.

This vegetation type ranges from being open thornveld throughout most of the site (Plate 3-4) to a small patch of near-intact closed thornveld towards the south eastern portion of the site (Plate 3-5). The tree canopy ranges from 3-4m with emergent trees at about 5-6m. The understory is dominated by a grass layer interspersed with some herbs.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 13

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Plate 3-4 Open thornveld, occupying the largest area at the proposed development site.

Plate 3-5 Closed thornveld found on the south east portion of the proposed development.

3.4.3 Alien species recorded on site

Four invasive alien plant species were recorded on site (Table 3-2). All four species are listed as a category 1b species according to the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004): Alien and Invasive Species Lists, 2016. Species listed as 1b under the regulations require compulsory control as part of an invasive species control programme. This means that no permits are issued for the use of this species and they must be removed and destroyed by the landowner in conjunction with a government sponsored invasive species management programme.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 14

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Table 3-2 List on invasive alien species found within the proposed development area. Scientific Name Common Name NEMBA Status (2016) Acacia mearnsii Black Wattle 1b Lantana camara Tickberry 1b Opuntia ficus-indica Prickly Pear 1b Verbena brasiliensis Brazilian Verbena 1b

3.4.4 Species of conservation concern recorded on site

The indigenous species recorded at the site were compared to the South African Red Data List, the TOPS list and the NWBMA, No 4. of 2016. Forty-eight species recorded on site appeared in the South African Red Data List, however all were categorised as ‘Least Concern’ species (Table 9-1). None of the species recorded on site were SCCs in terms of the TOPS and NWBMA Schedule 2 lists. However, if species of conservation concern are found on site during the construction phase, then these species will require permits for their destruction and/or relocation.

3.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE FAUNA

Of the 39 amphibian species in North West Province, 23 amphibian species have a distribution range which includes the site (ADU, 2019; IUCN, 2019). 12 of these species have been recorded within a 30 km2 radius of the site (QDS 2526CA) (Appendix C1: Table 10-1) (ADU, 2019). No SCC are likely to be found on site and species likely to occur on site are all listed as of least concern.

3.5.1 Amphibians

Of the 39 amphibian species in North West Province, 23 amphibian species have a distribution range which includes the site (ADU, 2019; IUCN, 2019). 12 of these species have been recorded within a 30 km2 radius of the site (QDS 2526CA) (Table 10-1) (ADU, 2019). No SCC are likely to be found on site and species likely to occur on site are all listed as of least concern.

3.5.2 Reptiles

Of the 113 reptile species in North West Province, approximately 59 species have a distribution range which includes the site (ADU, 2019; IUCN, 2019). Seven reptile species have been recorded within QDS 2526CA within which the site is located (Appendix C2: Table 11-1) (ADU, 2019). No SCC are likely to be found on site, and species likely to occur on site are all listed as of least concern (Bates, et al., 2014). The reptilian species that may occur on site includes common bushveld species of lizard (e.g. the Striped Skink, Common Girdled Lizard and Common rough-scaled lizard), snake (e.g. the Brown House Snake and Mole Snake) and possibly tortoise (e.g. the Leopard tortoise). However, these are not at significant risk because this is not the only habitat available to them, with a large area of natural land available to the east (Figure 3-4). Fossorial lizards (e.g. the Thin-tailed Legless Skink and Cape Worm Lizard) and snakes (e.g. Bibron’s Blind Snake and Bibron’s Burrowing Asp) may also be discovered on site during earthworks and if found should be appropriately relocated. Additionally, a number of venomous snakes common to the South African veld may also occur

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 15

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

on site, which will require cautionary measures to be taken during construction. These may include the Black Mamba, Boomslang and Puff Adder. 3.5.3 Birds

In terms of proximity to Important Birding Areas (IBAs), the site of the proposed development is situated approximately 35km from Botsalano Nature Reserve IBA, 100km from Pilanesberg National Park IBA and 110km from Magaliesberg IBA (Figure 3-5).

Of the 553 bird species in North West Province, approximately 412 species occur within the Madikwe region (Lepage, 2019). 390 of these species may occur within 25km of the project site (Appendix C3: Table 12-1) (IUCN, 2019). Twenty species of conservation concern (10 threatened and 10 near-threatened) (Table 3-3) and three species endemic to South Africa (Table 3-4) are likely to occur in the Madikwe region and may occur on site.

Some of the near-threatened species may be found on or near the site (e.g. the Mountain Pipit, Pallid Harrier and Bateleur). However, the proposed development does not pose a significant risk to these species given their widespread distribution. Furthermore, it is very unlikely that any of the vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered SCC are nesting, breeding and/or feeding on the site given the lack of suitable and available habitat for the larger species (e.g. cliff faces and forests habitats for vultures and eagles, or agricultural land and pristine savannah for Blue Crane and Secretary Bird) and waterfowl (e.g. permanent water sources such as dams and lakes for Maccoa Duck, Lesser Flamingo, etc.), as well as the proximity of the site to the neighbouring residential areas and the associated noise, vehicular traffic and foot traffic through and around the site. Most of these species are more likely to be found nesting, breeding and/or feeding at the Botsalano Nature Reserve. Only relatively small, disturbance tolerant species, commonly found in and around urban and suburban areas in South Africa are likely to be found within the proposed development site. These may include the Red-eyed Dove, Ring-necked Dove, Speckled Pigeon, Common Myna, Speckled Mousebird, Kurrichane Thrush, Hadada Ibis, Crowned Lapwing and Guinea fowl.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 16

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3-5 Proximity of proposed development site to Important Birding Areas (IBAs).

Table 3-3 Bird SCC with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. Scientific name Common name Red list category Gyps africanus White-backed Vulture Critically endangered Necrosyrtes monachus Hooded Vulture Critically endangered Gyps coprotheres Cape Griffon Endangered Torgos tracheliotos Lappet-faced Vulture Endangered Anthropoides paradiseus Blue Crane Vulnerable Aquila rapax Tawny Eagle Vulnerable Bucorvus leadbeateri Southern Ground-Hornbill Vulnerable Oxyura maccoa Maccoa Duck Vulnerable Polemaetus bellicosus Martial Eagle Vulnerable Sagittarius serpentarius Secretary Bird Vulnerable Anthus hoeschi Mountain Pipit Near-threatened Ardeotis kori Kori Bustard Near-threatened Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper Near-threatened Charadrius pallidus Chestnut-banded Plover Near-threatened Circus macrourus Pallid Harrier Near-threatened Falco vespertinus Red-footed Falcon Near-threatened Glareola nordmanni Black-winged Pratincole Near-threatened Numenius arquata Eurasian Curlew Near-threatened Phoeniconaias minor Lesser Flamingo Near-threatened Terathopius ecaudatus Bateleur Near-threatened (Lepage, 2019)

Table 3-4 Endemic birds with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 17

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Scientific name Common name Country/Province Eastern Long-billed South Africa – Limpopo, North West, Certhilauda semitorquata Lark Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, Eastern Cape South Africa – North West, Mpumalanga, Lamprotornis bicolor African Pied Starling Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern Cape, Western Cape South Africa – Limpopo, North West, Ploceus capensis Cape Weaver Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, Eastern Cape (Lepage, 2019)

3.5.4 Mammals

Of the 212 mammal species in North West Province, 110 mammal species have a distribution range which includes the site (Appendix C4: Table 13-1) (ADU, 2019; IUCN, 2019). 41 of these species have been recorded in QDS 2526CA within which the site is located (ADU, 2019).

Evidence of smaller mammals, such as small antelope and monkeys was found on site. Scat was found during the site visit and expected to be from a Bushbuck (Plate 3-6A), as well as the spoors of an antelope species (Plate 3-6B). The skull of a Vervet monkey was also found (Plate 3-6C) and cattle were observed grazing on site (Plate 3-6D). Smaller mammals like field mice, porcupines, aardvark, etc. may also occur within or around the project site, although they were not observed during the site assessment.

Plate 3-6 Evidence of mammals within the proposed development area. (A) Bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) scat; (B) Antelope spoors; (C) Vervet monkey (Chlorocebus pygerythrus) skull; (D) Cattle grazing. *All identifications require confirmation.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 18

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Thirteen (13) SCC may occur within a 25km radius of the project site (Table 3-5) (IUCN, 2019). However, most of these SCC species are unlikely to be found on site due to no or limited suitable available habitat, with the exception of the White-tailed rat. Records from the North West Province indicate that the White-tail Rat often occur in sparse, heavily-grazed and disturbed grassland (Avenant, et al., 2016). Similarly, other large carnivores are unlikely to found within the project site given the site is neighboured by residential areas and receives moderate foot and vehicular traffic. Larger ungulates, including domesticated cattle (observed, Plate 3.6) and large antelope (reported by neighbouring property owners of the site) may occasionally be found grazing or browsing within the project site and its surroundings.

Table 3-5 Mammal SCC with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. QDS 2526CA Scientific name Common name Red list category (ADU, 2019) Carnivora Acinonyx jubatus Cheetah Vulnerable Felis nigripes Black-footed Cat Vulnerable Panthera pardus Leopard Vulnerable 1 Hyaena brunnea Brown Hyena Near Threatened 1 Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter Near Threatened 1 Cetartiodactyla Syncerus caffer African Buffalo Near Threatened Giraffa camelopardalis Giraffe Vulnerable Hippopotamus amphibius Hippopotamus Vulnerable Perissodactyla Ceratotherium simum White Rhinoceros Near Threatened Diceros bicornis Black Rhinoceros Critically Endangered Pholidota Smutsia temminckii Temminck's Ground Pangolin Vulnerable Rodentia Otomys auratus Vlei Rat Near Threatened Mystromys albicaudatus White-tailed Rat Vulnerable 3

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 19

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

4 BIODIVERSITY AND SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT

4.1 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The sensitivity map was developed by identifying areas of high, medium and low sensitivity (Figure 4-1).

Areas of high sensitivity include:  Process areas such as rivers, wetlands and streams that are important for ecosystem functioning, including surface and ground water as well as animal and plant dispersal;  Areas that have a high species richness;  Areas that are not significantly impacted, transformed or degraded by current land use; and  Areas that contain the majority of species of conservation concern found in the area and may contain high numbers of globally important species, or comprise part of a globally important vegetation type.

Areas of medium sensitivity include:  Areas that still provide a valuable contribution to biodiversity and ecosystem functioning despite being degraded;  Degraded areas that still have a relatively high species richness; and  Degraded areas that still contain species of conservation concern.

Areas of low sensitivity include:  Areas that are highly impacted by current land use and provide little value to the ecosystem; and  Highly degraded areas that are unlikely to harbour any species of conservation concern.

4.2 SITE SENSITIVITY

The project site is classified as an area of moderate sensitivity (Figure 4-1) as it is moderately degraded and there is some infestation of alien species but it still provides refugia for small mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians and there are key indigenous species present. This area could be successfully rehabilitated back to its original state but the likelihood of that is doubtful given that it is used as an illegal dumping site and for grazing livestock.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 20

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Figure 4-1 Sensitivity map showing the site as an area of moderate sensitivity.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 21

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

5 IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT

This study provides the necessary information to assess the impacts of the project on the ecology of the site at the appropriate spatial and temporal scales.

5.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE

This phase assesses the impacts associated with the clearing and levelling of the land for the subdivision and establishment of the erven, as well as the subsequent construction of houses.

5.1.1 Impact 1: Loss of vegetation communities

Cause and comment: Approximately 12.65ha of Zeerust Thornveld will be lost as a result of clearing for the construction of houses and establishment of gardens within each erf. Since the vegetation is only lightly infested with alien species and still represents the natural vegetation, the severity of the impact will be moderate, with an overall significance of moderate negative.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 1: Loss of Zeerust Thornveld Without Mitigation Permanent Localised Moderate Definite MODERATE - With Mitigation Permanent Localised Moderate Definite MODERATE -

Mitigation and Management: The following mitigation actions are suggested:  Clearing must be kept to a minimum, particularly upslope of the proposed development.  Slope stabilisation and anti-erosion measures should be employed in steep-sloping areas.  A written method statement should be given to each new landowner who purchases each erf to encourage them and their contractors to adhere to the following measures: o Topsoil should be stockpiled on site (and separately to the subsoil) and used to landscape the garden. o All contractors who work on site must be prohibited from making fires, harvesting plants and animals from the site and surrounds. o Residents should be encouraged to use indigenous species in their gardens.

5.1.2 Impact 2: Loss of biodiversity

Cause and comment: The subdivision and subsequent clearing of land for the construction of houses will result in the permanent loss of general biodiversity. The severity of the impact will be moderate and

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 22

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

the overall significance moderately negative because areas of the biodiversity on the entire site will be lost.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 2: Loss of biodiversity Without Mitigation Permanent Study Area Moderate Definite MODERATE - With Mitigation Permanent Localised Moderate Definite MODERATE -

Mitigation Measures:  In addition to the mitigation measures listed under impact 1 it is recommended that the following mitigation measures are implemented: o Alien invasive species should be removed from the areas where development will not occur. The vacant erven should monitored for re-invasion by RMLM and/or contractor between the clearance and construction phases. An invasive alien plant management plan must be drafted and implemented by RMLM and/or contractor. o The construction area must be demarcated and no unauthorised activities must occur outside of the construction footprint.

5.1.3 Impact 3: Loss of floral species of conservation concern

Cause and comment: Although most of the species recorded on site were present in the South African Red Data List, all plant species were listed as ‘Least Concern’ and none of the plant species were listed as TOPS or NWBMA Schedule 2 species. However, there may be a few species such as geophytes that went undetected due to the time of year the assessment was done. Clearing for the subdivision of the land and construction of the houses could result in the loss of some of these species but this is unlikely to affect the population’s survival given the small area that will be affected. The overall significance of the impact is therefore low.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 3: Loss of Species of Conservation Concern Without Mitigation Permanent Localised Slight May occur LOW - With Mitigation Permanent Localised Slight May occur LOW -

Mitigation Measures: Refer to mitigation measures listed under impact 1 and 2.

5.1.4 Impact 4: Habitat fragmentation

Cause and comment: Fragmentation is one of the most important impacts on vegetation as it creates breaks in previously continuous vegetation, causing a reduction in the gene pool and a decrease in

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 23

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

species richness and diversity. This impact occurs when more and more areas are cleared for residential development, agriculture and/or road construction resulting in the isolation of functional ecosystems, which results in reduced biodiversity and reduced movement due to the absence of ecological corridors.

Edge effects may occur on adjacent properties that occur along the boundary of development and roads which may further compound the impacts associated with fragmentation and further reduce population numbers to below sustainable thresholds, potentially causing local extinctions.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 4: Habitat fragmentation Without Mitigation Permanent Study Area Moderate Probable MODERATE- With Mitigation Permanent Study Area Slight Probable LOW -

Mitigation Measures: Refer to mitigation measures listed under impact 1.

5.1.5 Impact 5: Invasion of invasive alien plant species

Cause and comment: A few individuals of invasive alien plant species were recorded on site. Although few in number, neighbouring populations may be able to invade the adjacent areas more readily if disturbed as the disruption of habitats often exacerbates the infestation of alien species unless these are controlled. Areas disturbed during clearing will be vulnerable to infestation if left exposed for too long before construction commences. Similarly, areas disturbed during the construction phase will be vulnerable to infestations unless rehabilitated to prevent invasive alien plant species from establishing themselves. In the absence of mitigation, the likelihood of invasion is probable and the impact could be severe, resulting in a moderately negative overall impact. However, this impact can be mitigated to one of low significance.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 5: Invasion of Invasive Alien Plant Species Without Mitigation Permanent Study area Severe Probable MODERATE - With Mitigation Short term Localised Slight May occur LOW -

Mitigation Measures:  An invasive alien plant management plan must be designed and implemented by RMLM and/or the contractor to monitor and remove alien species within and around the proposed site. The vacant erven should monitored for re-invasion by RMLM and/or contractor between the clearance and construction phases. This plan must designate management units and prescribe the most effective method of removing the species.  Disturbance should be limited to the construction footprint to prevent the establishment of invasive plants.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 24

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

5.1.6 Impact 6: Soil erosion

Cause and comment: After the clearance of vegetation and before construction of houses, the soil will be disturbed and vulnerable to erosion. In the absence of mitigation, the likelihood and severity of this impact will increase the longer the soil is exposed. However, if mitigation measures are implemented this can be reduced to a low negative significance if the recommended mitigation measures are implemented.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 6: Soil erosion Medium Without Mitigation Study Area Moderate Probable MODERATE - term With Mitigation Short term Localised Slight May occur LOW -

Mitigation Measures: Refer to mitigation measures listed under impact 1. Additionally, clearing must only occur immediately prior to construction to minimise the amount of time the soil is left bare and vulnerable to erosion.

5.1.7 Impact 7: Dust

Cause and comment: During clearing and construction, dust may be generated, especially where there is exposed ground. Specific activities that may contribute to the release of dust include offloading and stockpiling of building materials such as sand, storage of excavated materials and movement of heavy vehicles. The generation of dust may be exacerbated during windy, dry periods. In addition to dust, air pollution may result from the exhaust fumes emitted by construction vehicles, especially if the vehicles have not been serviced correctly. Dust and air pollution may affect the processes of photosynthesis, respiration and transpiration in plants, potentially resulting in a localised decreases in vegetation cover, primary production and species richness.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 7: Dust Without Mitigation Short term Study Area Moderate Probable LOW - With Mitigation Short term Localised Slight Probable LOW -

Mitigation Measures:  Employ dust suppression measures such as wetting of the project site during dry, windy periods.  Clearing must only occur immediately prior to construction to minimise the amount of time the soil is left bare and vulnerable to erosion.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 25

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

5.1.8 Impact 8: Loss of faunal habitat

Cause and comment: The clearance of vegetation and construction of houses will remove a number of micro habitats within the project site, including the taller established trees, the thicket-like shrub canopy and floor, the grassy understorey of the savannah and the rocky outcrops. However, the scale of the impact will be localised and the significance of the impact will be slight given the scarcity of fauna recorded on site and the large available natural land to the east.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 8: Loss of Faunal habitat Without Mitigation Permanent Localised Slight May Occur LOW - With Mitigation Permanent Localised Slight May Occur LOW -

Mitigation Measures:  Clearing of trees should take place in winter months, to prevent birds and bats establishing nesting grounds and starting to breed and rear young in the spring and summer months.  All clearing activities must deploy search and rescue teams in-front of clearing machinery to assist in relocating slower moving faunal species e.g. tortoises.  Where feasible, large established trees and rocky outcrops should be left and incorporated into the garden design of each erf.

5.2 OPERATION PHASE

This phase assesses the impacts associated with the operation of the residential area once developed.

5.2.1 Impact 1: Creation of garden habitats

Cause and comment: The proposed housing development may result in the creation of garden habitats and numerous new microhabitats, particularly for lizards and avifauna. This would be a low beneficial impact.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 1: Creation of garden habitats Slight Without Mitigation Permanent Localised May Occur LOW + (beneficial) Slight With Mitigation Permanent Localised May Occur LOW + (beneficial)

Mitigation Measures:  Maintenance of residential gardens.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 26

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

5.2.2 Impact 2: Effects on surrounding faunal species

Cause and comment: In contrast to Impact 1 above, the proposed development and associated garden habitats may also bring undesirable pest species (e.g. rodents and invasive avifauna), as well as potentially dangerous species (e.g. snakes and baboons), into close contact with the new residents. Pests and dangerous species may pose nuisance and harm to the new resident, respectively. Similarly, inappropriate pest control (e.g. poisons and traps) could may pose harm to not only the pest species, but also inadvertently affect other faunal species. Additionally, the introduction of pets such as domestic cats to the area may have adverse effects on local birds. The severity and overall significance of this impact would be slight and low, respectively.

Effect Risk or Overall Impact Temporal Spatial Severity of Likelihood Significance Scale Scale Impact Impact 2: Effects on surrounding faunal species Without Mitigation Permanent Localised Slight May occur LOW - With Mitigation Permanent Localised Slight May occur LOW -

Mitigation measures:  Write into the title deed that annual pest control services are recommended.  Supply resident with contact details for local pest control services and snake handlers.  Appropriate, environmentally-friendly pest management should be adopted.

5.3 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

The following alternatives were proposed for this development (Table 5-1).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 27

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Table 5-1 Proposed alternatives for the development Reasonable Alternative level Alternatives Advantages Disadvantages Comment and Feasible

Property or location Alternative location 1 - Current  Moderately disturbed  Loss of YES The main determining factors proposed site (Preferred site. indigenous for selecting the proposed This refers to the alternative).  Located close to vegetation location were:- fundamental location existing necessary (12.65ha). options, and the This site has been selected as is  Available land, which is infrastructure such  Potential loss of environmental risks and currently open, near-natural owned by the applicant as access roads, species of impacts associated with land, owned by the applicant (RMLM). sewage line and conservation such options. (RMLM). The site is easily  Proximity to existing water reticulation concern accessible from Drooge Street residential neighbourhood. system.  Increased and is adjacent to existing  Close to existing  Is easily accessible fragmentation of middle income housing to the infrastructure such as from Drooge Street. sensitive west and a military base to the internal access roads,  Located adjacent to vegetation north west. sewage system and water developed areas to  Surrounded by reticulation. The adjacency of the site to avoid unnecessary natural area to  Adjacent to both developed existing development will reduce habitat the east, which and natural areas. unnecessary ecological fragmentation, which may become

fragmentation. However, the would negatively degraded due to surrounding natural area to the impact on the edge effects east will become susceptible to biodiversity. of the degradation due to the edge development, effects of the development. The which would adjacency of the site to existing negatively impact infrastructure such as sewage on biodiversity. and water reticulation systems  Loss of faunal will also make it more cost species. effective to extend these services into the site.

Currently, the site appears to be used as an illegal dumping

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 28

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Reasonable Alternative level Alternatives Advantages Disadvantages Comment and Feasible

ground for rubble, garden waste and household refuse.

Alternative location 2 - Bok - Disturbed site. - Loss of degraded NO The main determining factors Street, RE of Portion 5 of the - Located close to vegetation. for selecting the proposed Farm Hazia No 240 JP existing necessary - Currently location were:- (25°33'24.4"S 26°05'12.9"E). infrastructure such occupied by  Available land, which is as access roads, informal settlers. This site was considered as is owned by the applicant sewage line and owned by the applicant (RMLM). (RMLM). water reticulation The site is easily accessible  Proximity to existing system. from Bok Street and is residential neighbourhood. - Is easily accessible surrounded by existing  Close to existing from Bok Street. development, namely low-to- infrastructure such as - Located adjacent to middle income housing, which internal access roads, developed areas to would reduce unnecessary sewage system and water avoid unnecessary ecological fragmentation of the reticulation. habitat site. The adjacency of the site to  Adjacent to developed fragmentation, which existing infrastructure such as areas. would negatively sewage and water reticulation  This alternative is currently impact on systems would also make it occupied by informal biodiversity. more cost effective to extend settlers and is therefore the these services into the site. less preferred option.

However, the area is currently widely occupied by an informal settlements.

Layout Alternatives Alternative Layout

This refers to different At the time of writing this report, spatial configurations of no layout or layout alternatives were available. However, the

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 29

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Reasonable Alternative level Alternatives Advantages Disadvantages Comment and Feasible

an activity on a project will include particular site. approximately 100 erven adjoining and internal municipal services, including roads, electricity and water systems.

Land Use Alternatives Alternative Land Use 1 -  Moderately disturbed  Loss of YES The main determining factors Current proposed site (Preferred site. indigenous for selecting the proposed This refers to different alternative).  Located close to vegetation location were:- land uses of a particular existing necessary (12.65ha). site. Residential development was  High demand from the infrastructure such  Potential loss of selected because of high public for serviced stands as access roads, species of demand from the public for for residential purposes. sewage line and conservation serviced stands for residential  Proximity to existing water reticulation concern purposes. residential neighbourhood. system.  Increased  Close to existing  Is easily accessible fragmentation of infrastructure such as from Drooge Street. sensitive internal access roads,  Located adjacent to vegetation sewage system and water developed areas to  Surrounded by reticulation. avoid unnecessary natural area to  Adjacent to both developed habitat the east, which and natural areas. fragmentation, which may become  This alternative will have a would negatively degraded due to larger impact on existing impact on the edge effects biodiversity and is therefore biodiversity. of the the less preferred option. development,

which would negatively impact on biodiversity.  Loss of faunal species.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 30

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Reasonable Alternative level Alternatives Advantages Disadvantages Comment and Feasible

Alternative Land Use 2 – - Conserves current - Loss of housing NO  Moderately disturbed site Conservational recreational vegetation cover opportunities for  Adjacent to developed area and reduces further the town areas to avoid unnecessary degradation. - Would require habitat fragmentation and The site could be transformed the municipality edge effects. into a conservational and to maintain this recreational area – for example, area and it is for walking trails, picnics, unlikely they birding, etc. have budget allocated for this task

No-go option The site will remain vegetated. The vegetation on site The vegetation on YES Although the ecological impacts will remain largely intact site will continue to will be lower for the no-go This refers to the and there will be degrade due to its alternative, there will be a loss of current status quo and minimal impact to the current land use. social benefits to the local the risks and impacts botanical biodiversity people who require housing. associated to it. and fauna. It is likely that the vegetation at the site will continue to degrade if the site is continued to be used for grazing and as a dumping site.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 31

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

6 IMPACT STATEMENT, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Ten ecological impacts were identified. Prior to the implementation of mitigation measures, four impacts have a low negative significance, five have a moderate negative significance and one has a low positive significance. With mitigation measures three impacts can be reduced from moderate to low significance (Figure 6-1).

Without mitigation With mitigation

1, 10% 1, 10% 2, 20%

5, 50% 4, 40%

7, 70%

Moderate - Low - Low + Moderate - Low - Low +

Figure 6-1 Summary of the significance of impacts in the absence of mitigation measures (left) and the significance of impacts after the implementation of mitigations measures (right).

It is highly recommended that all invasive alien plant species in and around the proposed area are removed and the vacant erven should be monitored for re-invasion between the clearance and construction phases.

6.2 SPECIALIST STATEMENT

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 32

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

development is considered to be ecologically acceptable, provided that mitigation measures provided in this report are implemented.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 33

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

7 REFERENCES

Animal Demography Unit, 2019. FrogMAP Virtual Museum. [Online] Available at: http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=FrogMAP [Accessed 13 February 2019]. Animal Demography Unit, 2019. MammalMAP Virtual Museumhttp://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=MammalMAP. [Online] Available at: http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=MammalMAP [Accessed 13 February 2019]. Animal Demography Unit, 2019. ReptileMAP Virtual Museum. [Online] Available at: http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=ReptileMAP [Accessed 13 February 2019]. Avenant, N. et al., 2016. A conservation assessment of Mystromys albicaudatus. In: M. F. R. L. Child, E. Do Linh San, D. Raimondo & H. T. Davies-Mostert, eds. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South Africa: South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust. Bates, M. F. et al., 2014. Atlas and red list of the reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Pretoria: South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI). IUCN, 2019. IUCN Red List. [Online] Available at: https://www.iucnredlist.org/search/map [Accessed 13 May 2019]. Jacques, H., Reed-Smith, J. & Somers, M. J., 2015. Aonyx capensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T1793A21938767. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-2.RLTS.T1793A21938767.en [Accessed 28 February 201]. Lepage, D., 2019. Checklist of the birds of Madikwe. Avibase, the world bird database. [Online] Available at: https://avibase.bsc- eoc.org/checklist.jsp?region=ZAnw09&list=clements&format=1 [13/02/2019] [Accessed 13 February 2019]. Power, R. J., 2013. The distribution and status of mammals in the North West, Mahikeng: Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation & Tourism, North West Provincial Government. Power, R. J. & Verbugt, L., 2014. The Herpetofauna of the North West: a literature survey, Mahikeng: Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation and Tourism. North West Provincial Government. Rural, Environment and Agricultural Development (READ), 2015. North West Biodiversity Sector Plan 2015. [Online] Available at: http://www.nwpg.gov.za/Agriculture/documents/2016/Environmental%20Policy%20Planning %20and%20Coordination/New%20Documents/North%20West%20Biodiversity%20Sector% 20Plan%202015.pdf [Accessed 16 January 2019].

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 34

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), 2019. Red List of South African Plants. [Online] Available at: http://redlist.sanbi.org/redcat.php [Accessed 12 March 2019]. StatsSA, 2011. Census 2011: Census in Brief. [Online] Available at: http://www.statssa.gov.za/census/census_2011/census_products/Census_2011_Census_in _brief.pdf [Accessed 13 May 2019]. Stein, A. B. et al., 2016. Panthera pardus (errata version published in 2016). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T15954A102421779. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-1.RLTS.T15954A50659089.en [Accessed 28 February 2019]. Wiesel, I., 2015. Parahyaena brunnea. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T10276A82344448. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T10276A82344448.en [Accessed 28 February 2019].

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 35

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

8 APPENDIX A: IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Five factors need to be considered when assessing the significance of impacts, namely: 1. Relationship of the impact to temporal scales - the temporal scale defines the significance of the impact at various time scales, as an indication of the duration of the impact.

2. Relationship of the impact to spatial scales - the spatial scale defines the physical extent of the impact.

3. The severity of the impact - the severity/beneficial scale is used in order to scientifically evaluate how severe negative impacts would be, or how beneficial positive impacts would be on a particular affected system (for ecological impacts) or a particular affected party. The severity of impacts can be evaluated with and without mitigation in order to demonstrate how serious the impact is when nothing is done about it. The word ‘mitigation’ means not just ‘compensation’, but includes concepts of containment and remedy. For beneficial impacts, optimization means anything that can enhance the benefits. However, mitigation or optimization must be practical, technically feasible and economically viable.

4. The likelihood of the impact occurring - the likelihood of impacts taking place as a result of project actions differs between potential impacts. There is no doubt that some impacts would occur (e.g. loss of vegetation), but other impacts are not as likely to occur (e.g. vehicle accident), and may or may not result from the proposed development. Although some impacts may have a severe effect, the likelihood of them occurring may affect their overall significance.

5. Each criterion is ranked to determine the overall significance of an activity (Table 8-1). The criterion is then considered in two categories, viz. effect of the activity and the likelihood of the impact. The total scores recorded for the effect and likelihood are then read off the matrix presented in Table 8-2 and Table 8-3, to determine the overall significance of the impact. The overall significance is either negative or positive.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 36

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Table 8-1 Ranking of evaluation criteria. Temporal Scale Short term Less than 5 years Medium term Between 5-20 years Between 20 and 40 years (a generation) and from a human Long term perspective also permanent Over 40 years and resulting in a permanent and lasting change that will Permanent always be there Spatial Scale Localised At localised scale and a few hectares in extent

Study Area The proposed site and its immediate environs Regional District and Provincial level National Country EFFECT International Internationally Severity Severity Benefit Slight impacts on the affected Slightly beneficial to the affected Slight system(s) or party(ies) system(s) and party(ies) Moderate impacts on the affected Moderately beneficial to the Moderate system(s) or party(ies) affected system(s) and party(ies) Severe/ Severe impacts on the affected A substantial benefit to the Beneficial system(s) or party(ies) affected system(s) and party(ies) Very Severe/ Very severe change to the A very substantial benefit to the Beneficial affected system(s) or party(ies) affected system(s) and party(ies)

Likelihood Unlikely The likelihood of these impacts occurring is slight May Occur The likelihood of these impacts occurring is possible Probable The likelihood of these impacts occurring is probable

LIKELIHOOD Definite The likelihood is that this impact will definitely occur

* In certain cases it may not be possible to determine the severity of an impact thus it may be determined: Don’t know/Can’t know

Table 8-2 Matrix used to determine the overall significance of the impact based on the likelihood and effect of the impact. Effect

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Likelihood 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Table 8-3 Description of Environmental Significance Ratings and associated range of scores. Significance Description Score Rate

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 37

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Low An acceptable impact for which mitigation is desirable but not LOW essential. The impact by itself is insufficient even in combination with other low impacts to prevent the development being approved. These impacts will result in either positive or negative medium to short term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Moderate An important impact which requires mitigation. The impact is MEDIUM insufficient by itself to prevent the implementation of the project but which in conjunction with other impacts may prevent its implementation. These impacts will usually result in either a positive or negative medium to long-term effect on the social and/or natural environment. High A serious impact, if not mitigated, may prevent the HIGH implementation of the project (if it is a negative impact). These impacts would be considered by society as constituting a major and usually a long-term change to the (natural &/or social) environment and result in severe effects or beneficial effects. Very High A very serious impact which, if negative, may be sufficient by VERY itself to prevent implementation of the project. The impact may HIGH result in permanent change. Very often these impacts are not able to be mitigated and usually result in very severe effects, or very beneficial effects.

The environmental significance scale is an attempt to evaluate the importance of a particular impact. This evaluation needs to be undertaken in the relevant context, as an impact can either be ecological or social, or both. The evaluation of the significance of an impact relies heavily on the values of the person making the judgment. For this reason, impacts of especially a social nature need to reflect the values of the affected society.

Prioritising The evaluation of the impacts, as described above is used to assess the significance of identified impacts and determine which impacts require mitigation measures.

Negative impacts that are ranked as being of “VERY HIGH” and “HIGH” significance will be investigated further to determine how the impact can be minimised or what alternative activities or mitigation measures can be implemented. These impacts may also assist decision makers i.e. numerous HIGH negative impacts may bring about a negative decision. For impacts identified as having a negative impact of “MODERATE” significance, it is standard practice to investigate alternate activities and/or mitigation measures. The most effective and practical mitigations measures will then be proposed. For impacts ranked as “LOW” significance, no investigations or alternatives will be considered. Possible management measures will be investigated to ensure that the impacts remain of low significance.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 38

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

9 APPENDIX B: BOTANICAL SPECIES LIST

Table 9-1 List of botanical species recorded on site. Scientific Name SA Red List TOPS NWBMA NEMBA IAPs Acacia mearnsii - - - 1b Aneilema aequinoctiale LC - - Aristida congesta LC - - Asparagus africanus LC - - Asparagus cf laricinus LC - - Chascanum hederaceum LC - - Chloris virgata LC - - Chlorophytum cooperi LC - - Cyanotis speciosa LC - - Cymbopogon pospischilii - - - Digitaria eriantha LC - - Elionurus muticus LC - - Enneapogon cf scoparius LC - - Eragrostis cf trichophora LC - - Eragrostis curvula LC - - Eragrostis superba LC - - Euclea crispa LC - - Euclea undulata LC - - Felicia muricata LC - - Gardenia volkensii var. volkensii LC - - Geigeria burkei - - - Gladiolus pretoriensis LC - - Lasiosiphon kraussianus LC - - Grewia flava LC - - Heteropogon contortus LC - - Hibiscus microcarpus LC - - Hyparrhenia hirta LC - - Lantana camara - - - 1b Lantana rugosa LC - - Ledebouria cf burkei LC - - Ledebouria marginata LC - - Lippia javanica LC - - Melinis repens LC - - Olea europaea subsp. Africana LC - - Opuntia ficus-indica - - - 1b Oxalis obliquifolia LC - - Panicum coloratum LC - - Panicum maximum LC - - Pavonia transvaalensis LC - -

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 39

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Peliostomum virgatum LC - - Polygala hottentotta LC - - Pycreus sp. LC - - Searsia lancea LC - - Senecio venosus LC - - Senegalia caffra LC - - Setaria sphacelata - - - Solanum campylacanthum LC - - Tarchonanthus camphoratus LC - - Themeda triandra LC - - Tragus berteronianus LC - - Vachellia karroo LC - - Vachellia tortilis LC - - Vangueria infausta LC - - Verbena brasiliensis - - - 1b Verbena tenuisecta - - - Ziziphus mucronata LC - -

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 40

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

10 APPENDIX C1: AMPHIBIANS

Table 10-1 Amphibians with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. QDS Red list 2526CA Scientific name Common name category (ADU, 2019) Amietia angolensis Angolan River Frog Least concern Amietia delalandii Delalande's River Frog Least concern 1 Breviceps adspersus Bushveld Rain Frog Least concern Cacosternum boettgeri Common Caco Least concern 1 Chiromantis xerampelina South Foam Nest Frog Least concern Kassina senegalensis Bubbling Kassina Least concern 1 Phrynobatrachus natalensis Snorring puddle frog Least concern Phrynomantis bifasciatus Banded Rubber Frog Least concern 1 Polyntonophrynus fenoulheti Fenoulhet’s Toad Least concern Polyntonophrynus vertebralis Southern Pygmy Toad Least concern Ptychadena anchietae Plain Grass Frog Least concern Ptychadena mossambica Mozambique ridged frog Least concern Pyxicephalus adspersus Giant Bull Frog Least concern Schismaderma carens Red Toad Least concern 1 Sclerophrys capensis Raucous Toad Least concern 1 Sclerophrys garmani Olive Toad Least concern 1 Sclerophrys gutturalis Guttural Toad Least concern 1 Sclerophrys poweri Power's Toad Least concern 1 Tomopterna cryptotis Tremelo Sand Frog Least concern 1 Tomopterna krugerensis Knocking Sand Frog Least concern Tomopterna natalensis Natal Sand Frog Least concern 1 Tomopterna tandyi Tandy's Sand Frog Least concern Xenopus laevis Common Platanna Least concern 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 41

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

11 APPENDIX C2: REPTILES

Table 11-1 Reptiles with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. QDS Red list category 2526CA Scientific name Common name (SARCA 2014) (ADU, (Bates, et al., 2014) 2019) Lizards Acontias gracilicauda Thin-tailed Legless Skink Least Concern Acontias percivali Percival’s Legless Skink Least Concern Agama aculeata Ground agama Least Concern Agama atra Southern Rock Agama Least Concern Agama atra Southern Rock Agama Least Concern Chamaeleo dilepis Flap-neck chameleon Least Concern Cordylus vittifer Common Girdled Lizard Least Concern Dalophia pistillum Blunt tailed worm lizard Least Concern Gerrhosaurus flavigularis Yellow-throated Plated Lizard Least Concern 1 Common Tropical House Hemidactylus mabouia Least Concern Gecko Lygodactylus capensis capensis Common Dwarf Gecko Least Concern 1 Lygodactylus nigropunctatus Black-spotted Dwarf Gecko Least Concern Meroles squamulosa Common rough scaled lizard Least Concern Mochlus sundevallii Sundevall's Writhing Skink Least Concern 1 Monopeltis capensis Cape Worm Lizard Least Concern Cape Spade-snouted Worm Monopeltis capensis Least Concern Lizard Nucras holubi Holub’s Sandveld Lizard Least Concern Nucras intertexta Spotted Sandveld Lizard Least Concern Pachydactulus capensis Cape gecko Least Concern Pachydactylus affinis Transvaal Gecko Least Concern Pachydactylus turneri Turner’s thick-toed gecko Least Concern Panaspis sp. Snake-eyed skinks Least Concern Pedioplanis lineoocellata subsp. Spotted sand lizard Least Concern lineoocellata Trachylepis capensis Cape Skink Least Concern 1 Trachylepis punctatissima Speckled Rock Skink Least Concern Trachylepis varia Variable Skink Least Concern 1 Trachylepsis striata Striped skink Least Concern Varanus albigularis Rock monitor Least Concern Varanus niloticus Water monitor Least Concern Snakes Afrotyphlops bibronii Bibron’s Blind Snake Least Concern Aparallactus capensis Black-headed Centipede-eater Least Concern

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 42

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Atractaspis bibronii Bibron’s burrowing asp Least Concern Atractaspis duerdeni Beaked Burrowing Asp Least Concern Bitis arietans arietans Puff adder Least Concern Boaedon capensis Brown House Snake Least Concern Crotaphopeltis hotamboeia Red lipped herald Least Concern Dasypeltis scabra Rhombic Egg-eater Least Concern 1 Dendroaspis polylepis Black mamba Least Concern Dispholidus typus Boomslang Least Concern Gonionotophis capensis Cape File Snake Least Concern Leptotyphlops scutifrons Peters' threadsnake Least Concern Lycodonomorphus rufulus Common Brown Water Snake Least Concern Lycophidion capense capense Cape Wolf Snake Least Concern Naja annulifera Snouted cobra Least Concern Naja mossambica Mozambique spitting cobra Least Concern Philothamnus semivariegatus Spotted bush snake Least Concern Prosymna ambigua Angolan Shovel-Snout Least Concern Prosymna sundevallii Sundevall’s Shovel-snout Least Concern Psammophis brevirostris Short snouted grass snake Least Concern Psammophylax tritaeniatus Striped Grass Snake Least Concern 1 Pseudaspis cana Mole snake Least Concern Python natalensis Southern African Python Least Concern Delalande’s Beaked Blind Rhinotyphlops lalandei Least Concern Snake Telescopus semiannulatus Eastern Tiger Snake Least Concern semiannulatus Thelotornis capensis capensis Vine snake Least Concern Tortoises and terrepins Kinixys lobatsiana Lobatse Hinged Tortoise Least Concern Pelomedusa subrufa Marsh terrapin Least Concern Psammobates oculifer Serrated/Kalahari tent tortoise Least Concern Stigmochelys pardalis Leopard tortoise Least Concern 7

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 43

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

12 APPENDIX C3: AVIFAUNA

Table 12-1 Birds with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) ACCIPITRIFORMES: Accipitridae Accipiter badius Shikra 1 Accipiter melanoleucus Black Goshawk 1 Accipiter minullus Little Sparrowhawk 1 Accipiter ovampensis Ovambo Sparrowhawk 1 Aquila rapax Tawny Eagle Vulnerable 1 Aquila spilogaster African Hawk-Eagle 1 Aquila verreauxii Verreaux's Eagle 1 Buteo buteo Common Buzzard 1 Buteo rufofuscus Jackal Buzzard 1 Circaetus cinereus Brown Snake-Eagle 1 Circaetus pectoralis Black-breasted Snake-Eagle 1 Circus macrourus Pallid Harrier Near-threatened 1 Circus pygargus Montagu's Harrier 1 Circus ranivorus African Marsh-Harrier 1 Elanus caeruleus Black-winged Kite 1 Gyps africanus White-backed Vulture Critically endangered 1 Gyps coprotheres Cape Griffon Endangered 1 Haliaeetus vocifer African Fish-Eagle 1 Hieraaetus pennatus Booted Eagle 1 Hieraaetus wahlbergi Wahlberg's Eagle 1 Kaupifalco monogrammicus Lizard Buzzard 1 Melierax canorus Pale Chanting-Goshawk 1 Micronisus gabar Gabar Goshawk 1 Milvus migrans Black Kite 1 Necrosyrtes monachus Hooded Vulture Critically endangered 1 Pernis apivorus European Honey-buzzard 1 Polemaetus bellicosus Martial Eagle Vulnerable 1 Polyboroides typus African Harrier-Hawk 1 Terathopius ecaudatus Bateleur Near-threatened 1 Torgos tracheliotos Lappet-faced Vulture Endangered 1 ACCIPITRIFORMES: Pandionidae Pandion haliaetus Osprey 1 ACCIPITRIFORMES: Sagittariidae Sagittarius serpentarius Secretarybird Vulnerable 1 ANSERIFORMES: Anatidae Alopochen aegyptiaca Egyptian Goose 1 Anas capensis Cape Teal 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 44

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Anas erythrorhyncha Red-billed Duck 1 Anas sparsa African Black Duck 1 Anas undulata Yellow-billed Duck 1 Dendrocygna bicolor Fulvous Whistling-Duck 1 Dendrocygna viduata White-faced Whistling-Duck 1 Netta erythrophthalma Southern Pochard 1 Oxyura maccoa Maccoa Duck Vulnerable 1 Plectropterus gambensis Spur-winged Goose 1 Sarkidiornis melanotos Knob-billed Duck 1 Spatula hottentota Hottentot Teal 1 Spatula smithii Cape Shoveler 1 Tadorna cana South African Shelduck 1 Thalassornis leuconotus White-backed Duck 1 BUCEROTIFORMES: Bucerotidae Lophoceros nasutus African Gray Hornbill 1 Tockus leucomelas Southern Yellow-billed Hornbill 1 Tockus rufirostris Southern Red-billed Hornbill 1 BUCEROTIFORMES: Bucorvidae Bucorvus leadbeateri Southern Ground-Hornbill Vulnerable 1 BUCEROTIFORMES: Phoeniculidae Phoeniculus purpureus Green Woodhoopoe 1 Rhinopomastus cyanomelas Common Scimitarbill 1 BUCEROTIFORMES: Upupidae Upupa epops Eurasian Hoopoe 1 CAPRIMULGIFORMES: Apodidae Apus affinis Little Swift 1 Apus apus Common Swift 1 Apus barbatus African Swift 1 Apus caffer White-rumped Swift 1 Apus horus Horus Swift 1 Apus melba Alpine Swift 1 Cypsiurus parvus African Palm-Swift 1 CAPRIMULGIFORMES: Caprimulgidae Caprimulgus europaeus Eurasian Nightjar 1 Caprimulgus pectoralis Fiery-necked Nightjar 1 Caprimulgus rufigena Rufous-cheeked Nightjar 1 Caprimulgus tristigma Freckled Nightjar 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Burhinidae Burhinus capensis Spotted Thick-knee 1 Burhinus vermiculatus Water Thick-knee Rare/Accidental 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Charadriidae

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 45

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Charadrius asiaticus Caspian Plover 1 Charadrius hiaticula Common Ringed Plover 1 Charadrius marginatus White-fronted Plover 1 Charadrius pallidus Chestnut-banded Plover Near-threatened 1 Charadrius pecuarius Kittlitz's Plover 1 Charadrius tricollaris Three-banded Plover 1 Vanellus armatus Blacksmith Lapwing 1 Vanellus coronatus Crowned Lapwing 1 Vanellus senegallus Wattled Lapwing 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Glareolidae Cursorius rufus Burchell's Courser 1 Cursorius temminckii Temminck's Courser 1 Glareola nordmanni Black-winged Pratincole Near-threatened 1 Rhinoptilus chalcopterus Bronze-winged Courser 1 Smutsornis africanus Double-banded Courser 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Jacanidae Actophilornis africanus African Jacana 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Laridae Chlidonias hybrida Whiskered Tern 1 Chlidonias leucopterus White-winged Tern 1 Chroicocephalus cirrocephalus Gray-hooded Gull 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Recurvirostridae Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt 1 Recurvirostra avosetta Pied Avocet 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Rostratulidae Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted-Snipe 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Scolopacidae Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper 1 Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper Near-threatened 1 Calidris minuta Little Stint 1 Calidris pugnax Ruff 1 Gallinago nigripennis African Snipe 1 Numenius arquata Eurasian Curlew Near-threatened 1 Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper 1 Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank 1 Tringa ochropus Green Sandpiper 1 Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper 1 Tringa totanus Common Redshank Rare/Accidental 1 CHARADRIIFORMES: Turnicidae Turnix sylvaticus Small Buttonquail 1 CICONIIFORMES: Ciconiidae

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 46

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Ciconia abdimii Abdim's Stork 1 Ciconia ciconia White Stork 1 Ciconia nigra Black Stork 1 Leptoptilos crumenifer Marabou Stork 1 Mycteria ibis Yellow-billed Stork 1 COLIIFORMES: Coliidae Colius colius White-backed Mousebird 1 Colius striatus Speckled Mousebird 1 Urocolius indicus Red-faced Mousebird 1 COLUMBIFORMES: Columbidae Columba arquatrix Rameron Pigeon 1 Columba guinea Speckled Pigeon 1 Oena capensis Namaqua Dove 1 Streptopelia capicola Ring-necked Dove 1 Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove 1 Streptopelia senegalensis Laughing Dove 1 Turtur chalcospilos Emerald-spotted Wood-Dove 1 CORACIIFORMES: Alcedinidae Alcedo semitorquata Half-collared Kingfisher 1 Ceryle rudis Pied Kingfisher 1 Corythornis cristatus Malachite Kingfisher 1 Halcyon albiventris Brown-hooded Kingfisher 1 Halcyon chelicuti Striped Kingfisher 1 Halcyon leucocephala Gray-headed Kingfisher 1 Halcyon senegalensis Woodland Kingfisher 1 Megaceryle maxima Giant Kingfisher 1 CORACIIFORMES: Coraciidae Coracias caudatus Lilac-breasted Roller 1 Coracias garrulus European Roller 1 Coracias naevius Rufous-crowned Roller 1 CORACIIFORMES: Meropidae Merops apiaster European Bee-eater 1 Merops bullockoides White-fronted Bee-eater 1 Merops hirundineus Swallow-tailed Bee-eater 1 Merops nubicoides Southern Carmine Bee-eater 1 Merops persicus Blue-cheeked Bee-eater 1 Merops pusillus Little Bee-eater 1 CUCULIFORMES: Cuculidae Centropus superciliosus White-browed Coucal 1 Chrysococcyx caprius Dideric Cuckoo 1 Chrysococcyx klaas Klaas's Cuckoo 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 47

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Clamator glandarius Great Spotted Cuckoo 1 Clamator jacobinus Pied Cuckoo 1 Clamator levaillantii Levaillant's Cuckoo 1 Cuculus canorus Common Cuckoo 1 Cuculus clamosus Black Cuckoo 1 Cuculus gularis African Cuckoo 1 Cuculus solitarius Red-chested Cuckoo 1 FALCONIFORMES: Falconidae Falco amurensis Amur Falcon 1 Falco biarmicus Lanner Falcon 1 Falco chicquera Red-necked Falcon 1 Falco naumanni Lesser Kestrel 1 Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon 1 Falco rupicoloides Greater Kestrel 1 Falco rupicolus Rock Kestrel 1 Falco subbuteo Eurasian Hobby 1 Falco vespertinus Red-footed Falcon Near-threatened 1 Polihierax semitorquatus Pygmy Falcon 1 GALLIFORMES: Numididae Numida meleagris Helmeted Guineafowl 1 GALLIFORMES: Phasianidae Coturnix coturnix Common Quail 1 Coturnix delegorguei Harlequin Quail 1 Dendroperdix sephaena Crested Francolin 1 Peliperdix coqui Coqui Francolin 1 Pternistis natalensis Natal Francolin 1 Pternistis swainsonii Swainson's Francolin 1 Scleroptila gutturalis Orange River Francolin 1 GRUIFORMES: Gruidae Anthropoides paradiseus Blue Crane Vulnerable 1 GRUIFORMES: Heliornithidae Podica senegalensis African Finfoot 1 GRUIFORMES: Rallidae Crex egregia African Crake 1 Fulica cristata Red-knobbed Coot 1 Gallinula angulata Lesser Moorhen Rare/Accidental 1 Gallinula chloropus Eurasian Moorhen 1 Porphyrio madagascariensis African Swamphen 1 Rallus caerulescens African Rail 1 Zapornia flavirostra Black Crake 1 GRUIFORMES: Sarothruridae

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 48

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Sarothrura rufa Red-chested Flufftail 1 MUSOPHAGIFORMES: Musophagidae Corythaixoides concolor Gray Go-away-bird 1 OTIDIFORMES: Otididae Ardeotis kori Kori Bustard Near-threatened 1 Eupodotis afraoides White-quilled Bustard 1 Eupodotis ruficrista Red-crested Bustard 1 PASSERIFORMES: Acrocephalidae Acrocephalus arundinaceus Great Reed Warbler 1 Acrocephalus baeticatus African Reed Warbler 1 Acrocephalus gracilirostris Lesser Swamp Warbler 1 Acrocephalus schoenobaenus Sedge Warbler 1 Hippolais icterina Icterine Warbler 1 Hippolais olivetorum Olive-tree Warbler 1 PASSERIFORMES: Alaudidae Calandrella cinerea Red-capped Lark 1 Calendulauda africanoides Fawn-colored Lark 1 Calendulauda sabota Sabota Lark 1 Certhilauda chuana Short-clawed Lark 1 Certhilauda semitorquata Eastern Long-billed Lark Endemic (country/region) 1 Chersomanes albofasciata Spike-heeled Lark 1 Eremopterix leucotis Chestnut-backed Sparrow- Lark 1 Eremopterix verticalis Gray-backed Sparrow-Lark 1 Mirafra africana Rufous-naped Lark 1 Mirafra cheniana Latakoo Lark 1 Mirafra fasciolata Eastern Clapper Lark 1 Mirafra passerina Monotonous Lark 1 Spizocorys conirostris Pink-billed Lark 1 Spizocorys starki Stark's Lark 1 PASSERIFORMES: Buphagidae Buphagus erythrorhynchus Red-billed Oxpecker 1 PASSERIFORMES: Campephagidae Campephaga flava Black Cuckooshrike 1 PASSERIFORMES: Cisticolidae Apalis thoracica Bar-throated Apalis 1 Calamonastes fasciolatus Barred Wren-Warbler 1 Camaroptera brachyura Green-backed Camaroptera 1 Cisticola aberrans Rock-loving Cisticola 1 Cisticola aridulus Desert Cisticola 1 Cisticola chiniana Rattling Cisticola 1 Cisticola fulvicapilla Piping Cisticola 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 49

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Cisticola lais Wailing Cisticola 1 Cisticola rufilatus Tinkling Cisticola 1 Cisticola textrix Cloud Cisticola 1 Cisticola tinniens Levaillant's Cisticola 1 Eremomela icteropygialis Yellow-bellied Eremomela 1 Eremomela usticollis Burnt-neck Eremomela 1 Malcorus pectoralis Rufous-eared Warbler 1 Prinia flavicans Black-chested Prinia 1 Prinia subflava Tawny-flanked Prinia 1 PASSERIFORMES: Corvidae Corvus albus Pied Crow 1 Corvus capensis Cape Crow 1 PASSERIFORMES: Dicruridae Dicrurus adsimilis Fork-tailed Drongo 1 PASSERIFORMES: Emberizidae Emberiza capensis Cape Bunting 1 Emberiza flaviventris Golden-breasted Bunting 1 Emberiza impetuani Lark-like Bunting 1 Emberiza tahapisi Cinnamon-breasted Bunting 1 PASSERIFORMES: Estrildidae Amadina erythrocephala Red-headed Finch 1 Amadina fasciata Cut-throat 1 Estrilda astrild Common Waxbill 1 Estrilda erythronotos Black-faced Waxbill 1 Granatina granatina Violet-eared Waxbill 1 Lagonosticta rhodopareia Jameson's Firefinch 1 Lagonosticta rubricata African Firefinch 1 Lagonosticta senegala Red-billed Firefinch 1 Ortygospiza fuscocrissa African Quailfinch 1 Pytilia melba Green-winged Pytilia 1 Spermestes cucullata Bronze Mannikin 1 Sporaeginthus subflavus Zebra Waxbill 1 Uraeginthus angolensis Southern Cordonbleu 1 PASSERIFORMES: Fringillidae Crithagra atrogularis Black-throated Canary 1 Crithagra flaviventris Yellow Canary 1 Crithagra gularis Streaky-headed Seedeater 1 Crithagra mozambica Yellow-fronted Canary 1 PASSERIFORMES: Hirundinidae Cecropis abyssinica Lesser Striped Swallow 1 Cecropis cucullata Greater Striped Swallow 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 50

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Cecropis semirufa Rufous-chested Swallow 1 Delichon urbicum Common House-Martin 1 Hirundo albigularis White-throated Swallow 1 Hirundo dimidiata Pearl-breasted Swallow 1 Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow 1 Petrochelidon spilodera South African Swallow 1 Pseudhirundo griseopyga Gray-rumped Swallow 1 Ptyonoprogne fuligula Rock Martin 1 Riparia cincta Banded Martin 1 Riparia paludicola Plain Martin 1 Riparia riparia Bank Swallow 1 PASSERIFORMES: Laniidae Corvinella melanoleuca Magpie Shrike 1 Eurocephalus anguitimens White-crowned Shrike 1 Lanius collaris Southern Fiscal 1 Lanius collurio Red-backed Shrike 1 Lanius minor Lesser Gray Shrike 1 PASSERIFORMES: Leiothrichidae Turdoides bicolor Southern Pied-Babbler 1 Turdoides jardineii Arrow-marked Babbler 1 PASSERIFORMES: Macrosphenidae Sphenoeacus afer Cape Grassbird 1 Sylvietta rufescens Cape Crombec 1 PASSERIFORMES: Malaconotidae Dryoscopus cubla Black-backed Puffback 1 Laniarius atrococcineus Crimson-breasted Gonolek 1 Laniarius ferrugineus Southern Boubou 1 Malaconotus blanchoti Gray-headed Bushshrike 1 Nilaus afer Brubru 1 Tchagra australis Brown-crowned Tchagra 1 Tchagra senegalus Black-crowned Tchagra 1 Telophorus sulfureopectus Sulphur-breasted Bushshrike 1 Telophorus zeylonus Bokmakierie 1 PASSERIFORMES: Monarchidae Terpsiphone viridis African Paradise-Flycatcher 1 PASSERIFORMES: Motacillidae Anthus cinnamomeus African Pipit 1 Anthus hoeschi Mountain Pipit Near-threatened 1 Anthus leucophrys Plain-backed Pipit 1 Anthus lineiventris Striped Pipit 1 Anthus similis Long-billed Pipit 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 51

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Anthus vaalensis Buffy Pipit 1 Macronyx capensis Orange-throated Longclaw 1 Motacilla aguimp African Pied Wagtail 1 Motacilla capensis Cape Wagtail 1 Motacilla flava Western Yellow Wagtail 1 PASSERIFORMES: Muscicapidae Agricola infuscatus Chat Flycatcher 1 Agricola pallidus Pale Flycatcher 1 Bradornis mariquensis Mariqua Flycatcher 1 Cercomela familiaris Familiar Chat 1 Cercotrichas leucophrys Red-backed Scrub-Robin 1 Cercotrichas paena Kalahari Scrub-Robin 1 Cossypha caffra Cape Robin-Chat 1 Cossypha heuglini White-browed Robin-Chat 1 Cossypha humeralis White-throated Robin-Chat 1 Fraseria plumbea Gray Tit-Flycatcher 1 Melaenornis pammelaina Southern Black-Flycatcher 1 Melaenornis silens Fiscal Flycatcher 1 Monticola brevipes Short-toed Rock-Thrush 1 Muscicapa striata Spotted Flycatcher 1 Myrmecocichla formicivora Southern Anteater-Chat 1 Oenanthe monticola Mountain Wheatear 1 Oenanthe pileata Capped Wheatear 1 Saxicola torquatus African Stonechat 1 Thamnolaea cinnamomeiventris Mocking Cliff-Chat 1 PASSERIFORMES: Nectariniidae Chalcomitra amethystina Amethyst Sunbird 1 Cinnyris afer Greater Double-collared Sunbird 1 Cinnyris mariquensis Mariqua Sunbird 1 Cinnyris talatala White-breasted Sunbird 1 Nectarinia famosa Malachite Sunbird 1 PASSERIFORMES: Oriolidae Oriolus larvatus African Black-headed Oriole 1 Oriolus oriolus Eurasian Golden Oriole 1 PASSERIFORMES: Paridae Melaniparus cinerascens Ashy Tit 1 Melaniparus niger Southern Black-Tit 1 PASSERIFORMES: Passeridae Gymnornis superciliaris Yellow-throated Petronia 1 Passer diffusus Southern Gray-headed Sparrow 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 52

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Passer domesticus House Sparrow Introduced species 1 Passer melanurus Cape Sparrow 1 Passer motitensis Great Rufous Sparrow 1 PASSERIFORMES: Phylloscopidae Phylloscopus trochilus Willow Warbler 1 PASSERIFORMES: Platysteiridae Batis molitor Chinspot Batis 1 PASSERIFORMES: Ploceidae Amblyospiza albifrons Grosbeak Weaver Rare/Accidental 1 Anaplectes rubriceps Red-headed Weaver 1 Bubalornis niger Red-billed Buffalo-Weaver 1 Euplectes afer Yellow-crowned Bishop 1 Euplectes albonotatus White-winged Widowbird 1 Euplectes ardens Red-collared Widowbird 1 Euplectes orix Southern Red Bishop 1 Euplectes progne Long-tailed Widowbird 1 Philetairus socius Sociable Weaver 1 Plocepasser mahali White-browed Sparrow- Weaver 1 Ploceus capensis Cape Weaver Endemic (country/region) 1 Ploceus cucullatus Village Weaver 1 Ploceus intermedius Lesser Masked-Weaver 1 Ploceus velatus Southern Masked-Weaver 1 Quelea quelea Red-billed Quelea 1 Sporopipes squamifrons Scaly Weaver 1 PASSERIFORMES: Pycnonotidae Pycnonotus barbatus Common Bulbul 1 Pycnonotus nigricans Black-fronted Bulbul 1 PASSERIFORMES: Remizidae Anthoscopus caroli African Penduline-Tit 1 Anthoscopus minutus Southern Penduline-Tit 1 PASSERIFORMES: Stenostiridae Stenostira scita Fairy Flycatcher 1 PASSERIFORMES: Sturnidae Acridotheres tristis Common Myna Introduced species 1 Cinnyricinclus leucogaster Violet-backed Starling 1 Creatophora cinerea Wattled Starling 1 Lamprotornis australis Burchell's Starling 1 Lamprotornis bicolor African Pied Starling Endemic (country/region) 1 Lamprotornis chalybaeus Greater Blue-eared Starling Rare/Accidental 1 Lamprotornis nitens Cape Starling 1 Onychognathus morio Red-winged Starling 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 53

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) PASSERIFORMES: Sylviidae Sylvia borin Garden Warbler 1 Sylvia communis Greater Whitethroat 1 Sylvia subcaerulea Rufous-vented Warbler 1 PASSERIFORMES: Turdidae Psophocichla litsitsirupa Groundscraper Thrush 1 Turdus libonyana Kurrichane Thrush 1 Turdus smithi Karoo Thrush 1 PASSERIFORMES: Viduidae Anomalospiza imberbis Parasitic Weaver 1 Vidua chalybeata Village Indigobird 1 Vidua funerea Variable Indigobird 1 Vidua macroura Pin-tailed Whydah 1 Vidua paradisaea Eastern Paradise-Whydah 1 Vidua purpurascens Purple Indigobird 1 Vidua regia Shaft-tailed Whydah 1 PASSERIFORMES: Zosteropidae Zosterops pallidus Orange River White-eye 1 Zosterops virens Cape White-eye 1 PELECANIFORMES: Ardeidae Ardea alba Great Egret 1 Ardea cinerea Gray Heron 1 Ardea goliath Goliath Heron 1 Ardea intermedia Intermediate Egret 1 Ardea melanocephala Black-headed Heron 1 Ardea purpurea Purple Heron 1 Ardeola ralloides Squacco Heron 1 Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret 1 Butorides striata Striated Heron 1 Egretta ardesiaca Black Heron 1 Egretta garzetta Little Egret 1 Gorsachius leuconotus White-backed Night-Heron 1 Ixobrychus minutus Little Bittern 1 Ixobrychus sturmii Dwarf Bittern 1 Nycticorax nycticorax Black-crowned Night-Heron 1 PELECANIFORMES: Pelecanidae Pelecanus rufescens Pink-backed Pelican 1 PELECANIFORMES: Scopidae Scopus umbretta Hamerkop 1 PELECANIFORMES: Threskiornithidae Bostrychia hagedash Hadada Ibis 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 54

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Platalea alba African Spoonbill 1 Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis 1 Threskiornis aethiopicus Sacred Ibis 1 PHOENICOPTERIFORMES: Phoenicopteridae Phoeniconaias minor Lesser Flamingo Near-threatened 1 Phoenicopterus roseus Greater Flamingo 1 PICIFORMES: Indicatoridae Indicator indicator Greater Honeyguide 1 Indicator minor Lesser Honeyguide 1 Prodotiscus regulus Wahlberg's Honeyguide 1 PICIFORMES: Lybiidae Lybius torquatus Black-collared Barbet 1 Pogoniulus chrysoconus Yellow-fronted Tinkerbird 1 Trachyphonus vaillantii Crested Barbet 1 Tricholaema leucomelas Pied Barbet 1 PICIFORMES: Picidae Campethera abingoni Golden-tailed Woodpecker 1 Campethera bennettii Bennett's Woodpecker 1 Chloropicus fuscescens Cardinal Woodpecker 1 Chloropicus namaquus Bearded Woodpecker 1 Jynx ruficollis Rufous-necked Wryneck 1 PODICIPEDIFORMES: Podicipedidae Podiceps cristatus Great Crested Grebe 1 Podiceps nigricollis Eared Grebe 1 Tachybaptus ruficollis Little Grebe 1 PSITTACIFORMES: Psittacidae Poicephalus meyeri Meyer's Parrot 1 PTEROCLIFORMES: Pteroclidae Pterocles bicinctus Double-banded Sandgrouse 1 Pterocles burchelli Burchell's Sandgrouse 1 Pterocles gutturalis Yellow-throated Sandgrouse 1 Pterocles namaqua Namaqua Sandgrouse 1 STRIGIFORMES: Strigidae Asio capensis Marsh Owl 1 Bubo africanus Spotted Eagle-Owl 1 Bubo lacteus Verreaux's Eagle-Owl 1 Glaucidium perlatum Pearl-spotted Owlet 1 Otus senegalensis African Scops-Owl 1 Ptilopsis granti Southern White-faced Owl 1 STRIGIFORMES: Tytonidae Tyto alba Barn Owl 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 55

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

Madikwe region Scientific name Common name Red list category (Lepage. 2019) Tyto capensis African Grass-Owl 1 STRUTHIONIFORMES: Struthionidae Struthio camelus Common Ostrich 1 SULIFORMES: Anhingidae Anhinga rufa African Darter 1 SULIFORMES: Phalacrocoracidae Microcarbo africanus Long-tailed Cormorant 1 Phalacrocorax carbo Great Cormorant 1 412

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 56

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

13 APPENDIX C4: MAMMALS

Table 13-1 Mammals with a distribution range that includes the proposed development site. QDS 2526CA Family Scientific name Common name Red list category (ADU, 2019) Carnivora

Canis mesomelas Black-backed Jackal Least Concern 1

Canidae Canis sp. Jackals and Wolves Least Concern 1 Otocyon megalotis Bat-eared Fox Least Concern Vulpes chama Cape Fox Least Concern

Acinonyx jubatus Cheetah Vulnerable

Caracal caracal Caracal Least Concern 1

Felis catus Domestic Cat Introduced 1 Felidae Felis nigripes Black-footed Cat Vulnerable

Felis silvestris Wild Cat Least Concern Leptailurus serval Serval Least Concern Panthera pardus Leopard Vulnerable 1

Atilax paludinosus Marsh Mongoose Least Concern 1

Cynictis penicillata Yellow Mongoose Least Concern Helogale parvula Common Dwarf Mongoose Least Concern Common Slender Herpestidae Herpestes sanguineus Least Concern 1 Mongoose

Ichneumia albicauda White-tailed Mongoose Least Concern Mungos mungo Banded Mongoose Least Concern Suricata suricatta Meerkat Least Concern Hipposideros caffer Sundevall's Roundleaf Bat Least Concern Hipposideridae Rhinolophus darlingi Darling's Horseshoe Bat Least Concern Crocuta crocuta Spotted Hyaena Least Concern

Hyaena brunnea Brown Hyena Near Threatened 1 Hyaenidae

Proteles cristata Aardwolf Least Concern 1

Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter Near Threatened 1

Mustelidae Ictonyx striatus Zorilla Least Concern Mellivora capensis Honey Badger Least Concern Poecilogale albinucha African Striped Weasel Least Concern Civettictis civetta African Civet Least Concern

Genetta genetta Common Genet Least Concern Viverridae Cape Genet (Cape Large- Genetta tigrina Least Concern 1 spotted Genet)

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 57

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

QDS 2526CA Family Scientific name Common name Red list category (ADU, 2019) Cetartiodactyla Aepyceros melampus Impala Least Concern 1 Alcelaphus buselaphus Hartebeest Least Concern 1

Antidorcas marsupialis Springbok Least Concern 1

Connochaetes taurinus Common Wildebeest Least Concern 1 taurinus

Damaliscus lunatus Topi Least Concern

Damaliscus pygargus Blesbok Least Concern 1 phillipsi Kobus ellipsiprymnus Waterbuck Least Concern 1 ellipsiprymnus Oreotragus oreotragus Klipspringer Least Concern

Oryx gazella Gemsbok Least Concern 1 Bovidae

Raphicerus campestris Steenbok Least Concern

Redunca arundinum Southern Reedbuck Least Concern 1

Redunca fulvorufula Mountain Reedbuck Least Concern 1

Sylvicapra grimmia Bush Duiker Least Concern 1

Syncerus caffer African Buffalo Near Threatened

Tragelaphus angasii Nyala Least Concern 1

Tragelaphus oryx Common Eland Least Concern 1

Tragelaphus scriptus Bushbuck Least Concern 1

Tragelaphus strepsiceros Greater Kudu Least Concern 1

Giraffidae Giraffa camelopardalis Giraffe Vulnerable

Hippopotamidae Hippopotamus amphibius Hippopotamus Vulnerable

Phacochoerus africanus Common Warthog Least Concern 1 Suidae Potamochoerus larvatus Bushpig Least Concern Chiroptera

Hipposideridae Cloeotis percivali Percival's Trident Bat Least Concern Sauromys petrophilus Roberts's Flat-headed Bat Least Concern

Molossidae

Tadarida aegyptiaca Egyptian Free-tailed Bat Least Concern

Nycteridae Nycteris thebaica Cape Long-eared Bat Least Concern

Rhinolophidae Rhinolophus denti Dent's Horseshoe Bat Least Concern

Eptesicus hottentotus Least Concern

Vespertilionidae Neoromicia capensis Cape Bat Least Concern

Scotophilus dinganii Least Concern

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 58

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

QDS 2526CA Family Scientific name Common name Red list category (ADU, 2019) Eulipotyphla Southern African

Erinaceidae Atelerix frontalis Least Concern Hedgehog

Crocidura cyanea Least Concern

Crocidura fuscomurina Bicolored Musk Shrew Least Concern 1

Crocidura hirta Least Concern

Soricidae Crocidura mariquensis Least Concern

Crocidura silacea Least Concern

Suncus lixus Greater Dwarf Shrew Least Concern 1

Suncus varilla Least Concern Hyracoidea Procaviidae Procavia capensis Rock Hyrax Least Concern Lagomorpha

Lepus capensis Cape Hare Least Concern Lepus saxatilis Scrub Hare Least Concern 1

Leporidae Lepus victoriae African Savanna Hare Least Concern

Pronolagus randensis Jameson's Red Rock Hare Least Concern 1 Macroscelidea Elephantulus Short-snouted Sengi Least Concern brachyrhynchus Macroscelididae Elephantulus intufi Bushveld Sengi Least Concern Eastern Rock Elephant Elephantulus myurus Least Concern 1 Shrew Perissodactyla Equidae Equus quagga Plains Zebra Least Concern 1

Ceratotherium simum White Rhinoceros Near Threatened Rhinocerotidae Critically Diceros bicornis Black Rhinoceros Endangered Pholidota Temminck's Ground Manidae Smutsia temminckii Vulnerable Pangolin Primates Chlorocebus pygerythrus Vervet Monkey Least Concern 1

Chlorocebus pygerythrus Vervet Monkey Least Concern Cercopithecidae 1 pygerythrus (subspecies pygerythrus) (2008)

Papio ursinus Chacma Baboon Least Concern 1

Galagidae Galago moholi Southern Lesser Galago Least Concern Rodentia Bathyergidae Cryptomys hottentotus Southern African Mole-rat Least Concern 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 59

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

QDS 2526CA Family Scientific name Common name Red list category (ADU, 2019)

Gliridae Graphiurus microtis Least Concern Hystricidae Hystrix africaeaustralis Cape Porcupine Least Concern 1

Aethomys ineptus Tete Veld Aethomys Least Concern 1

Aethomys namaquensis Namaqua Rock Mouse Least Concern 1

Desmodillus auricularis Least Concern Gerbilliscus brantsii Least Concern

Gerbilliscus leucogaster Least Concern Gerbillurus paeba Least Concern Single-Striped Lemniscomys rosalia Least Concern 1 Lemniscomys Muridae Mastomys coucha Least Concern

Micaelamys namaquensis Namaqua Rock Rat Least Concern

Mus indutus Least Concern

Otomys angoniensis Least Concern

Otomys auratus Vlei Rat Near Threatened

Rattus rattus House Rat Least Concern Mesic Four-striped Grass Rhabdomys dilectus Least Concern Rat

Thallomys paedulcus Least Concern Dendromus melanotis Least Concern

Mystromys albicaudatus White-tailed Rat Vulnerable

Nesomyidae Saccostomus campestris Least Concern

Steatomys krebsii Least Concern

Pedetidae Pedetes capensis Spring Hare Least Concern

Paraxerus cepapi Smith's Bush Squirrel Least Concern 1 Sciuridae

Xerus inauris Least Concern Tubulidentata

Orycteropodidae Orycteropus afer Aardvark Least Concern 41

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 60

Ecological Impact Assessment Report

14 APPENDIX D: SPECIALIST DECLARATION AND CURRICULUM VITAE

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services RMLM Residential Development (Berg/Drooge Street) 61