ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT (FAUNA, FLORA & AVIFAUNA)
PROPOSED SIRIUS 100MW PV SOLAR 4 PROJECT NEAR UPINGTON, NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE SEPTEMBER 2019
Prepared by:
NKURENKURU ECOLOGY & BIODIVERSITY (PTY) LTD.
Gerhard Botha (Pri Sci Nat: Ecology & Botany)
PO Box 12500, Brandhof, 9324
Cell: 084 2073454 Email: [email protected] Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration of Consultant’s Independence...... v 1. SPECIALIST INFORMATION ...... vii 2. DECLARATION BY THE SPECIALIST ...... vii 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Applicant ...... 1 1.2 Project ...... 1 1.3 Proposed Activity ...... 1 1.4 Terms of reference ...... 2 1.5 Conditions of this report ...... 2 1.6 Relevant legislation ...... 2 2 Methodology ...... 4 2.1 Ecology (Terrestrial Fauna & Flora): Data scouring and review...... 4 2.2 Ecology (Terrestrial Fauna & Flora): Methods to be followed during the Assessment ...... 5 2.3 Avifauna: Data scouring and review ...... 6 2.4 Field sampling and assessment methodology ...... 7 2.5 Ecological Mapping ...... 8 2.6 Sensitivity Analysis and Criteria ...... 8 2.7 Assessment of impacts ...... 10 3 Study Area ...... 11 3.1 Locality ...... 11 3.2 Climate and rainfall ...... 15 3.3 Physiography and soils ...... 16 3.4 Existing Land Use ...... 27 3.5 Conservation Planning: Strategic Environmental Assessment for wind and solar PV energy in South Africa – Renewable Energy Development Zones (REDZs)...... 31 3.6 Conservation Planning: Environmental Management Framework ...... 39 3.7 Conservation Planning: Critical Biodiversity Areas and broad scale ecological processes ...... 42 3.8 Vegetation overview ...... 45 3.9 Site specific vegetation description – Fine Scale Vegetation Patterns ...... 52 Description of the identified habitat types ...... 59 3.9.1 Ziziphus mucronata – Cenchrus ciliaris riparian woodlands of intermittent watercourses/streams...... 60 3.9.2 Rhigozum trichotomum – Barleria lichtensteiniana riparian shrubland of the ephemeral washes (drainage lines)...... 65 3.9.3 Ziziphus mucronata – Lycium oxycarpum riparian shrubland of the moist derpression like feature...... 69 ii | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.9.4 Senegalia mellifera – Stipagrostis uniplumis mixed open shrublands...... 72 3.9.5 Zygophyllum chrysopteron – Enneapogon scaber dwarf shrublands...... 76 3.10 Fauna Survey ...... 80 3.10.1 Mammals ...... 80 3.10.2 Reptiles ...... 81 3.10.3 Amphibians ...... 82 3.11 Avifauna Survey ...... 85 3.11.1 Avian micro-habitats ...... 85 3.11.2 Important Bird Areas (IBA) ...... 88 3.11.3 Avifauna species composition ...... 88 4 sensitivity assessment ...... 95 5 assessment of proposed impacts ...... 100 5.1 Assumptions ...... 100 5.2 Fixed and Tracking PV Panels ...... 100 5.3 Monofacial (traditional opaque-backsheeted panels) vs Bificial modules ...... 101 5.4 Localised vs. cumulative impacts: some explanatory notes...... 106 5.5 Identification of Potential Ecological Impacts and Associated Activities ...... 109 5.6 Assessment of Impacts ...... 110 5.6.1 For the SOLAR PV FACILITY (Entire project site including access roads, internal access roads, solar field, all laydown alternatives, all substation and battery areas as well as the office)...... 110 Listed Impacts Influenced by the Different PV Solar Panel Tehcnologies and Associated Infrastructure (Mono- and Bi-Facial PV Solar Technologies)...... 112 Listed Impacts that are NOT Influenced by the Different PV Solar Panel Tehcnologies and Associated Infrastructure ...... 125 5.6.2 For the Grid Connection Power Line ...... 135 Construction Phase ...... 135 Operation Phase ...... 142 5.6.3 Cumulative Impacts ...... 147 5.7 Comparison of Laydown Alternative Options ...... 152 5.8 Comparison of Office Alternative Options ...... 152 5.9 Comparison of Substation and Battery Alternatives ...... 153 6 Discussion and Conclusion ...... 153 7 References ...... 160 8 Appendices: ...... 163 Appendix 2. List of bird species identified within the study site during the site visit. 163 Appendix 2. Listed Plant Species ...... 166 Appendix 3. List of Mammals ...... 170 Appendix 4. List of Reptiles...... 173 iii | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Appendix 5. List of Amphibians...... 175 Appendix 6. Specialist CV...... 176
FIGURES
Figure 1: Location map of the farm Tungsten 638 and the feasibility area as well as the proposed development footprint area of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four...... 13 Figure 2: Proposed Layout Map of the Sirius PV Solar 3 Facility...... 14 Figure 3: Climate graph of Upington (https://en.climate-data.org/africa/south- africa/northern-cape/upington-838/)...... 15 Figure 4: Climate table of Upington (https://en.climate-data.org/africa/south- africa/northern-cape/upington-838/)...... 15 Figure 5: Terrain units occurring within land types Ag1 and Ae10...... 16 Figure 6: The typographical setting and character of the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 as well as the area earmarked as feasible for the development of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four...... 23 Figure 7: Regional Land Types found within the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 and the surrounding landscape...... 24 Figure 8: Regional geology found within the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 and the surrounding landscape...... 25 Figure 9: Surface hydrological features within the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 as well as the area earmarked as feasible for the development of the Sirius PV Solar 3 Facility...... 30 Figure 10: The project area’s location within the REDZ7: Upington...... 32 Figure 11: Avian Impact Sensitivity Map (copied from DEA, 2015) indicating that the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four (dark blue dot) and power line route are located within a Green Zone or a Low Landscape Sensitivity Area...... 38 Figure 12: Map from the ZF Mgcawu EMF showing the conservation priorities for the vegetation types. The approximate proposed development location is indicated by the blue arrow...... 40 Figure 13: Map from the ZF Mgcawu EMF showing the environmental control zones. The approximate proposed development location is indicated by the blue arrow. .... 41 Figure 14: Terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Areas map (Northern Cape Province) of the proposed study area and surrounding environment...... 44 Figure 15: Vegetation types (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006) of the study site as well as the status of Threatened Ecosystems...... 49 Figure 16: Schematic representation of the South African Red List categories. Taken from http://redlist.sanbi.org/redcat.php...... 50 Figure 17: Identified habitat types within the study site (Farm Tungsten Lodge 638) including the feasibility area for the Sirius PV Solar Project Four...... 57 Figure 18: Habitat and feature map of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four footprint...... 58 Figure 19: Sensitivity Map of the study site (Farm Tungsten Lodge 638) including the feasibility area for the Sirius PV Solar Project Four...... 98 Figure 20: Sensitivity Map and feature map of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four footprint...... 99 Figure 21: Location Map of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four relative to the other solar facilities planned within a radius of 30 km...... 108
iv | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
DECLARATION OF CONSULTANT’S INDEPENDENCE
I, Gerhard Botha, as the appointed specialist hereby declare that I: » act/ed as the independent specialist in this application; » regard the information contained in this report as it relates to my specialist input/study to be true and correct, and » do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity, other than remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 and any specific environmental management Act; » have and will not have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding; » have disclosed, to the applicant, EAP and competent authority, any material information that have or may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or the objectivity of any report, plan or document required in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 and any specific environmental management Act; » am fully aware of and meet the responsibilities in terms of NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 (specifically in terms of regulation 13 of GN No. R. 326) and any specific environmental management Act, and that failure to comply with these requirements may constitute and result in disqualification; » have provided the competent authority with access to all information at my disposal regarding the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or not; and » am aware that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 48 of GN No. R. 326.
Gerhard Botha Pr.Sci.Nat 400502/14 (Botanical and Ecological Science) September 2019
Field of expertise:
Wetland ecology, aquatic and wetland fauna & flora, terrestrial biodiversity, aquatic biomonitoring and wetland habitat evaluations. BSc (Hons) Zoology and Botany, MSc Botany (Phytosociology) from 2011 to present. v | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
DETAILS OF THE SPECIALIST, DECLARATION OF INTEREST AND UNDERTAKING UNDER OATH
(For official use only)
File Reference Number:
NEAS Reference Number: DEA/EIA/
Date Received:
Application for authorisation in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, Act No. 107 of 1998, as amended and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, 2014, as amended (the Regulations)
PROJECT TITLE
Sirius Solar PV Project Four
Kindly note the following:
1. This form must always be used for applications that must be subjected to Basic Assessment or Scoping & Environmental Impact Reporting where this Department is the Competent Authority. 2. This form is current as of 01 September 2018. It is the responsibility of the Applicant / Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) to ascertain whether subsequent versions of the form have been published or produced by the Competent Authority. The latest available Departmental templates are available at https://www.environment.gov.za/documents/forms. 3. A copy of this form containing original signatures must be appended to all Draft and Final Reports submitted to the department for consideration. 4. All documentation delivered to the physical address contained in this form must be delivered during the official Departmental Officer Hours which is visible on the Departmental gate. 5. All EIA related documents (includes application forms, reports or any EIA related submissions) that are faxed; emailed; delivered to Security or placed in the Departmental Tender Box will not be accepted, only hardcopy submissions are accepted.
Departmental Details Postal address:
Department of Environmental Affairs vi | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Attention: Chief Director: Integrated Environmental Authorisations
Private Bag X447
Pretoria
0001
Physical address:
Department of Environmental Affairs
Attention: Chief Director: Integrated Environmental Authorisations
Environment House
473 Steve Biko Road
Arcadia
Queries must be directed to the Directorate: Coordination, Strategic Planning and Support at:
Email: [email protected]
1. SPECIALIST INFORMATION
Specialist Company Nkurenkuru Ecology and Biodiversity (Pty) Ltd. Name: B-BBEE Contribution level 4 Percentage 100 (indicate 1 to 8 or non- Procurement compliant) recognition Specialist name: Gerhard Botha Specialist BSc (Hons) Qualifications: Professional SACNASP Pr Sci Nat 400502/14 Ecological and Botany affiliation/registration: Physical address: 2 Jock Meiring Street, Park West, Bloemfontein, 9324 Postal address: PO Box 12500, Brandhof, 9324 Postal code: 9324 Cell: 084 207 3454
Telephone: Fax:
E-mail: [email protected]
2. DECLARATION BY THE SPECIALIST
I, ______Gerhard Botha______, declare that –
• I act as the independent specialist in this application; vii | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
• I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant; • I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work; • I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the Act, Regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity; • I will comply with the Act, Regulations and all other applicable legislation; • I have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity; • I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my
possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority; • all the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct; and • I realise that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 48 and is punishable in terms of
section 24F of the Act.
Signature of the Specialist
Nkurenkuru Ecology and Biodiversity (Pty) Ltd
Name of Company:
17 September 2019
Date
viii | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
ix | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Declaration of Consultant’s Independence
Sections where this is Requirements of Appendix 6 – GN R326 EIA Regulations of 7 April addressed in the Specialist 2017 Report 1. (1) A specialist report prepared in terms of these Regulations must contain- Page V – VIII and Appendix 6 a) details of- i. the specialist who prepared the report; and ii. the expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae; b) a declaration that the specialist is independent in a form as may be Page V - VII specified by the competent authority; c) an indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report Section 1 (1.3, 1.4, 1.5) was prepared; (cA) an indication of the quality and age of base data used for the specialist Section 2 (2.1, 2.3) report; (cB) a description of existing impacts on the site, cumulative impacts of the Section 3 and 5 proposed development and levels of acceptable change; d) the duration, date and season of the site investigation and the Section 2 (2.2 – 2.4) and relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment; Section 3 (3.9) e) a description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or Section 2 carrying out the specialised process inclusive of equipment and modelling used; f) details of an assessment of the specific identified sensitivity of the Section 2 (2.6) and Section 4 site related to the proposed activity or activities and its associated structures and infrastructure, inclusive of a site plan identifying site alternatives; g) an identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers; Section 4 and 5 h) a map superimposing the activity including the associated structures Section 4 and infrastructure on the environmental sensitivities of the site including areas to be avoided, including buffers; i) a description of any assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps Section 1 (1.3 and 1.4) in knowledge; j) a description of the findings and potential implications of such Section 6 findings on the impact of the proposed activity, including identified alternatives on the environment or activities; k) any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr; Section 5 l) any conditions for inclusion in the environmental authorisation; Section 5 and Section 6 m) any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or Section 5 and Section 6 environmental authorisation; n) a reasoned opinion- Section 6 i. as to whether the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised; (iA) regarding the acceptability of the proposed activity or activities; and ii. if the opinion is that the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised, any avoidance, management and mitigation measures that should be included in the EMPr, and where applicable, the closure plan; o) a description of any consultation process that was undertaken during N/A the course of preparing the specialist report; p) a summary and copies of any comments received during any N/A consultation process and where applicable all responses thereto; and q) any other information requested by the competent authority. N/A 2) Where a government notice gazetted by the Minister provides for any N/A protocol or minimum information requirement to be applied to a specialist report, the requirements as indicated in such notice will apply.
x | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
SIRIUS 100MW PV SOLAR Project Four, NEAR UPINGTON, NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT (FAUNA, FLORA AND AVIFAUNA) REPORT
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Applicant
SOLA Assets (Pty) Ltd.
1.2 Project
The project will be known as the Sirius Solar PV Project Four.
1.3 Proposed Activity
SOLA Future Energy (Pty) Ltd is proposing the development of a 100MW Solar Energy Facility on a site near Upington, in the Northern Cape Province. The project will include:
» Arrays of PV panels (static and tracking PV system) with a contracted capacity of up to 100MW; » Mounting structures to support the PV panels; » Cabling between the project components (to be lain underground where applicable); » On-site substation; » On-site inverters to convert the power from a direct current (DC) to an alternating current (AC); » An on-site substation to facilitate the connection between the solar PV facility and the Eskom electricity grid. » A 132kV overhead power line connecting the facility to the Upington Main Transmission Substation (MTS); » An internal 11kV/33kV power line connecting the 132kV power line to the on-site substation; » Battery storage area ~5ha in extent1; » Conservancy tank ~10m3 in capacity; » Site offices and maintenance buildings, including workshop areas for maintenance and storage; » Temporary laydown areas; and » Internal access roads and fencing.
1 Battery storage for Sirius Solar PV Project Four will be assessed within a separate EIA process.
1 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
1.4 Terms of reference
To conduct an ecological (fauna, flora and avifauna) study for a basic assessment of the target areas where the establishment of the solar energy facility and associated infrastructure is proposed to be located and provide a professional opinion on ecological and avifaunal issues pertaining to the target area to aid in future decisions regarding the proposed project.
1.5 Conditions of this report
Findings, recommendations and conclusions provided in this report are based on the authors’ best scientific and professional knowledge and information available at the time of compilation. No form of this report may be amended or extended without the prior written consent of the author. Any recommendations, statements or conclusions drawn from or based on this report must clearly cite or make reference to this report. Whenever such recommendations, statements or conclusions form part of a main report relating to the current investigation, this report must be included in its entirety.
1.6 Relevant legislation
Legislation pertaining to general ecology (flora and fauna):
The following legislation was taken into account whilst compiling this report:
Provincial » The Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act / NCNCA (Act No 9 of 2009) in its entirety, with special reference to: • Schedule 1: Specially Protected/Threatened Species • Schedule 2: Protected Species
The above-mentioned Nature Conservation Ordinance accompanied by all amendments is regarded by the Northern Cape Department of Environment and Nature Conservation (DENC) as the legally binding, provincial documents, providing regulations, guidelines and procedures with the aim of protecting game and fish, the conservation of flora and fauna and the destruction of problematic (vermin and invasive) species.
National » National Environmental Management Act / NEMA (Act No 107 of 1998), and all amendments and supplementary listings and/or regulations » Environment Conservation Act (ECA) (No 73 of 1989) and amendments » National Environmental Management Act: Biodiversity Act / NEMA:BA (Act No. 10 of 2004) and amendments » National Forest Act 1998 / NFA (No 84 of 1998)
2 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» National Veld and Forest Fire Act (Act No. 101 of 1998) » Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act / CARA (Act No. 43 of 1983) and amendments
International » Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES)
Legislation pertaining to Avifauna:
The Convention on Biological Diversity:
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is an international convention (to which South Africa is a signatory) and represents a commitment to sustainable development. The Convention has three main objectives: the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the use of genetic resources (http://cbd.int/convention/guide/). Although the convention does not include specific recommendations or guidelines pertaining to birds and energy infrastructure interactions and impacts, it does make provisions for keeping and restoring biodiversity.
The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals:
The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (also known as CMS or the Bonn Convention) is an intergovernmental treaty and is the most appropriate instrument to deal with the conservation of terrestrial, aquatic and avian migratory species. he convention includes policy and guidelines with regards to the impact associated with man- made infrastructure. CMS requires that parties (South Africa is a signatory) take measures to avoid migratory species from becoming endangered (Art II, par. 1 and 2) and to make every effort to prevent the adverse effects of activities and obstacles that seriously impede or prevent the migration of migratory species i.e. power lines (Art 111, par. 4b and 4c).
The Agreement on the Convention of African-Eurasian Migratory Water Birds:
The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Water birds (AEWA) is an intergovernmental treaty dedicated to the conservation of migratory water birds and their habitat across Africa, Europe, the Middle East Central Asia, Greenland and the Canadian Archipelago. The AEWA covers 255 species of birds ecologically dependent on wetlands for at least part of their annual cycle and is a legally binding agreement by all contracting parties (South Africa included) to guarantee the conservation of migratory water birds within their national boundaries through species and habitat protection and the management of human activities.
The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act: » A 2 500m2 temporary concrete batching plant.
3 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004, NEMBA) regulations on Threatened and Protected Species (TOPS) provides for the consolidation of biodiversity legislation through establishing national norms and standards for the management of biodiversity across all sectors and by different management authorities. The national Act and several sets of provincial conservation legislation provide for among other things, the management and conservation of South Africa’s biodiversity; protection of species and ecosystems that necessitate national protection and the sustainable use of indigenous biological resources.
Guidelines to minimise the impacts on birds of Solar Facilities and Associated Infrastructure in South Africa:
The “Guidelines to minimise the impact on birds of Solar Facilities and Associated Infrastructure in South Africa” (Smit, 2012) is perhaps the most important (although not legally binding) document from an avifaunal impact perspective currently applicable to solar development in South Africa. The guidelines are published by BirdLife South Africa (BLSA) and detail the recommended procedure for conducting an avifaunal specialist study as well as list all of the potential impacts of interactions between birds and solar facilities and associated infrastructure. We are aware of changes to the BirdLife South Africa best practice guidelines recently published at the Birds and Renewable Energy Forum in Johannesburg (2015) and although the revised requirements are still a work in progress and have not yet been ratified, they will inform this assessment where applicable.
2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Ecology (Terrestrial Fauna & Flora): Data scouring and review
Data sources from the literature were consulted and used where necessary in the study and include the following:
Vegetation: » Vegetation types and their conservation status were extracted from the South African National Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford 2006) as well as the National List of Threatened Ecosystems (2011), where relevant. » Critical Biodiversity Areas for the site and surroundings were extracted (CBA Map for Northern Cape Province obtained from http://bgis.sanbi.org/fsp/project.asp). » Information on plant and animal species recorded for the surrounding was extracted from the SABIF/SIBIS database hosted by SANBI. This is a considerably larger area than the study area, but is necessary to ensure a conservative approach as well as counter the fact that the site itself has probably not been well sampled in the past.
4 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» The IUCN conservation status of the species in the list was also extracted from the database and is based on the Threatened Species Programme, Red List of South African Plants (2013). » Freshwater and wetland information was extracted from the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas assessment, NFEPA (Nel et al. 2011). This includes rivers, wetlands and catchments defined under the study.
Fauna » Lists of mammals, reptiles and amphibians which are likely to occur in the study area were derived based on distribution records from the literature and various spatial databases (SANBI’s SIBIS and BGIS databases). » Literature consulted includes Branch (1988) and Alexander and Marais (2007) for reptiles, Du Preez and Carruthers (2009) for amphibians, Friedmann and Daly (2004) and Skinner and Chimimba (2005) for mammals. » Apart from the literature sources, additional information on reptiles were extracted from the SARCA web portal, hosted by the ADU, http://vmus.adu.org.za. » The conservation status of each species is also listed, based on the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria 2014 and where species have not been assessed under these criteria, the CITES status is reported where possible. These lists are adequate for mammals and amphibians, the majority of which have been assessed, however the majority of reptiles have not been assessed and therefore, it is not adequate to assess the potential impact of the development on reptiles, based on those with a listed conservation status alone. In order to address this shortcoming, the distribution of reptiles was also considered such that any narrow endemics or species with highly specialised habitat requirements occurring at the site were noted.
2.2 Ecology (Terrestrial Fauna & Flora): Methods to be followed during the Assessment
As part of the BA process, a detailed field survey of the vegetation was undertaken (17-19 September 2018) and the results include:
» A phytosociological classification of the vegetation found in the study area according to vegetation survey data. » A corresponding description of all defined plant communities and their typical habitats, including a full species list for each plant community and a representative photographic record taken on site of each community. » A map of all plant communities within the boundaries of the study area. » A description of the sensitivity of each plant community, based on sensitivity criteria outlined in section 2.5. » A full assessment of impacts according to section 2.6.
5 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
2.3 Avifauna: Data scouring and review
Data sources from the literature were consulted and used where necessary in the study and include the following:
» Bird distribution data of the Southern African Bird Atlas Project obtained from the Animal Demography Unit of the University of Cape Town, in order to ascertain species occurrence within the study area (Harrison et al. 1997); » The Birds in Reserves Project database was used to augment bird counts data (Animal Demographic Unit 2015). » The conservation status of all bird species occurring within the quarter degree square determined with the use of The Eskom Red Data book of birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland (Taylor 2014); » The Important Bird Areas (IBA) programme according to BirdLife South Africa; » The conservation status, endemism and biology of all species considered likely to occur within the study area was then determined from Hockey et al. (2005) and Taylor et al. (2015). » The BirdLife South Africa “Guidelines to minimise the impact on birds of Solar Facilities and Associated Infrastructure in South Africa” was incorporated into the report (Smit et al. 2012). » A review of avian monitoring and mitigation information at existing utility scale solar facilities compiled by Watson et al. (2015) was used to determine the impacts of solar facilities on avian species. » Appendix A5: Bird Scoping Assessment Report of The Strategic Environmental Assessment of Wind and Solar Photovoltaic Energy in South Africa. » A review of all available published and unpublished literature pertaining to bird interactions with SEFs and their associated power infrastructure, summarising the issues involved and the current level of knowledge in the field. Various information sources including data on the local avifauna of the area and previous studies of bird interactions with SEFs and their associated power infrastructure will be examined.
Data Sources Utilized
» The Southern African Bird Atlas Project 1 (SABAP 1; Harrison et al., 1997) quarter degree squares (QDC) 2821CA (17 cards) as well as the Southern African Bird Atlas Project 2 (SABAP 2; http://sabap2.adu.org.za/index.php) pentads 2830_2105 (7 card) and 2830_2100 (1 card) were consulted to determine the bird species likely to occur within the study area and the broader impact zone of the development. » The conservation status, endemism and biology of all species considered likely to occur within the study area was then determined from Hockey et al. (2005) and Taylor et al. (2015).
6 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
2.4 Field sampling and assessment methodology
Prior to the site visit a review of all available published and unpublished literature pertaining to bird interactions with plants, substations and power lines was undertaken, summarising the issues involved and the current level of knowledge in the field. Various information sources including data on the local avifauna of the area and previous studies of bird interactions with plants, substations and power lines were examined.
A site visit of the project area was conducted from the 17h to the 19th of September 2018 to determine the in situ local avifauna and avian habitats present on site. Walked transects, vehicle transects and vantage point surveys were conducted in various habitats across the site. During the survey, not only the development footprint area was surveyed, but a broader area was inspected. The site was thoroughly traversed to obtain a first-hand perspective of the proposed project and birdlife and to:
» Quantify aspects of the local avifauna (such as species diversity and abundance); » Identify important avian features present on site (such as nesting and roosting sites); » Confirm the presence, abundance, habitat preference and movements of priority species; » Identify important flyways across the site; and » Delineate any obvious, highly sensitive, no-go areas to be avoided by the development.
Data collection methods included the following:
» Vehicle drive surveys: Vehicle surveys were predominantly done along the farm dirt roads and twin tracks as well as the service road of the existing overhead power lines. » Power Line inspection: The existing power lines were surveyed daily for the duration of the survey period for any possible raptors or other avifaunal species utilizing the line and pylons for perching. All nests located within the pylons were identified and monitored for a period of time during sunrise and sunset to determine if the nests are active and which species utilized these nests. » Walked-transects: Walk-throughs were conducted within the study area including the proposed feasible area (refer to Figure 1). These were done along pre-defined areas as well as along random selected areas. » Fixed point surveys: During the last day of the survey period areas deemed potentially high in avifaunal species diversity was closely monitored for periods of 2 hours each.
The flowing equipment were utilized during field work.
» Canon EOS 450D Camera, » Swarovski SLC 10X42 WB Binoculars, » Roberts VII Multimedia Android Edition for Data Capturing and Bird Identification, » Sasol’s The Larger Illustrated Guide to Birds of Southern Africa (2005), and
7 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Roberts Bird Guide (2016)
The survey was primarily conducted by means of a Checklist survey supplemented with some notes on avifaunal movement (especially regarding the larger avifaunal species as well as identified nesting species and activities with the patches of higher tree covering). The surveys normally started just before sunrise and ended just after sunset in order to record all possible bird activities throughout the day.
Using the data collected during the desktop phase as well as during the site visit, avian micro- habitats and sensitive habitats for avifaunal communities were identified and mapped.
The methodology used during the survey was deemed sufficient as this area was identified (and confirmed on site) as a low sensitive or low risk area within the REDZ map (Avian Impact Sensitivity Map for Solar Developments within Upington FA 7; refer to Figure 10). This site would therefore be considered as a Regime 1 site in terms of the Bird Life South Africa (BLSA) guidleines, requiring a short site visit by an avifaunal specialist. During the site visit sufficient first-hand knowledge of the avian habitats and avian species present were obtained, as well as information regarding the potential impacts that the development will have on the avifaunal character of the area.
2.5 Ecological Mapping
Mapping has been done by comparing georeferenced ground survey data to the visual inspection of available Google-Earth Imagery (which is a generalised colour composite image without any actual reflectance data attached to it) and in that way extrapolating survey reference points to the entire study area. Delineations are therefore approximate, and due to the intricate mosaics and often gradual mergers of vegetation units, generalisations had to be made. Mapped units will thus show where a certain vegetation unit is predominant, but smaller inclusions of another vegetation type in this area do exist, but have not been mapped separately. The latter would require a supervised classification of georeferenced raw SPOT or similar satellite imagery (with all reflectance data), which has not been available to this project due to the high cost of such imagery.
2.6 Sensitivity Analysis and Criteria
The determination of specific ecosystem services and the sensitivity of ecosystem components, both biotic and abiotic, is rather complex and no single overarching criterion will apply to all habitats studied. The main aspects of an ecosystem that need to be incorporated in a sensitivity analysis, however, include the following:
8 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Describing the nature and number of species present, taking into consideration their conservation value as well as the probability of such species to survive or re-establish itself following disturbances, and alterations to their specific habitats, of various magnitudes » Identifying the species or habitat features that are ‘key ecosystem providers’ and characterising their functional relationships (Kremen 2005) » Determining the aspects of community structure that influence function, especially aspects influencing stability or rapid decline of communities (Kremen 2005) » Assessing key environmental factors that influence the provision of services (Kremen 2005) » Gaining knowledge about the spatial-temporal scales over which these aspects operate (Kremen 2005).
This implies that in the sensitivity analysis not only aspects that currently prevail on the area should be taken into consideration, but also if there is a possibility of a full restoration of the original environment and its biota, or at least the rehabilitation of ecosystem services resembling the original state after an area has been significantly disturbed. According to the above, sensitivity classes have been summarised as follows:
» High Sensitivity: Areas that are relatively undisturbed or pristine and • either very species-rich relative to immediate surroundings, • or have a very unique and restricted indigenous species composition • Alternatively, constitute specific habitats or a high niche diversity for fauna and/or flora species of conservation concern, and where the total extent of such habitats and associated species of conservation concern remaining in southern Africa is limited. • Excessive disturbance of such habitats may lead to ecosystem destabilisation and/or species loss. • This would also include areas where the abiotic environment is of such nature that the habitat and its niche-diversity are the main reason for a higher species diversity and cannot be reconstructed or rehabilitated once physically altered in any way. ▪ Note: depending on the species composition and abiotic habitat, High Sensitivity Areas can also be specifically denoted as No-Go Areas. » Medium Sensitivity: Areas where disturbances are at most limited and • Areas with a species diversity representative of its natural state, but not exceptionally high or unique compared to its surroundings • Areas of which the abiotic or biotic configuration does not constitute a very specific or restricted habitat or very high niche diversity • Areas that provide ecosystem services needed for the continued functioning of the ecosystem and the continued use thereof (e.g. grazing or pollinator resources). • Although species of conservation concern may occur on the area, these are not restricted to these habitats only. • Areas that need to remain intact to ensure the functioning of adjacent ecosystems, or wildlife corridors or portions of land that prevent the excessive fragmentation of
9 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
natural fauna and flora populations, or areas that will be difficult or impossible to rehabilitate to a functional state after physical alteration • where the landscape can be rehabilitated to allow the re-establishment of some of the original species composition after physical alteration, but some of the species of conservation concern or ecosystem functionality may be lost » Low Sensitivity: Areas that have been previously transformed, disturbed or • Areas that provide limited ecosystem services, or have a low ecological value. • Species diversity may be low or all species present have a much wider distribution beyond this habitat or locality. • Species of conservation concern may be present on such areas, but these are not restricted to these habitats and can be relocated with ease. • Further arguments may include landscapes where the abiotic nature is such that it can be rehabilitated relatively easy to allow the re-establishment of the original species composition, and where the development will not lead to any unjustified degradation of landscapes or ecosystem services if adequately mitigated.
2.7 Assessment of impacts
The Environmental Impact Assessment methodology assists in the evaluation of the overall effect of a proposed activity on the environment. This includes an assessment of the significant direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. The significance of environmental impacts are to be assessed by means of the criteria of extent (scale), duration, magnitude (severity), probability (certainty) and direction (negative, neutral or positive).
» The nature, which includes a description of what causes the effect, what will be affected and how it will be affected. » The extent, wherein it is indicated whether the impact will be local (limited to the immediate area or site of development) or regional, and a value between 1 and 5 is assigned as appropriate (with 1 being low and 5 being high). » The duration, wherein it was indicated whether: • the lifetime of the impact will be of a very short duration (0 – 1 years) – assigned a score of 1; • the lifetime of the impact will be of a short duration (2 – 5 years) – assigned a score of 2; • medium-term (5 -15 years) – assigned a score of 3; • long term (> 15 years) – assigned a score of 4; or • permanent – assigned a score of 5. » The magnitude, quantified on a scale from 0 – 10, where 0 is small and will have no effect on the environment, 2 is minor and will not result in an impact on processes, 4 is low and will cause a slight impact on processes, 6 is moderate and will result in processes continuing but in a modified way, 8 is high (processes are altered to the extent that they
10 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
temporarily cease), and 10 is very high and results in complete destruction of patterns and permanent cessation of processes. » The probability of occurrence, which describes the likelihood of the impact actually occurring. Probability is estimated on a scale of 1 -5, where 1 is very improbable (probably will not happen), 2 is improbable (some possibility, but low likelihood), 3 is probable (distinct possibility), 4 is highly probable (most likely) and 5 is definite (impact will occur regardless of any prevention measures). » The significance, is determined through a synthesis of the characteristics described above and can be assessed as LOW, MEDIUM or HIGH; and » the status, which was described as either positive, negative or neutral; » the degree of which the impact can be reversed; » the degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources; and » the degree to which the impact can be mitigated.
The significance was calculated by combining the criteria in the following formula:
S=(E+D+M)P where;
» S = Significance weighting » E = Extent » D = Duration » M = Magnitude » P = Probability
The significance weightings for each potential impact are as follows;
» < 30 points: LOW (i.e. where the impact would not have a direct influence on the decision to develop in the area), » 30 – 60 points: MEDIUM (i.e. where the impact could influence the decision to develop in the area unless it is effectively mitigated), » > 60 points: HIGH (i.e. where the impact must have an influence on the decision process to develop in the area).
3 STUDY AREA
3.1 Locality
The proposed facility will be located on Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 (study site), situated approximately 20 km south-west of Upington (refer to Figure 1). The proposed 132kV Power line wil traverse this property as well as a portion of the Farm Olyvenhouts Drift 108. The proposed site falls under the jurisdiction of the Kai !Garib Local Municipality (Farm Tungsten Lodge 638) as well as the Dawid Kuiper Local Municipality (Farm Olyvenhouts Drift 108), both
11 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019 of which falls under the greater ZF Mgcawu District Municipality in the Northern Cape Province. The study site falls within the 2821CA quarter degree square (QDGS). The surrounding landscape is predominantly utilized for agricultural purposes with large tracts of land, especially along the Orange River being transformed by cultivation (mainly vineyards for the dried fruit and wine industry), whilst the remaining areas are utilized as natural grazing for livestock. Prominent/major road system of the area are the N14 between connecting Upington with Keimoes.
The development footprint of the proposed Sirius Solar PV 4 project spans the central western portion of Tungsten Lodge and is bisected by the Helbrandleegte River whilst the Helbrandskloofspruit River spans the eastern boundary (Figure 1 and Figure 2).
12 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 1: Location map of the farm Tungsten 638 and the feasibility area as well as the proposed development footprint area of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four.
13 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 2: Proposed Layout Map of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four (as provided by Savannah Environmental Pty (Ltd)).
14 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.2 Climate and rainfall
The climate associated with the study area has been derived from recorded and extrapolated climatic data (https://en.climate-data.org/africa/south- africa/northern-cape/upington-838/) for Upington (Figures 3 and 4). Rainfall for the region is low (180 mm) and occurs mainly in late summer with very dry winters. Mean annual rainfall is, as mentioned low, 180 mm with March being the wettest month, averaging about 39 mm, and July being the driest month, with an average of only 2 mm. The average annual temperature in Upington is 19.3°C with January being the warmest (Ave. 26.2°C) and July being the coldest (Ave 11.5°C). Frost is frequent to very frequent in winter (mean frost days up to 23 days per year).
Figure 3: Climate graph of Upington (https://en.climate-data.org/africa/south-africa/northern- cape/upington-838/).
Figure 4: Climate table of Upington (https://en.climate-data.org/africa/south-africa/northern- cape/upington-838/).
15 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.3 Physiography and soils
Landscape Features According to Mucina and Rutherford (2006) the region can be described as extensive to irregular plains on a slightly sloping plateau sparsely vegetated by grassland. This description is furthermore consistent with the land type classification (AGIS 2007) which classifies the landscape as Class A2 with an average slope of between 0% and 3%. Land types represent areas that are uniform with respect to climate, terrain form, geology and soil. According to AGIS (2014), the study site is situated, mostly, with the land type Ag1 with only a small area within the south-eastern corner located within Ae10 land type (Figure 6). Across a landscape, usually five terrain units can be identified. Wetlands occur most frequently in valley bottoms (unit 5), but can also occur on crests, mid slopes and foot slopes (units 1, 3 and 4). The catena within land types Ag1 and Ae10 incorporate all of the four terrain units 1, 3, 4 and 5, as shown in Figure 5
Figure 5: Terrain units occurring within land types Ag1 and Ae10.
At a finer scale using a Google elevation profile for the study site as well as other spatial sources the study site can be described as largely flat to slightly undulating plain, generally sloping gradually in a south to south-eastern direction towards the Orange River (Figure 6). Small typographical variations are mostly due to depressional features such as small moist derpression like feature, shallow drainage lines as well as two larger intermittent (ephemeral) water courses. These lower lying areas are typically surrounded by slightly elevated gravel (quartzite and calcrete) plains as well as exposed intrusive granitic beds.
16 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Tungsten Lodge 638 (study site) is situated between elevations; 841m and 793m above sea level with an average elevation of 815m. As mentioned, the study site is relative flat with an average slope of only 0.5% (maximum slope: 17%).
The proposed footprint of Sirius PV Solar Project Four is situated between elevations; 820m and 803m above sea level with an average elevation of 812m. The PV facility is situated on slightly elevated plains sloping gently towards the lower lying areas associated with the intermittent streasm (Helbrandleegte River bisecting the solar pv fields and the Helbrandskloofspruit River to the east). The proposed development footprint has an average slope of 0.7% with a maximum slope of 1.8%.
Geology
The geology of the study site is relatively diverse comprising of a mixture geological stratifications and lithological classes (Figure 8).
The geological setting is according to Cornell et al. (2006), the Namaqua-Natal Metamorphic Province, Namaqua Sector, Areachap Terrane with a bedrock comprising of metasediments, gneisses and granites ranging in age from 2000- 1000 Ma. This bedrock is exposed beneath Kalahari Group sedimentary deposits, where the latter has been eroded away along drainages.
The area is on the edge of the Kalahari Basin where the Kalahari Group sedimentary deposits are thin. Basal pebbly sands of the Eden Formation, deposited in braided streams (Haddon, 2000), may overlie the bedrock.
Calcretes of the Mokalanen Formation are widely developed and have formed in a variety of sediments such as the deposits of ephemeral streams, pans, colluvium and windblown sands. Typically, this formation consists of sandy limestone and an overlying conglomerate with a calcareous matrix.
Overlying the calcretes are red aeolain sand classic of the Kalahari, now termed the Gordonia Formation (Kalahari Group). The sands consist of rounded quarts grains coloured by a thin coating of haematite.
Occurring discontinuous, at the contact between the aeolain sand (Gordonia Formation) and the underlying calcrete or weathered rock are a relatively thin, horizon of gravelly soil consisting of loose to medium dense, fine to medium sized gravel in a silty sand matrix. The gravel is of variable origin (either transported or residual origin), but typically consisted of vein quartz, calcrete, and fragments
17 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
of weathered bedrock (especially biotite gneiss). Such gravels have been exposed around the drainage systems (drainage lines and intermittent water courses) where the sandy matrix have been removed. The major geological formations and groups found within the study site includes; » Kalahari Group (Gordonia Formation): Basal gravels, sandy and pebbly calcretes and overlying aeolain sands » Louisvale Granite: Grey, well-foliated, medium-grained, locally porphyritic adamellitic granite with abundant xenoliths. » Bethesda Formation: Biotite-rich and pelitic gneisses, muscovite-biotite schist, subordinate amphibolite and calc-silicate rocks. » Dyasons Klip Gneiss: Brown-weathering porphyroblastic to megacrystic gneiss (intrusive). » Vaalputs Granite: Light grey with a medium-grained equigranular texture and a well-developed foliation. Oldest of the Keimoes Suite granites. » Kanoneiland Granite: Similar to the Straussburg Granite being that it is a mesocratic biotite characterized by a poorly developed tectonic fabric with numerous mafic and leucocratic inclusions. This granite is regarded as a late kinematic meso- to epizonal granite.
Photo 1: Calcrete plain Photo 2: Quartzitic plain
18 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 3: Low ridge of exposed muscovite-biotite schist Photo 4: Outcropping of basement granite
Soil and Landtypes
A sepperate Agricultural Potential and Soil Specialist Assessment of the study area was conducted by an independent consulting company. Subsequently the information provided below, pertaining to soil and landtypes are only broad description (from available literature) of “abiotic” factors that may influence ecological patterns within the study area. As such the proposed impacts of the development on these aspects (agricultural potential and soils) were not assessed within this study.
Detailed soil information is not available for broad areas of the country. As a surrogate landtype data was used to provide a general description of soil in the study area (landtypes are areas with largely uniform soils, typography and climate). The study site is, as already mentioned situated mostly with the land type Ag1 with a small section within the south-eastern corner of the study site falling within the Ae10 land type (Land Type Survey Staff, 1987). The development footprint of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four is situated entirely within the Ag1 landtype (Figure 7). The proposed 132kV overhead transmission powerline whill however encroach into a small section of the Ag10 landtype to the west.
» The A-group of land types refer to yellow and red soils without water tables belonging to one or more of the following soil forms: Inanda, Kranskop, Magwa, Hutton, Griffin, Clovelly (Figure 4).
• The Ag group of landtypes refer to red-yellow apedal, freely drained soils. These soils are shallow (less than 300mm), red, freely-drained, apedal
19 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
soils that occur in arid to semi-arid areas associated with low rainfall (less than 500mm per annum), as well as areas underlain by hard to weathered rock. Red soils typically have a high base status. Ag2 soils are generally soils with minimal development and occur on hard or weathered rock. A wide range of textures may occur (usually loamy sand to sandy loam). Stones or rocks are often present on the soil surface. Common soil forms are Mispha, Hutton and rock whilst soil forms such as Glenrosa, Shortlands are sparsely present (also refer to Table 1). • The Ae group of landtypes refer to red-yellow apedal, freely drained soils. These soils are moderately deep (ave. 500mm – 1200mm) red, freely drained and apedal (structureless). These soils generally occur in areas associated with low to moderate rainfall (3oomm – 700mm per annum) in the interior of South Africa and have a high fertility status. A wide range of texture occurs (usually sand loam to sandy clay loam). Common soil forms are Mispah and Hutton and to a lesser extent, Clovely, Sterkspruit and Rensburg (Also refer to Table 2).
Table 1: Soil forms and coverage per terrain unit (%) for the Ag1 land type. The proposed development footprint of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four is situated entirely within this landtype.
% Cover per Terrain Unit Clay Content Soil Form (%) Depth 1 3 4 5 (mm)
Slope (%) 0-2 2-20 0-4 0-5 A E
Soil-rock complex
Rock 60 30 10
Mangano Hu33, Zwartfontein Hu34 20 10 5 100-300 3-6
Loskop Ms12, Kalkbank Ms22 10 5 5 100-250 6-10
Mispah Ms10, Muden Ms20 10 5 5 100-250 6-10
Portsmouth Hu35 10 50 600-1200+ 3-6
Shorrocks Hu36 25 15 200-450 10-15
Loskop Ms12, Kalkbank Ms22 10 10 15 100-250 6-10
Zwartfontein Hu34 3 13 15 200-450 3-8
Mispah Ms10, Muden Ms20 10 15 100-250 6-10
Mangano Hu33, Roodepoort Hu30 2 12 200-450 3-8
Stream beds 20
20 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Table 2: Soil forms and coverage per terrain unit (%) for the Ae10 land type.
% Cover per Terrain Unit Clay Content Soil Form (%) Depth 1 3 4 5 (mm)
Slope (%) 0-2 2-20 0-4 0-5 A E
Soil-rock complex
Rock 80 80
Mispah Ms10 20 20 100-200 6-10
Mangano Hu33, Zwartfontein Hu34 45 450-1000 3-6
Kalkbank Ms22 40 90 100-250 6-10
Portsmouth Hu35 10 10 200-600 3-6
Roodepoort Hu30 5 600-1200 2-4
21 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 5: Shallow sandy-loams overlying calcretes with Photo 6: Deeper red aeolain sand an abundant of surface gravel and rocks (calcretes and quartzites)
Photo 8: Greyish clay-loam soils of larger pans. Typically Photo 7: Deep alluvial sand associated with the overlying calcrete beds. intermittent streams
22 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 6: The typographical setting and character of the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 as well as the area earmarked as feasible for the development of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four.
23 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 7: Regional Land Types found within the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 and the surrounding landscape.
24 | Page
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 8: Regional geology found within the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 and the surrounding landscape.
25 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Hydrology
A sepperate Aquatic and Wetland Specialist Assessment of the study area was conducted by an independent consulting company. Subsequently the information provided below, pertaining to hydrological features within the study area, serve only as a broad description of such features and factors that may influence the ecological patterns within the study area. As such the proposed impacts of the development on these aspects (aquatic and wetland) were not assessed within this study.
The study site (including the proposed development footprint) drains into two major intermittent or ephemeral rivers (Figure 9): » to the south-west into Helbrandskloofspruit, and » to the north-east into Helbrandleegte River, which merges into Helbrandkloofspruit south of the study area. » Helbrandkloofspruit drains into the Orange River (occasionally referred to as Gariep River) approximately 7 km south-east of the site selected for the development. » Numerous smaller tributaries and drainage lines drain into these intermittent (ephemeral) systems
These river systems may only flow once every couple of years after sufficient rainfall, but they do collect enough of the runoff from surrounding areas and their numerous small ephemeral tributaries to maintain a relatively constant higher sub-surface moisture reserve and so support much denser and higher vegetation than on the surrounding plains.
Furthermore, the study area is characterized by a few small depression-like features. Small topographical variations within the landscape have created small depression like features (non-wetland) which have been filled up over time with sand. These areas contain a higher soil moisture content than that of the surrounding karroid shrublands (during the rainy season). All of these areas are similar in that they have accumulated a deeper layer of sand over an extended period of time, contain for short periods of time moisture within the soil and subsequently are able to sustain a taller tree cover on the periphery. Most of these depression features currently appear to be endorheic although these features may historically have been exoreic draining into the larger drainage systems, via drainage lines, during historical wetter periods.
The area earmarked as feasible for the development of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four is, as mentioned drained by both intermittent rivers. The Helbrandskloofspruit River bisects the proposed footprint whilst the
26 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Helbrandleegte River is situated just east of the earmarked footprint. Especially the Helbrandskloofspruit is fed by numerous small drainage lines (ephemeral washes) which falls witin the proposed development footprint. Only one enorheic depressional feature (historically exoreic but has lost its outward draining character) is located within the footprint. This oval shaped depression is relatively small in size and is less than 85m in diameter (longest part) and highly disturbed and alterd.
Photo 9: Helbrandleegte River Photo 10: Helbrandkloofspruit River
Photo 12: Small grassy depression feature with shrubby peripheral fringe
Photo 11: Smaller drainage line (ephemeral wash)
3.4 Existing Land Use
The open grassland and shrublands of the site are mostly being used for livestock farming (cattle), with a presence of game. Infrastructure and development currently are minimal within the study area and is limited to cattle kraals (pens), artificial watering points, cement dams, cattle feeding points and an overhead transmission line. An Eskom feeder line exists from the Tungsten Lodge Homestead area to the N14 and beyond. A 132 kV Eskom line runs across the 27 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
farm portion, and has been taken as approximate south-eastern extent of the study area. Furthermore, numerous gravel roads (twin tracks) traverse the study area. A relatively large access road leading from the N14 to the homestead area of the farm exists. Other land use activities within the study site include small mining activities (old mine excavations).
28 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 13: Small farm track Photo 14: Access road for Sirius PV Solar 1 and 2 Facilities.
Photo 16: Dams and windpump Photo 15: Old farm homestead
Photo 18: CSP Facility on adjacent property. Photo 17: Existing power line
29 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 9: Surface hydrological features within the Farm Tungsten Lodge 638 as well as the area earmarked as feasible for the development of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four.
30 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.5 Conservation Planning: Strategic Environmental Assessment for wind and solar PV energy in South Africa – Renewable Energy Development Zones (REDZs)
A Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEAs) has been undertaken by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) in order to contribute to the implementation of the National Development Plan and National Infrastructure Plan, as well as to provide adaptive processes that streamline the regulatory environmental requirements for Strategic Integrated Projects (SIPs) whilst safeguarding the environment. The wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) SEA was accordingly commissioned by the DEA with the objective of facilitating the implementation of sustainable green energy initiatives.
The SEA identifies areas where large scale wind and solar PV energy facilities can be developed in terms of SIP 8 and in a manner that will significantly limit negative impacts on the environment, whilst yielding the highest possible socio- economic benefits to the country. These areas are referred to as Renewable Energy Development Zones (REDZs).
The SEA undertaken in this regard led to the identification of eight proposed REDZs with a combined size of approximately 80 000 km2 and comprising about 17 000 farm portions.
The solar PV assessment domain was informed by the location of the majority of existing solar PV project applications at the commencement of the SEA and includes the five provinces of the Northern Cape, Western Cape, Eastern Cape, Free State and North West.
The property earmarked for the proposed PV facility is located within such a REDZ area (REDZ 7: Upington) (Figure 10).
31 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 10: The project area’s location within the REDZ7: Upington.
32 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
The proposed Upington REDZ 7 landscape sensitivity of remaining areas after the elimination of combined very high sensitivities is shown in Figure 11. The Sirius PV Solar Project Four study site falls within an area of lower sensitivity.
Appendix A5 (Bird Scoping Assessment Report) of the Strategic Environmental Assessment for Wind and Solar Photovoltaic Energy in South Africa
The second stage of the SEA comprised a scoping-level assessment of the Renewable Energy (RE) development sensitivities within each of the identified Focus Areas (Fas), in order to identify those areas of lowest sensitivities, where development applications can be fast-tracked without compromising the environmental sustainability of the RE industry.
According to this report the most significant impacts causing a concern about the implications for avifauna of large-scale solar PV developments include the tendency of these developments to destroy, degrade, fragment or otherwise displace birds from large areas of natural habitats. This is especially of significance for species with restricted ranges and very specific habitat requirements. Other possible impacts of solar PV facilities as identified within this report include noise and disturbance generated by construction and maintenance activities, collision and electrocution mortality associated with newly installed power infrastructure, the attraction of novel species to an area by the artificial provision of otherwise scarce resources (perches, nest sites and shade etc.) and potential chemical pollution.
The main objective of this study was to examine and map avian impact sensitivity within the eight FAs and to look for areas within each FA where these sensitivities are low enough to allow some abbreviation or streamlining of the baseline monitoring requirements.
The following description has been provided for the Upington Focus Area 7 following the scoping assessment:
“The Upington FA (12 833km2) straddles the boundary between the Nama Karoo and Savannah Biomes, and comprises the Bushmanland and Kalahari Duneveld Bioregions (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). The area south of the Orange River is covered mainly by arid grassland, while the area north of the river features a mixture of shrubland and duneveld vegetation (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). The FA is not located close to any registered national Important Bird Areas, but the Orange River flows through a significant portion of the area, acting as an important flyway for birds generally, and supporting significant numbers of waterbirds. In addition to the already well-
33 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
developed vegetation structure on the banks of the river, quite large stands of alien invasive trees, particularly in the Upington area, support a variety of bird species, including nesting African Fish-Eagles.
The FA includes two significant ranges of mountains - the Boegoeberge and the Skurweberge, which probably hold numbers of cliffnesting species including Verreaux’s Eagle, Booted Eagle and Black Stork, while well-treed drainage lines in the north of the FA probably support nest sites of large savannah raptors – Martial Eagle, Tawny Eagle and White-backed and Lappet-faced Vulture. Both Verreaux’s Eagle and Martial Eagle also nest in man-made power pylons and communications masts in the vicinity of Upington. Over 275 bird species could occur within this FA, including 23 red- listed species and four red-listed endemics.
We identified a short-list of 20 threatened and/or impact susceptible priority species to inform the sensitivity mapping for this FA (Table 3). Verreaux’s Eagle, a suite of large savannah raptors and a suite of large terrestrial birds were the most influential species in shaping the sensitivity maps for this area.”
34 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Table 3: Listed priority species identified for the Upington FA 7. Key species in the sensitivity mapping process are highlighted in bold. NT = Near Threatened; VU = Vulnerable; EN = Endangered; LC = Least Concern. Threat Status FA-specific predicted Name SA Endemic SABAP2 Rep Rate (%) Regional Global susceptibility to Solar Secretary Birds VU VU 5.26 Moderate Sagittaraius serpentarius Martial Eagle EN VU 1.91 Moderate Polemaetus bellicosus Korri Bustard NT NT 14.83 Moderate Ardeotis kori Ludwig’s Bustard EN EN Near-Endemic 4.31 Moderate Neotis ludwigii Karoo Korhaan NT LC Near-Endemic 18.66 Moderate Eupodotis vigorsii Lanner Falcon VU LC 8.13 Low Falco biarmicus African Fish-Eagle - - 19.14 Low Haliaeetus vocifer White-backed Vulture EN EN 1.44 Moderate Gyps africanus Lappet-faced Vulture EN VU 1.91 Moderate Aegypius tracheliotus Jackal Buzzard - - Near-Endemic 0.48 Low Buteo rufofuscus Tawny Eagle EN LC 0.96 Moderate Aquila rapaxs Verreaux’s Eagle VU LC 6.22 Low Aquila verreauxii
35 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Booted Eagle - - 2.39 Low Aquila pennatus Lesser Kestrel - - 0.96 Moderate Falco naumanni Greater Flamingo NT LC 0.00 Moderate Phoenicopterus ruber Lesser Flamingo NT NT 0.00 Moderate Phoeniconaias minor Black Stork VU LC 0.00 Low Ciconia nigra Black-eared Sparrowlark - - Endemic 3.35 High Eremopterix australis Sclater’s Lark NT NT Near-Endemic 0.00 High Spizocorys sclateri African Rock Pipit NT LC Endemic 5.26 Moderate Anthus crenatus
36 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Within the Bird Scoping Assessment Report (desktop integration and interpretation of existing data) of the SEA, avian impact sensitivities were generated and mapped (Figure 4) based on the interpretation of spatial data known as absolute sensitivity criteria (refer to Table 2).
According to the Figure 11, Sirius PV Solar Project Four is located within a green zone which is defined within the Bird Scoping Assessment Report as:
A low sensitivity area which possibly does not support important populations of threatened species that is susceptible to impacts. These areas are probably suitable for development, but present levels of knowledge preclude confident predictions on the sustainability of impacts
Table 4: The absolute sensitivity criteria applied for solar developments within the Upington FA 7. Application Sensitivity: Site Description of criteria Buffer Distance All wetlands with a surface area Medium: 1 km from edge >20 000 m2 Relevant to all All protected areas Very High: 1 km from edge Focus Areas From DEM slopes >75°, that probably High: 1 km constitute sheer cliffs that may be used by cliff-nesting/slope soaring birds. Power lines ≥132 kV possibly used by Medium: 5 km nesting Martial or Tawny Eagles or other raptors. Orange River as an avian fly-way; Very High: 1 km from edge supports waterbirds and riparian of full river communities. Known White-backed Vulture Very High: 5 km colonies/nest sites Known Verreaux’s Eagle nests on cliffs Very High: 3 km Upington or comms towers, or predicted sites on Focus Area 7 the basis of spacing and habitat. High: 5km
Known Martial Eagle nest sites on Very High: 2 km Ferrum-Garona 275 kV Tx line. Known African Fish-Eagle nest site High: No buffer Presence data for a suite of threatened, Medium: No buffer impact susceptible large savannah raptors.
37 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Project Location
Figure 11: Avian Impact Sensitivity Map (copied from DEA, 2015) indicating that the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project 4 (dark blue dot) and power line route are located within a Green Zone or a Low Landscape Sensitivity Area.
38 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.6 Conservation Planning: Environmental Management Framework
The ZF Mgcawu District Municipality (formerly Siyanda District Municipality) has compiled an Environmental Management Framework (EMF), in which environmental concerns and conservation priorities for all landscapes within the municipality are listed and mapped.
According to the EMF, the proposed project area does not fall within areas earmarked for conservation. Nevertheless, Bushmanland Arid Grasslands have been allocated a medium conservation priority, and Kalahari Karroid Shrubland a high conservation priority (Figure 12). This implies that despite the area not being earmarked for conservation, all care should be taken to disturb/break as little ground as possible.
Similarly, the proposed project area has been mapped as Zone 3 and Zone 7 (Figure 13) in the EMF Environmental Control Zones. These maps already indicate a relatively high biodiversity value of the plains.
This implies that the proposed project area does have a medium conservation value due to species diversity over most parts, with portions of high conservation value areas. There is no specific restriction on development of the area, but areas that are more sensitive should be excluded from the development and the footprint area restricted as much as possible.
The nearby Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation on the banks of the Orange River is regarded as a Critical Biodiversity Area, of which remaining sections have been listed as threatened ecosystems. Although these areas fall outside the proposed development, the intermittent rivers on either side of the development site and their largest tributaries drain directly into the Orange River, hence contamination or accelerated erosion off the proposed development site could have a negative impact on this important biodiversity area (Figure 14 under Section 3.7). The proposed development thus must proceed in such a manner that accelerated erosion is not initiated and mitigated if it occurs, and pollution is strictly controlled, with measures in place to contain any kind of pollution immediately on site, preventing it to reach even the smaller ephemeral washes.
39 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 12: Map from the ZF Mgcawu EMF showing the conservation priorities for the vegetation types. The approximate proposed development location is indicated by the blue arrow.
40 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 13: Map from the ZF Mgcawu EMF showing the environmental control zones. The approximate proposed development location is indicated by the blue arrow.
41 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.7 Conservation Planning: Critical Biodiversity Areas and broad scale ecological processes
Critical Biodiversity Areas have been identified for all municipal areas of the Northern Cape Province and are published on the SANBI website (bgis.sanbi.org). These maps identify threatened vegetation types (Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation) and a corridor area as the areas of concern in the study area (Figure 14). The threatened vegetation type is Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation within the Orange River. It is classified as a CBA2, which is a near natural landscape with intermediate level of irreplaceability or some flexibility in terms of area required to meet biodiversity targets and are approaching but have not passed their limits of acceptable change (see Table 5). The corridor area is classified as an Ecological Support Area (ESA), which are areas that are moderately to significantly disturbed but still able to maintain basic functionality. The corridor is, however, identified as an important terrestrial migration corridor in which basic ecological functionality needs to be maintained.
As mentioned in Section 3.6 this threatened vegetation type (Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation) falls outside the proposed development (footprint of Sirius PV Solar Project Four, 132kV overhead power line as well as entire study site) (refer to Figure 15). However, the surrounding catchments were still considered to have a Moderate to High Ecological Importance and Ecological Sensitivity and for this reason the southern portion of the project area was included as a CBA2, with most of the proposed development site falling within this CBA2 (including a portion of the 132kV power line). The intermittent rivers on either side of the study site are classified as an Ecological Support Area. However, the footprint itself, of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four, is located outside of these watercourses and, with the necessary mitigation measures in place, will not have a significant impact on the functioning of this ESA or the CBA2 (catchment) as well as the threatened Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation. It is important to bear in mind that these intermittent rivers (ESAs) drained directly into the Orange River, but have been fragmented from the Orange River through barriers and obstructions such as dams small dams and weirs at the confluence. However, connectivity may be restored for a brief period of time following sufficient rainfall events and hence contamination or accelerated erosion off the proposed development site could potentially have a negative impact on the downstream CBA2 during such periods. The proposed development thus must proceed in such a manner that accelerated erosion is not initiated and mitigated if it occurs, and pollution is strictly controlled, with measures in place to contain any kind of pollution immediately on site, preventing it to reach even the smaller ephemeral washes.
42 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Table 5: Relationship between Critical Biodiversity Areas categories (CBAs) and land management objectives CBA Land Management Objective category Protected Natural landscapes: Areas (PA) » Ecosystems and species are fully intact and undisturbed. & CBA 1 » 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 landscapes that are at or past their limits of acceptable change. CBA 2 Near-natural landscapes: » Ecosystems and species largely intact and undisturbed. » Areas with intermediate irreplaceability or some flexibility in terms of the area required to meet biodiversity targets. There are options for loss of some components of biodiversity in these landscapes without compromising the ability to achieve targets. » These are landscapes that are approaching but have not passed their limits of acceptable change. ESA Functional landscapes: » Ecosystem 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. ONA (Other Production landscapes: Natural Manage land to optimise sustainable utilisation of natural resources. Areas) and Transformed
43 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 14: Terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Areas map (Northern Cape Province) of the proposed study area and surrounding environment.
44 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.8 Vegetation overview
Broad vegetation types
The study site is situated in the Nama-Karoo biome and Bushmanland and West Griqualand Bioregion. The vegetation types covering the study site are Bushmanland Arid Grassland (Nkb 3) and Kalahari Karroid Shrubland (Nkb 5) with Kalahari Karroid Shrubland having a very limited extent within the study site, found only within the south-western corner. The proposed footprint of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four is located exclusively within Bushmanland Arid Grassland (refer to Figure 15).
The Bushmanland Arid Grassland landscapes consist of extensive or broken plains on a slightly sloping plateau. Vegetation is relatively sparse, dominated by grasses of the genus Stipagrostis. Other prominent grass genera include Enneapogon, Eragrostis, and Schmidtia. A variable density of high shrubs can be found, dominated by Acacia mellifera, Rhigozum trichotomum, and Boscia foetida subsp foetida. Dwarf karroid shrubs are common, especially of the genera Pentzia, Aptosimum, Pteronia, and Salsola (Mucina & Rutherford 2006).
The Bushmanland Arid Grassland vegetation is considered least threatened. A target of 21% has been earmarked for conservation, of which only a small portion is already protected in the Augrabies National Park. Overall, very little of the vegetation has been transformed, but extensive areas may be in various states of degradation due to grazing pressure (Mucina & Rutherford 2006, Hoffman and Ashwell 2001).
Within the study area, the Bushmanland Arid Grassland merges in an intricate mosaic into the Kalahari Karroid Shrubland where sands have eroded historically to expose a high amount of surface calcrete and small quartz ridges. This vegetation consists of a diverse, low karroid shrub layer, and grasses and shrubs more related to the sandy region of the Kalahari region. Small trees and tall shrubs are dominated by Acacia mellifera, Rhigozum trichotomum, Parkinsonia africana, and Boscia foetida subsp foetida. Dominant genera within the low shrub layer include Hermannia, Aptosimum, Leucosphaera, and Monechma. The grass layer is variable, consisting mostly of Stipagrostis, Enneapogon, Eragrostis, and Schmidtia species (Mucina & Rutherford 2006).
The Kalahari Karroid Shrubland vegetation is considered as least threatened. Of the 21% target for conservation, up to date only a small portion is protected in the Augrabies National Park. Many of the belts of this vegetation type have, in
45 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
the past, been preferred for road construction, which has led to the introduction of several alien invasive species (Mucina & Rutherford 2006).
Table 6: Key species associated with the Bushmanland Arid Grassland.
DOMINANT SPECIES Growth Form Key Species Low Shrubs Aptosimum spinescens, Hermannia spinosa, Pentzia spinescens, Aizoon asbestinum, A. schellenbergii, Aptosimum elongatum, A. lineare, A. marlothii, Barleria rigida, Berkheya annectens, Blepharis mitrata, Eriocephalus ambiguous, E. spinescens, Limeum aethiopicum, Lophiocarpus polystachys, Monechma incanum, M. spartioides, Pentzia pinnatisecta, Phaeoptilum spinosum, Polygala seminude, Pteronia leucoclada, P. mucronata, P. soridida, Rosenia humilis, Senecio niveus, Sericocoma avolans, Solanum capense, Talinum arnotii, Tetragonia arbuscula, Zygophyllum microphyllum Tall Shrubs Lycium cinereum, Rhigozum trichotomum, Cabada aphylla, Parkinsonia africana Small Trees Acacia mellifera subsp. detinens, Boscia foetida subsp. foetida Graminoids Aristida adscensionis, A. congesta, Enneapogon desvauxii, Eragrostis nindensis, Schmidtia kalahariensis, Stipagrostis ciliata, S. obtusa, Cenchrus ciliaris, Enneapogon scaber, Eragrostis annulata, E. porosa, E. procumbens, Panicum lanipes, Setaria verticillata, Sporobolus nervosus, Stipagrostis brevifolia, S. uniplumis, Tragus berteronianus, T. racemosus, Herbs Acanthopsis hoffmannsegiana, Aizoon canariense, Amaranthus praetermissus, Barleria lichtensteiniana, Chamaesyce inaequilatera, Dicoma capensis, Indigastrum argyraeum, Lotononis platycarpa, Sesamum capense, Tribulus pterophorus, T. terrestrisl, Vahlia capensis Succulent Shrubs Kleinia longiflora, Lycium bosciifolium, Salsola tuberculate, S. glabrescens Succulent Herbs Gisekia pharnacioides, Psilocaulon coriarium, Trianthema parvifolia Geophytic Herbs Moraea venenata ENDEMIC SPECIES Growth Form Key Species Succulent Shrub Dinteranthus pole-evansii, Larryleachia dinteri, L. marlothii, Ruschia kenhardtensis Succulent Herb Tridentea dwequensis (Bushmanland Endemic) Herb Lotononis oligocephala, Nemesia maxii
Table 7: Key species associated with the Kalahari Karroid Shrubland.
DOMINANT SPECIES Growth Form Key Species Low Shrubs Aptosimum spinescens, A. albomarginatum, Hermannia spinosa, A. schellenbergii, A. lineare, A. marlothii, Barleria rigida, Hermannia modesta, Indigofera heterotricha, Leucosphaera bainesii, Limeum aethiopicum, Monechma genistifolium subsp. genistifolium, Phyllanthus maderaspatensis, Polygala seminude, Ptycholobium biflorum subsp. beflorum, Sericocoma avolans, Phaeoptilum spinosum, Solanum capense, Tephrosia dregeana
46 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Tall Shrubs Rhigozum trichotomum Small Trees Acacia mellifera subsp. detinens, Boscia foetida subsp. foetida, Parkinsonia africana Graminoids Aristida adscensionis, A. congesta, Enneapogon desvauxii, E. scaber, E. cenchroides, Schmidtia kalahariensis, Stipagrostis ciliata, S. obtusa, S. anomala, S. hochstetteriana, S. uniplumis, Eragrostis annulata, E. homomalla, E. porosa, Tragus berteronianus, T. racemosus, Herbs Amaranthus praetermissus, Barleria lichtensteiniana, Chamaesyce inaequilatera, C. glanduligera Chascanum garipense, Cleome angustifolia subsp. diandra, Cucumis africanus, Geigeria ornativa, Hermannia abrotanoides, Dicoma capensis, Indigastrum argyraeum, Indigofera alternans, I. auricoma, Kohautia cynanchica, Limeum argute-carinatum, Mollugo cerviana, Monsonia umbellate, Sesamum capense, Tribulus pterophorus, T. terrestrisl, T. cristatus Succulent Herbs Gisekia africana, G. pharnacioides, Trianthema parvifolia
A species list from SANBI database (POSA) containing the species that have been recorded to date within the surroundings of the study area has been compiled. POSA generated species lists also contain updated Red Data species status according to the Red List of South African Plants published by SANBI in Strelitzia 25 (Raimondo et al. 2009, updated 2013). Only protected and red data species that may potentially occur in the study area have been listed under the results. The actual field survey confirmed which of the species already recorded actually occurs in the study area, and indicates the presence of additional species that may not have been recorded in official databases to date.
A total of 360 species have been recorded within the broader area, with Forbs and Dwarf Shrubs making the largest contributions to this species diversity with 116 and 96 species respectively. Even though less diverse grasses with 46 recorded species also play an important role within these Nama-Karoo vegetation types. Furthermore, even though Trees and High Shrubs are only represented with 37 species, trees such as Acacia erioloba (now Vachellia erioloba) and Boschia foetida are crucial species for biodiversity and functioning of ecosystems. Some higher shrubs species may become encroaching if the natural vegetation is disturbed and may become dominant, significantly impacting the functions provided by the affected environment. Such higher shrubs include; Acacia mellifera (now Senegalia mellifera) and Rhigozum obovatum. Geophytes and Succulents are respectively represented by 23 and 42 species. Alien Invasive Plant diversity within the affected environment is regarded as relatively low and is typically represented by Prosopis glandulosa, Nicotiana glauca and Salsola kali. Even though previous studies indicate that their population densities are relatively low within the affected region, Prosopis glandulas may pose a potential threat in areas that are disturbed through uncontrolled actions.
47 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
* Due to the fact that most of the acts and regulations pertaining to Acacia species (now spit into Vachelia and Senegalia) precede the name change, such species within this report will still be referred to on their “old” genus name in order to avoid any potential confusion.
48 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 15: Vegetation types (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006) of the study site as well as the status of Threatened Ecosystems.
49 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Red List and protected plant species of the study site
As previously mentioned, a species list was obtained from SANBI database (POSA) for the study area and surrounding environment. The species on this list were evaluated to determine the likelihood of any of them occurring within the study area. Of the species that are considered to occur within the geographical area under consideration, there were 68 species that are regarded as conservation important (refer to Table 8). According to the South African Red List Categories, 9 species are listed as Red Data Species namely; three species as Data Deficient (Hoodia gordonii; Senecio monticola & S. trachylaenus); three species as Declining (Acacia erioloba, Boophone disticha & Crinum bulbispermum) and three species as Near Threatened (Drimia sanguinea, Dinteranthus wilmotianus & Hoodia officinalis). Only two species protected according to the National Forest Act (NFA) were recorded on the site, namely Acacia erioloba and Acacia haematoxylon. A total of 65 species that occur within the region are protected within the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act (Act No 9 of 2009) (Schedule 1 & 2). Furthermore, the region is characterised with a relatively high number of south African endemics, with 66 endemic species recorded within the region.
Figure 16: Schematic representation of the South African Red List categories. Taken from http://redlist.sanbi.org/redcat.php
50 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Table 8: Conservation Important Flora Species that have been listed within the SANBI database and have been recorded within the region. National Forest Act (NFA), Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act (NCNCA).
Species Status Species Status
Hoodia gordonii NCNCA, Sutherlandia frutescens NCNCA NEMBA:BA, Anacampseros NCNCA Data Deficient baeseckei Senecio monticola Data Deficient Anacampseros NCNCA Senecio trachylaenus NCNCA, Data filamentosa subsp. Deficient tomentosa Acacia erioloba NFA, Declining Anacampseros NCNCA Boophone disticha NCNCA, filamentosa subsp. Declining namaquensis Crinum bulbispermum NCNCA, Manulea schaeferi NCNCA Declining Ferraria variabilis NCNCA Harpagophytum NCNCA, Lapeirousia littoralis NCNCA procumbens subsp. NEMBA:BA subsp. caudata procumbens Lapeirousia littoralis NCNCA Acacia haematoxylon NFA subsp. littoralis Drimia sanguinea NCNCA, Near Nerine laticoma NCNCA Threatened Oxalis lawsonii NCNCA Dinteranthus NCNCA, Near Adenium oleifolium NCNCA wilmotianus Threatened Aloe claviflora NCNCA Hoodia officinalis subsp. NCNCA, Near Aloe hereroensis NCNCA officinalis Threatened Asclepias stellifera NCNCA Near Avonia albissima NCNCA Cleome conrathii Threatened Cotyledon orbiculata NCNCA Boophone disticha NCNCA var. orbiculata Hypoxis hemerocallidea NCNCA Crassula muscosa NCNCA Nananthus vittatus NCNCA Euphorbia avasmontana NCNCA Acalypha caperonioides NCNCA Euphorbia gariepina NCNCA var. caperonioides subsp. gariepina Lessertia phillipsiana NCNCA Euphorbia mauritanica NCNCA Jamesbrittenia NCNCA Euphorbia rudis NCNCA atropurpurea subsp. Euphorbia spinea NCNCA atropurpurea Haworthia venosa NCNCA Jamesbrittenia NCNCA subsp. tessellata atropurpurea subsp. Larryleachia marlothii NCNCA pubescens Mesembryanthemum NCNCA Jamesbrittenia NCNCA crystallinum canescens Mesembryanthemum NCNCA Jamesbrittenia NCNCA guerichianum integerrima Orbea lutea subsp. lutea NCNCA Lessertia pauciflora NCNCA Prenia tetragona NCNCA
51 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Species Status Species Status
Psilocaulon articulatum NCNCA Peristrophe cernua NCNCA Psilocaulon coriarium NCNCA Anacampseros NCNCA Psilocaulon subnodosum NCNCA filamentosa subsp. Ruschia canonotata NCNCA filamentosa Ruschia hamata NCNCA Dianthus micropetalus NCNCA Sarcostemma viminale NCNCA Babiana flabellifolia NCNCA Boscia foetida subsp. NCNCA Oxalis bowiei NCNCA foetida Oxalis imbricata var. NCNCA Combretum NCNCA violacea erythrophyllum Tritonia strictifolia NCNCA Commiphora NCNCA Cotyledon orbiculata NCNCA gracilifrondosa var. dactylopsis Gymnosporia linearis NCNCA Pelargonium NCNCA subsp. lanceolata anethifolium Nymania capensis NCNCA Ruschia ruralis NCNCA Lessertia excisa NCNCA Leucadendron rubrum NCNCA Pelargonium inquinans NCNCA
Species recorded within the development site are described in the sections which follow.
3.9 Site specific vegetation description – Fine Scale Vegetation Patterns
In this section, the different habitats and vegetation patterns observed within the study site (including the proposed power line servitude) are described. As these are field-based observations taken directly from the site, they are of greater reliability and pertinence than the results of the National Vegetation Map which is at a coarse scale and does not represent the detail of the site adequately. The habitat map derived for the study area (including the proposed development footprint) is provided in Figures 17 and 18.
Vegetation of the study site was consistent with Bushmanland Arid Grasslands and Kalahari Karroid Shrublands (as described by Mucina and Rutherford, 2006), with small areas of riparian woodlands fringing ephemeral washes, intermittent streams and moist derpression like feature, contributing to habitat diversity. Small-scale plant diversity and ecological state of the vegetation varies considerably across the entire farm portion (study area), depending mostly on edaphic factors such as soil surface rockiness, depth of soil and soil moisture content. Landscape position also plays an important role. Despite past disturbances such as gravel roads, farm tracks, homesteads, farming activities and small-scale mining, the natural vegetation is relatively intact, with only a low presence of alien invasives. Probably the most significant impact on the vegetation is livestock grazing.
52 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
The study site is moderately species diverse with over 135 plant species identified within the boundaries of the study area. As mentioned, variations in edaphic factors, such as soil moisture content, contribute to this diversity. The forb and graminoid layer were relatively well developed and represented by 60 species (35 forb species and 25 graminoid species). Even though the lower shrub layer (dwarf shrubs) was only represented by 21 species, most of these species play a vital role in the structure and functioning of the vegetation layer and may in some areas form the dominant plant cover. The trees and higher shrub layer are mainly a feature of the riparian woodlands fringing ephemeral washes, intermittent streams and depression like features, and play a vital role in habitat, niche and species diversity with the study area. This higher plant stratification is represented by 5 tree species and 14 higher shrub species. Geophytes and succulents only make up 21.9% of the total species composition. Furthermore, the most dominant plant families within the development area are; Poaceae with 18.9%, Asteraceae with 14.4%, Fabaceae with 6%, Scrophulariaceae 6% and Acanthaceae with 5.3%. Key species associated with the study site are provided in Table 9.
Table 9: Key species associated with the study site.
DOMINANT SPECIES Growth Form Key Species Shrubs Rhigozum trichotomum, Boscia foetida, Senegalia (Acacia) mellifera, Lycium bosciifolium Dwarf Shrubs Monechma divaricatum. Monechma genistifolium, Plinthus sericeus, Leucosphaera bainesii, Eriocephalus merxmuelleri, Geigeria ornativa, Salsola armata, S. tuberculata, Aptosimum spinescens Trees Boscia albitrunca, Vachellia (Acacia) erioloba, Ziziphus mucronata Graminoids Aristida stipitate, Enneapogon desvauxii, Enneapogon scaber, Eragrostis annulata, E. trichophora, E. echinochloidea, Stipagrostis uniplumis, S. obtuse, S. ciliata, Forbs Acanthopsis disperma, Barleria lichtensteiniana, Blepharis mitrata, Helichrysum argyrospaerum, Ocimum angustifolium, Geophytic Herbs Albuca seineri, Moreae polystachya, Harpagophytum procumbnes, Nerine laticoma Succulent Herbs Annacampseros albissima, Kleinia longiflora, Euphorbia spinea, Sarcocaulon samoniflorum, Ruschia spinosa, Zygophyllum lichtensteinianum, Z. chrysopteron, Z. leptopetalum
Weeds and invasive alien species are currently uncommon within the study site and are represented by 3 species, namely Prosopis glandulosa, Salsola kali and Argemone ochroleuca. All three of these species are listed as Invasive Alien Plants (NEM:BA, 2017) with P. glandulosa characterised as a Category 3 IAP and S. kali and A. ochroleuca as Category 1b IAPs. Only S. kali was observed within the proposed development footprint for the Sirius 3 PV development. However,
53 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
beyond the study site, along major transport routes are several alien invasive species, most notably P. glandulosa and Nicotiana glauca. There is a high risk of invasion of these and other alien invasive species onto the property and development area during and after construction, necessitating regular monitoring and eradication of such species as soon as observed.
Regarding conservation important species, 20 species were identified within the study site, with 16 species identified within the proposed development footprint of Sirius PV Solar Project Four (refer to Table 10) of which three species are Red Listed Species (Hoodia gordonii – Data Deficient, Acacia erioloba – Declining and Aloidendron dichotomum - Vulnerable), two species are protected within the National Forest Act (A. erioloba, Boscia albitrunca) whilst the remaining species area listed as protected species within the relevant provincial conservation ordinations.
Table 10: Conservation Important Flora Species that was confirmed during the site survey within the study site as well as within the proposed development footprint of Sirius 3. Abbreviations: National Forest Act – NFA; Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act: Schedule 1 or 2 – NCNCA 1/2. Species Status Confirmed: Development Footprint Boscia albitrunca NFA Confirmed Boscia foetida subsp. foetida NCNCA 2 Confirmed Vachellia (Acacia) erioloba Declining, NFA Confirmed Harpagophytum procumbens NCNCA 1 Psilicaulon junceum NCNCA 2 Confirmed Hoodia gordonii Data Deficient; NCNCA 1 Confirmed Anacampseros (Avonia) albissima NCNCA 2 Confirmed Euphorbia spinea NCNCA 2 Confirmed Lithops bromfieldii NCNCA 2 Euphorbia braunsii (rudis) NCNCA 2 Aloe claviflora NCNCA 2 Confirmed Larryleachia marlothii NCNCA 2 Aloidendron (Aloe) dichotomum Vulnerable Confirmed Anacampseros filamentosa NCNCA 2 Confirmed Prenia tetragona NCNCA 2 Confirmed Nerine laticoma NCNCA 2 Confirmed Adenium oleifolium NCNCA 2 Confirmed Ruschia spinosa NCNCA 2 Confirmed Oxalis semiloba NCNCA 2 Confirmed Microloma sagittatum NCNCA 2 Confirmed
54 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 20: Hoodia gordonii Photo 19: Aloidendron (Aloe) dichotomum
Photo 22: Aloe claviflora Photo 21: Anacampseros filamentosa
Photo 24: Boscia foetida Photo 23: Anacampseros albissima
55 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 26: Euphorbia spinea.
Photo 25: Ruschia spinosa
Photo 28: Acacia erioloba Photo 27: Boscia albitrunca
Photo 29: Psilicaulon junceum
56 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 17: Identified habitat types within the study site (Farm Tungsten Lodge 638) including the feasibility area for the Sirius PV Solar Project Four.
57 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 18: Habitat and feature map of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four footprint.
58 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Description of the identified habitat types
Five habitat types could be identified (Figures 17 and 18 above):
» Habitat 1: Ziziphus mucronata – Cenchrus ciliaris riparian woodlands of intermittent watercourses/streams. Density, height and composition of the woody and herb layer vary immensely. Large specimens of the protected Acacia erioloba and Boscia albitrunca as well as other tree species are scattered along these larger watercourses. Several of the large Acacia erioloba trees are currently ‘occupied’ by large active social weavers’ nests.
In some localities along these watercourses sandy plains are created on either side of these drainage features by occasional large flooding events. These sandy plains typically merge into habitat type 4.
» Habitat 2: Rhigozum trichotomum – Barleria lichtensteiniana riparian shrubland of the ephemeral washes (ephemeral drainage systems). These washes are typically characterized with a dense medium to tall shrub layer. However, these small tributaries do not hold enough moisture to support a tree layer and the typical herb layer found within habitat 1.
» Habitat 3: Ziziphus mucronata – Lycium oxycarpum riparian shrubland of the depression like features. These depressions form due to micro- topography variations of the underlying substrates (shallower soils over calcrete), which have been filled up over time with sand giving rise to sparse low forb and grasslands on depression bottoms (may even be devoid of vegetation). The outer belt of these depression features comprises of a mixture of tall shrubs and trees. These areas contain a higher soil moisture content than that of the surrounding karroid shrublands (during the rainy season).
Fine silt and clay particles that have been layered here are fine enough to have filtered out most of the dissolved salts/minerals that have been washed off higher-lying areas. Unlike other fluvial systems (Habitat 1 and 2), these minerals were accumulated because runoff accumulating here, is not distributed or moved over larger areas, but will gradually either evaporate or infiltrate, hence the sodic content of the alluvial deposits in the depressions is generally higher than in all other fluvial systems. Inundation of depressions with standing water will be scarce, but thorough wetting of the soils will result in deep, ‘sticky’ muds. Even very shallow and short- lived surface water resulting from sufficiently large rainfall events may serve as an important surface water source for fauna.
59 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Habitat 4: Senegalia mellifera – Stipagrostis uniplumis mixed open shrublands cover the lower-lying areas of the study area where the soil layer tend to be deeper with less rockiness. Sandy loams naturally eroded off the undulating landscape have accumulated over time in these areas. Characteristically this habitat type is covered by a more prominent grass cover with fewer dwarf (karroid) shrubs. Taller shrubs such as Senegalia mellifera, Rhigozum trichtomum and Boscia foetida area also an occasional but important feature of this habitat type. S. mellifera and R. trichtomum have become encroaching in some portions of this habitat type. Due to the dominance of grass species and the moderate presence of dwarf shrubs, this habitat type is regarded as having a higher grazing potential for larger livestock. However, the cover of perennial grasses can vary significantly from one year to the next, depending on rainfall. During the time of the inspection this habitat type was subjected to severe grazing pressure, well over the carrying capacity, subsequently most of the more palatable grasses were grazed to just above the soil layer.
» Habitat 5: Zygophyllum chrysopteron – Enneapogon scaber dwarf shrublands occupy the bulk of the study site, especially on the higher-lying portions of the undulating landscape. Species composition is very diverse and is influenced by underlying geology, soil depth (typically very limited) and prominence of surface rockiness. Dwarf (karroid) shrubs and grasses from a prominent layer within this habitat type, but as mentioned the specific make-up of this layer is highly variable throughout this habitat. Similarly, the presence of grasses and annuals is driven by rainfall during the season and the abiotic characteristics of a specific locality.
3.9.1 Ziziphus mucronata – Cenchrus ciliaris riparian woodlands of intermittent watercourses/streams.
Habitat Summary
Substrate Mostly deep coarse sand. May Disturbance Limited to farm tracks, become slightly loamy is some service tracks (power line) areas. Large rocks (outcroppings) and the occasional may be exposed in some areas borehole (wind pump and along the embankments water crib)
Species 76 species recorded of 132 Conservation High in terms of species of Richness value: conservation concern as well as keystone species (Indigenous) » Relatively high diversity, presence of keystone species (e.g. Acacia erioloba, Boscia albitrunca and Ziziphus
60 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
mucronata).
High in terms of creation of micro-habitat and corridor of movement for migrating faunal species.
Ecosystem Absorption and reduction of Sensitivity: High sensitivity, function occasional flash floods. No-go Ephemeral Alluvial Important corridor for abiotic and Systems (Tributaries of biotic material transfer, as well as the Orange River) wildlife.
Niche habitat ensures persistence of organisms and provides seasonal water and food to migrating fauna
Keystone species vital for maintenance habitat for multitude of organisms.
Larger shrubs and small trees on the periphery provide nesting space for birds and shelter/breeding areas for fauna.
Large Acacia erioloba (Camelthorn) provide nesting space for social weavers.
Dense herbaceous vegetation helps slow down floods and retain nutrients.
Vegetation filters out possible pollutants to prevent their discharge into the Orange River.
A permanent vegetation cover is necessary to maintain the functionality and stability of this ecosystem
Need for Clearing of alien invasive species Agricultural Grazing, maintenance of rehabilitation (1 recorded: Salsola kalii) present potential pollinator populations, or that may be introduced seasonal surface water
Dominant species Monechma divaricatum, M. genistifolium, Blepharis mitrata, Cenchrus ciliaris, Enneapogon scaber, E. cenchroides, Eragrostis annulata, Stipagrostis ciliata, S. uniplumis, Senegalia mellifera, Lycium bosciifolium, L. oxycarpum, Zygophyllum lichtensteinianum, Z. dregeanum, Ziziphus mucronate, Acacia erioloba
Key Species Boscia albitrunca, Acacia erioloba, Searsia pendulina, Ziziphus mucronate, Stipagrostis ciliata, S. uniplumis
Conservation Important Boscia albitrunca, B. foetida, Acacia erioloba, Nerine laticoma, Species (Protected and
61 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Red Data Species) Psilicaulon junceum
Sociable weaver (Philetairus socius) nests
Table 11: Species list for Habitat 1 Growth Species Graminoid Eragrostis annulata Form Graminoid Eragrostis echinochloidea Climber Cissampelos capensis Graminoid Eragrostis lehmanniana Climber Coccinia rehmannii Graminoid Eragrostis nindensis Climber Pergularia daemia subsp. Graminoid Eragrostis porosa garipensis Graminoid Eragrostis trichophora Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum marlothii Graminoid Schmidtia kalihariensis Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum spinescens Graminoid Setaria verticillata Dwarf Shrub Cabada aphylla Graminoid Stipagrostis brevifolia Dwarf Shrub Galenia africana var. Graminoid Stipagrostis ciliata africana Graminoid Stipagrostis namaquensis Dwarf Shrub Geigeria ornativa Graminoid Stipagrostis obtusa Dwarf Shrub Geigeria pectidea Graminoid Stipagrostis uniplumis Dwarf Shrub Indigofera heterotricha Graminoid Tragus berteronianus Dwarf Shrub Microloma sagittatum Half- Tapinanthus oleifolius Dwarf Shrub Monechma divaricatum parasitic Dwarf Shrub Monechma genistifolium Shrub Dwarf Shrub Plinthus sericeus Pteridophyte Ophioglossum polyphyllum Dwarf Shrub Salsola kalii Shrub Asparagus africanus Dwarf Shrub Salsola rabieana Shrub Boscia foetida subsp. foetida Forb Amellus tridactylus Shrub Diospyros lycioides Forb Arctotis leiocarpa Shrub Ehretia rigida Forb Barleria rigida Shrub Gymnosporia linearis Forb Berkheya spinosissima Shrub Lycium bosciifolium Forb Blepharis mitrata Shrub Lycium oxycarpum Forb Chrysocoma obtusa Shrub Parkinsonia africana Forb Cleome spp. Shrub Rhigozum trichotomum Forb Dimorphotheca zeyheri Shrub Senegalia (Acacia) mellifera Forb Helichrysum argyrospaerum s. detinens Forb Helichrysum micropoides Succulent Crassula natans var. natans Forb Hirpicium echinus Succulent Kleinia longiflora Forb Limeum sulcatum Succulent Psilicaulon junceum Forb Limeum viscosum Succulent Sansevieria aethiopica Forb Ocimum angustifolium Succulent Zygophyllum chrysopteron Forb Radyera urens Succulent Zygophyllum dregeanum Forb Salvia spp. Succulent Zygophyllum Forb Tribulus zeyheri lichtensteinianum Geophyte Nerine laticoma Tree Boscia albitrunca Graminoid Aristida congesta Tree Searsia pendulina Graminoid Cenchrus ciliaris Tree Vachelia (Acacia) erioloba Graminoid Enneapgon desvauxii Tree Ziziphus mucronata Graminoid Enneapogon cenchroides Graminoid Enneapogon scaber
62 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 30: Dense riparian woodland comprising of a tall shrubs and tree species including a large A. erioloba species with a sociable weaver’s nest.
Photo 31: A more open riparian fringe with numerous smaller A. erioloba trees
63 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 32: A portion of the Helbrandskloofspruit stream with a fairly narrow channel and an open shrubby riparian fringe comprising mainly of S. mellifera (Suitable location for the access road crossing)
Photo 33: A broader channel fringed by a dense taller riparian fringe (also containing A. erioloba). This is not a suitable location the access road crossing.
64 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.9.2 Rhigozum trichotomum – Barleria lichtensteiniana riparian shrubland of the ephemeral washes (drainage lines).
Habitat Summary
Substrate Channel centres with deeper Disturbance Limited to farm tracks, alluvial sandy deposits with or service tracks (power without surface rockiness, line). Acacia mellifera and typically overlying calcrete Rhigozum trichotomum substrate. Geological substrates may become invasive typically become exposed along (encroaching) in some the fringes resulting in shallow localities. soils. Rocks and boulders
Species 37 species recorded of 132 Conservation Moderate in terms of Richness value: species of conservation concern (Indigenous) » Relatively high diversity, presence of keystone species (e.g. Acacia erioloba, Boscia albitrunca and Ziziphus mucronata)
Moderate in terms of creation of micro-habitat
Ecosystem Below-ground water storage, Sensitivity: Medium Sensitivity function supporting higher shrubs in close proximity to drainage lines
Absorption and reduction of occasional flash floods.
Corridor for water, seed, nutrient flows and fauna
Larger shrubs and small trees on the periphery provide nesting space for birds and shelter/breeding areas for fauna.
A permanent vegetation cover is necessary to maintain the functionality and stability of this ecosystem
Need for Clearing of alien invasive species Agricultural Very limited seasonal rehabilitation (1 recorded: Salsola kalii) present potential grazing, maintenance of or that may be introduced pollinator populations
Dominant species Monechma divaricatum, Aptosimum spinescens, M. genistifolium, Barleria lichtensteiniana, Blepharis mitrata, Enneapogon scaber, Eragrostis annulata, Stipagrostis ciliata, S. uniplumis, Acacia mellifera, Boscia foetida, Rhigozum trichotomum, Lycium oxycarpum, Zygophyllum lichtensteinianum,
Key Species Acacia erioloba, Boscia foetida, Stipagrostis ciliata, S. uniplumis
65 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Conservation Important Boscia foetida and Acacia erioloba, Species (Protected and Red Data Species)
Table 12: Species list for Habitat 2 Growth Form Species Shrub Asparagus africanus
Shrub Boscia foetida subsp. foetida Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum spinescens
Shrub Ehretia rigida Dwarf Shrub Eriocephalus ambiguus
Shrub Lycium bosciifolium Dwarf Shrub Geigeria pectidea
Shrub Lycium oxycarpum Dwarf Shrub Monechma divaricatum
Shrub Parkinsonia africana Dwarf Shrub Monechma genistifolium
Shrub Rhigozum trichotomum Dwarf Shrub Plinthus sericeus
Shrub Senegalia (Acacia) mellifera Forb Acanthopsis disperma s. detinens
Forb Aptosimum elongatum Succulent Sansevieria aethiopica
Forb Barleria lichtensteiniana Succulent Zygophyllum chrysopteron
Forb Barleria rigida Succulent Zygophyllum dregeanum
Forb Berkheya spinosissima Succulent Zygophyllum lichtensteinianum Forb Blepharis mitrata
Tree Vachelia (Acacia) erioloba Forb Chrysocoma obtusa
Half-parasitic Tapinanthus oleifolius Forb Cullen obtusifolia Shrub Forb Helichrysum argyrospaerum Shrub Asparagus africanus Forb Ocimum angustifolium Shrub Boscia foetida subsp. foetida Graminoid Aristida congesta Shrub Ehretia rigida Graminoid Enneapogon scaber Shrub Lycium bosciifolium Graminoid Eragrostis annulata Shrub Lycium oxycarpum Graminoid Stipagrostis brevifolia Shrub Parkinsonia africana Graminoid Stipagrostis ciliata Shrub Rhigozum trichotomum Graminoid Stipagrostis obtusa Shrub Senegalia (Acacia) mellifera s. detinens Graminoid Stipagrostis uniplumis
Succulent Sansevieria aethiopica Half-parasitic Tapinanthus oleifolius Shrub Succulent Zygophyllum chrysopteron
66 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 34: Relatively shallow (diffuse) ephemeral wash (drainage line) characterized by a sandy channel and a relative dense riparian fringe comprising of tall shrubs and smaller tree species (note the Boscia albitrunca tree in the left top corner of the drainage line).
Photo 35: Ephemeral wash with a more prominent, incised channel and a dense woody vegetation cover
67 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 36: An ephemeral wash with a less prominent channel and a sparser vegetation cover.
68 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.9.3 Ziziphus mucronata – Lycium oxycarpum riparian shrubland of the moist depression like feature.
Habitat Summary
Substrate Greyish loamy to clay-loam soils, Disturbance Most of the depressions larger depressions may contain are relatively undisturbed finer grained alluvial silt and clay with moderate levels of trampling and grazing Depressions with surrounding present in some surface calcrete, depressions.
Higher salinity/sodicity of soils Woodland periphery may possible. become prone to bush encroachment Mainly isolated systems or lowest accumulation areas
Species 39 species recorded of 132 Conservation Low in terms of species of Richness value: conservation concern and keystone species (Indigenous) Moderate in terms of creating micro-habitats and sustaining downstream intermittent watercourses with moisture.
Ecosystem Accumulation and filtering of Sensitivity: High Sensitivity function runoff before water seeps into ground water
Possible seasonal surface water during periods of exceptional rainfall (however, this is very unpredictable)
» Seasonal availability of associated biota (most notably invertebrates) that serve as important food sources for especially reptiles and birds
Seasonal grazing on peripheries of depressions during periods of higher moisture
Below-ground storage and channelling of water
Larger shrubs and small trees on the periphery provide nesting space for birds and shelter/breeding areas for fauna.
Softer and deeper substrates on banks provide burrowing sites for fauna
69 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Need for None recorded Agricultural Grazing – low value rehabilitation potential Occasional seasonal source of surface water
Dominant species Riparian Fringe: Ziziphus mucronata, Senegalia mellifera, Lycium bosciifolium, L. oxycarpum
Depression Wetland: Geigeria pectidea, Lycium cinereum, Amellus tridactylus, Platycarpha carlinoides, Moreae polystachya, Eragrostis annulata, E. porosa, Chloris virgata, Selago dinteri, Berkheya spinosissima
Key Species Ziziphus mucronata
Conservation Important Nerine laticoma Species (Protected and Red Data Species)
Table 13: Species list for Habitat 3 Growth Form Species Forb Selago dinteri
Forb Sesamum triphyllum Dwarf Shrub Geigeria ornativa
Forb Tribulus zeyheri Dwarf Shrub Geigeria pectidea
Geophyte Colchicum melanthoides Dwarf Shrub Lycium cinereum
Geophyte Moraea polystachya Dwarf Shrub Pentzia incana
Geophyte Nerine laticoma Forb Amellus tridactylus
Graminoid Chloris virgata Forb Aptosimum elongatum
Graminoid Eragrostis annulata Forb Argemone ochroleuca
Graminoid Eragrostis porosa Forb Berkheya spinosissima
Graminoid Schmidtia pappophoroides Forb Blepharis mitrata
Graminoid Stipagrostis uniplumis Forb Boerhavia repens
Graminoid Tragus berteronianus Forb Chrysocoma obtusa
Graminoid Urochloa oligotricha Forb Crotalaria spp.
Half-parasitic Tapinanthus oleifolius Forb Diascia spp. Shrub
Forb Hermbstaedtia spp. Shrub Lycium bosciifolium
Forb Hirpicium echinus Shrub Lycium oxycarpum
Forb Hirpicium zeyheri Shrub Senegalia (Acacia) mellifera s. detinens Forb Platycarpha carlinoides
Succulent Zygophyllum Forb Radyera urens lichtensteinianum
70 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Tree Searsia lancea
Tree Ziziphus mucronata
Photo 37: Depression feature comprising of a woody (tall shrubs) fringe and a sparsely covered interior
Photo 38: Depression feature with a grassy interior.
71 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.9.4 Senegalia mellifera – Stipagrostis uniplumis mixed open shrublands.
Habitat Summary
Substrate Sandy to Sandy-loam, highly Disturbance Subjected to moderate- variable soil depth, overlaying high grazing pressure, calcrete which may occasionally farm tracks, power line become exposed as surface gravel pylons and associated and rock service road
Species 58 species recorded of 132 Conservation Moderate - Low Richness value: Slow-growing protected (Indigenous) trees and shrubs (Boscia foetida and Acacia erioloba – smaller specimens than those found within the riparian woodlands)
Ecosystem Grazing and browsing Sensitivity: Low Sensitivity function Larger shrubs and small trees on the periphery provide nesting space for birds and shelter/breeding areas for fauna.
Collection area of soil and seed resources from higher lying areas, these can only be retained by denser vegetation to prevent loss of these resources into the drainage lines.
Softer sands retain runoff from higher lying areas, preventing loss thereof and thus also acting as first buffer of potential flash floods by slowing down and retaining stormwater.
Maintains food resources for fauna, especially grazing and seeds.
Softer soils offer habitat to burrowing fauna.
Herbaceous vegetation, trees and low shrubs prevent accelerated erosion and degradation of the ecosystem
Need for Clearing of 2 indigenous invasives Agricultural Grazing, maintenance of rehabilitation where shrub encroachment occurs potential pollinator populations (A. mellifera and R. trichotomum) and 2 alien species (S. kalii and P.
72 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
glandulosa)
Dominant species Rhigozum trichotomum, Acacia mellifera, Boscia foetida, Enneapogon cenchroides, Eragrostis lehmanniana, E. trichophora, Stipagrostis ciliata, S. uniplumis, Aristida stipitata, Geigeria ornativa, Monechma divaricatum, Blepharis mitrata, Cleome spp., Aptosimum lineare
Key Species Acacia erioloba, Boscia foetida, Acacia mellifera, Stipagrostis uniplumis, S. ciliata, Eragrostis lehmanniana
Conservation Important Acacia erioloba, Boscia foetida, Euphorbia spinea, Psilicaulon Species (Protected and junceum, Rushcia spinosa, Harpagophytum procumbens Red Data Species)
Table 14: Species list for Habitat 4 Growth Form Species Forb Ocimum angustifolium
Forb Salvia spp. Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum lineare
Forb Sesamum triphyllum Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum spinescens
Forb Tribulus zeyheri Dwarf Shrub Galenia africana var. africana Geophyte Harpagophytum procumbens Dwarf Shrub Geigeria ornativa
Geophyte Albuca seineri Dwarf Shrub Monechma divaricatum
Geophyte Ledebouria undulata Dwarf Shrub Monechma genistifolium
Geophyte Moraea polystachya Dwarf Shrub Plinthus sericeus
Graminoid Aristida stipitata Dwarf Shrub Pteronia mucronata
Graminoid Enneapgon desvauxii Dwarf Shrub Salsola armata
Graminoid Enneapogon cenchroides Forb Acanthopsis disperma
Graminoid Enneapogon scaber Forb Arctotis leiocarpa
Graminoid Eragrostis lehmanniana Forb Barleria lichtensteiniana
Graminoid Eragrostis porosa Forb Barleria rigida
Graminoid Eragrostis trichophora Forb Blepharis mitrata
Graminoid Schmidtia kalihariensis Forb Cleome spp.
Graminoid Schmidtia pappophoroides Forb Dimorphotheca polyptera
Graminoid Stipagrostis ciliata Forb Helichrysum argyrospaerum Graminoid Stipagrostis obtusa
Forb Hermbstaedtia spp. Graminoid Stipagrostis uniplumis
Forb Lotononis spp
73 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Graminoid Tragus berteronianus Shrub Senegalia (Acacia) mellifera s. detinens Half-parasitic Tapinanthus oleifolius Shrub Succulent Euphorbia spinea
Shrub Asparagus africanus Succulent Kleinia longiflora
Shrub Boscia foetida subsp. Succulent Psilicaulon junceum foetida Succulent Ruschia spinosa Shrub Lycium oxycarpum Succulent Sansevieria aethiopica Shrub Parkinsonia africana Succulent Zygophyllum chrysopteron Shrub Prosopis glandulosa Succulent Zygophyllum leptopetalum Shrub Rhigozum trichotomum Tree Vachellia (Acacia) erioloba Shrub Senegalia (Acacia) hebeclada subsp. Hebeclada
Photo 39: Mixed open shrubland comprising of Stipagrostis grasses (mainly S. uniplumis) as well as low growing shrubs such as R. trichotomum and S. mellifera.
74 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 40: Boscia foetida (the shrub in the foreground) is a key shrub within this habitat type
Photo 41: Soil capping and sheet erosion indicative of overgrazing within this habitat
75 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.9.5 Zygophyllum chrysopteron – Enneapogon scaber dwarf shrublands.
Habitat Summary
Substrate Very shallow sandy-loam soils Disturbance Trampling and grazing has with a high degree of surface resulted in isolated cases rockiness. Extensive gravel plains of sheet erosion with bare may form in areas. Gravels and patches. rocks comprise either of calcrete and/or quartzite. Low quartz Farm tracks, power line ridges may occasionally be pylons and associated present service roads
Species 73 species recorded of 132 Conservation Moderate Richness value: Relative high species (Indigenous) diversity
Ecosystem High species diversity adds to Sensitivity: Low Sensitivity function resilience of vegetation to drought and continued availability of resources to fauna
Vegetation increases soil porosity and thus facilitates rainfall infiltration, reducing stormwater runoff
Prevention of soil degradation
Maintenance of pollinator populations
Need for Clearing of alien invasive species Agricultural Grazing (very limited rehabilitation (1 recorded – Salsola kalii) potential potential), maintenance of pollinator populations
Dominant species Rhigozum trichotomum, Leucosphaera bainesii, Eriocephalus merxmuelleri, E. asphalathoides, Acanthopsis disperma, Salsola armata, Enneapogon scaber, Stipagrostis obtusa, S. uniplumis, Oropetium capense Anacampseros abissima, Kleinia longiflora, Euphorbia spinea, Zygophyllum chrysopteron, Z. leptopetalum, Monechma divaricatum,
Key Species Boscia foetida, Acacia erioloba, Lycium bosciifolium, Eriocephalus merxmuelleri, Enneapogon scaber, Stipagrostis uniplumis, S. obtusa
Conservation Important Acacia erioloba, Boscia foetida, Euphorbia spinea, E. rudis, Species (Protected and Psilicaulon junceum, Rushcia spinosa, Anacampseros filamentosa, Red Data Species) A. albissima, Adenium oleifolium, Larryleachia marlothii, Hoodia gordonii, Aloe claviflora, Lithops bromfieldii,
76 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Table 15: Species list for Habitat 5 Growth Form Species Geophyte Dipcadi glaucum
Geophyte Dipcadi gracilimum Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum lineare
Geophyte Eriospermum zeyheri Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum marlothii
Geophyte Ledebouria undulata Dwarf Shrub Aptosimum spinescens
Graminoid Aristida congesta Dwarf Shrub Cabada aphylla
Graminoid Enneapgon desvauxii Dwarf Shrub Eriocephalus ambiguus
Graminoid Enneapogon cenchroides Dwarf Shrub Eriocephalus asphalathoides
Graminoid Enneapogon scaber Dwarf Shrub Eriocephalus merxmuelleri
Graminoid Eragrostis annulata Dwarf Shrub Galenia africana var. africana Graminoid Eragrostis echinochloidea
Dwarf Shrub Geigeria ornativa Graminoid Eragrostis nindensis
Dwarf Shrub Leucosphaera bainesii Graminoid Microchloa caffra
Dwarf Shrub Monechma divaricatum Graminoid Oropetium capense
Dwarf Shrub Pentzia incana Graminoid Schmidtia kalihariensis
Dwarf Shrub Pentzia spinescens Graminoid Stipagrostis ciliata
Dwarf Shrub Plinthus sericeus Graminoid Stipagrostis obtusa
Dwarf Shrub Pteronia mucronata Graminoid Stipagrostis uniplumis
Dwarf Shrub Salsola armata Graminoid Tragus berteronianus
Dwarf Shrub Salsola kalii Half-parasitic Tapinanthus oleifolius Shrub Dwarf Shrub Salsola rabieana
Pteridophyte Ophioglossum polyphyllum Dwarf Shrub Salsola tuberculata
Shrub Boscia foetida subsp. Forb Acanthopsis disperma foetida
Forb Barleria rigida Shrub Lycium bosciifolium
Forb Blepharis mitrata Shrub Phaeoptilum spinosum
Forb Dimorphotheca zeyheri Shrub Rhigozum trichotomum
Forb Helichrysum argyrospaerum Shrub Senegalia (Acacia) mellifera s. detinens Forb Limeum sulcatum
Succulent Adenium oleifolium Forb Limeum viscosum
Succulent Aloe claviflora Geophyte Albuca seineri
Succulent Anacampseros (Avonia) Geophyte Albuca spp.
77 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
albissima Succulent Ruschia spinosa
Succulent Anacampseros filamentosa Succulent Sarcocaulon samoniflorum
Succulent Euphorbia rudis Succulent Trianthema parvifolia
Succulent Euphorbia spinea Succulent Zygophyllum chrysopteron
Succulent Hoodia gordonii Succulent Zygophyllum leptopetalum
Succulent Kleinia longiflora Succulent Zygophyllum lichtensteinianum Succulent Larryleachia marlothii Tree Vachelia (Acacia) erioloba Succulent Lithops bromfieldii
Succulent Prenia tetragona
Succulent Psilicaulon junceum
Photo 42: Dwarf shrubland occurring on an extensive gravel plain comprising of a mixture of calcretes and quartzites.
78 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 43: Taller shrubs are scarce within this habitat type.
Photo 44: Area characterised by surface calcretes and a sparse vegetation cover. The shrubs in the background indicate a diffuse drainage channel.
79 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.10 Fauna Survey
3.10.1 Mammals
The potential diversity of mammals within the study site is moderate with as many as 46 terrestrial mammals potentially occurring within the area. Of the 46 mammals that have a distribution that include the project site, only 9 species have been recorded within the 2821C Grid (MammalMap, 2018).
Of the species that have a distribution that include the project site (footprint of Sirius PV Solar 3), 14 species are regarded as Conservation Important Species with 5 species either listed as Red Data species or as a Protected Species within the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act 10 of 2004) (refer to Table 16).
At a broad scale, it is likely that a large portion of these species occur in the area. However, due to a relatively limited range of habitats available within the project site the diversity within the project site itself is low to moderate.
During the site visit the following faunal species (or signs of such) were confirmed on site:
» Aardvark (Orycteropus afer) – Burrows and dung • Aardvark burrows also likely utilized by a wide variety of faunal species such as Aardwolf (Proteles cristatus), Cape Fox (Vulpes chama), Bat-eared Fox (Otocyon megalotis), Cape Porcupine (Hystrix afrecaeaustralis), Black- footed cat (Felis nigripes), Rock Monitor (Varanus albigularis) and Kalahari Tent Tortoise (Psammobates oculiferus) » Cape Hare (Lepus capensis) – Physical sighting » Springhare (Pedetes capensis) – Burrows in sandy pockets surrounded by shallow calcrete beds and underneath low growing shrubs of the outer periphery of pans » South African Ground Squirrel (Xerus inauris) – Burrows » Namaqua Rock Mouse (Aethomys namaquensis) – Physical sighting (rocky outcropping near intermittent river) » Yellow Mongoose (Cynictis penicillata) – Physical sighting » Cape Porcupine (Hystrix afrecaeaustralis) - Dung » Greater Kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) – Dung and spoor. » Steenbok (Raphicerus campestris) – Physical sighting » Cape Fox (Vulpes chama) – Physical sighting (Used dense low growing scrub of riparian woodland as refuge. » Black-backed Jackal (Canis mesomelas) – Dung
80 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Springbok (Antidorcas marsupialis)
Most of these species are highly mobile and will move away from the construction area and may move back during operational phase of the project. Furthermore, as the typical arid grasslands and shrublands of the site are widely available in the area, as well as in the broader region, the impacts would be local in nature and it is not likely that the long-term viability of any populations of terrestrial mammals would be compromised by the development.
Only one listed mammal was recorded within the study site; Dassie Rat – Petromus typicus (Near Threatened) whilst four listed terrestrial mammals may potentially occur at the site, the Honey Badger – Mellivora capensis (Endangered), Brown Hyaena – Hyaena brunnea (Near Threatened), African Wild Cat – Felis silvestris (Vulnerable) and Black-footed Cat – Felis nigripes (Vulnerable). Although the area is used for livestock production, human activity in the area is relatively low and it is possible that all four listed species may occur in the area. Some habitat loss for mammals is an inevitable consequence of the development but is not likely to be of broader significance. The only recorded listed mammal species, the Dassie Rat, has a very specific habitat requirement (rocky outcrops or boulder-strewn hillsides) which is located outside of the proposed development footprint of the Sirius PV Solar 3 facility.
In general, the impact associated with the development on mammals can be regarded as low.
3.10.2 Reptiles
The potential diversity of reptilian species within the greater area is moderate to low with as many as 40 terrestrial reptilian species potentially occurring within the area. As a result of the large absence of suitable habitat, the diversity within the study site itself is regarded as low.
Reptilian species observed in the wider area (2821C Grid) include Common Ground Agama (Agama aculeata aculeata), Karoo Girdled Lizard (Karusasaurus polyzonus), Common Giant Ground Gecko (Chondrodactylus angulifer angulifer), Striped Blind Legless Skink (Acontias kgalagadi kgalagadi), Karasburg Tree Skink (Trachylepis sparsa), Kalahari Tree Skink (Trachylepis spilogaster), Kalahari Tent Tortoise (Psammobates tentorius verroxii) and Water Monitor (Varanus niloticus).
During the site visit the following reptilian species were confirmed on site:
» Common Ground Agama (Agama aculeate aculeata)
81 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Striped Skink (Mabuya striata) » Cape Skink (Mabuya capensis) » Rock Monitor (Varanus albigularis)
As with mammals, the development is likely to result in some local habitat loss for reptiles but as there are not range-restricted reptiles which would occur in the affected area, the impacts are not likely to be of broader significance. The development would be likely to create some novel habitats for reptiles, which would potentially benefit a limited number of species which could take advantage of the novel habitats created within the development area. This is likely to be restricted to species such as geckos and agamas, which would utilise the buildings and other vertical infrastructure of the development. This would however be a very limited number of species and is not considered an overall positive outcome.
3.10.3 Amphibians
The potential diversity of Amphibian species is regarded as low with 10 species having distribution that include the study site. Amphibian species observed in the wider area (2821C Grid) according to FrogMAP include Raucous Toad (Sclerophyrus capensis), Power’s Toad (Sclerophyrus poweri), Delalande’s River Frog (Amietia delalandii) and Tremelo Sand Frog (Tomopterna cryptotis).
The only listed species which may occur in the area is the Giant Bullfrog – Pyxicephalus adspersus (Near Threatened). This species is associated with ephemeral pans and there do not appear to be any pans of sufficient size to support this species at the site. Those amphibians which require perennial water are likely to be restricted to the vicinity of the Orange River and the plains of the site area likely to contain low amphibian diversity and are not likely to be highly significant from an amphibian perspective. As there are no natural perennial water sources at the site, it is likely that amphibian abundance is generally low and restricted largely to those species which are relatively independent of water such as the Tremelo Sand Frog (Tomopterna cryptotis).
During this site visit no amphibian species were observed.
Overall, given the low likely abundance of amphibians at the site, impacts on amphibians are likely to be local in extent and of low significance.
82 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 45: Steenbok (Raphicerus campestris) Photo 46: Springbok (Antidorcas marsupialis)
Photo 48: Yellow mongoose (Cynictis penicillate) Photo 47: Cape Ground Squirrel (Xerus inauris)
Photo 50: Burrows belonging to Southern African Photo 49: Active den of an Aardvark (Orycteropus afer) Springhare (Pedetes capensis)
83 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 52: Burrows of small rodent species (burrow Photo 51: Stick and plant depris at a Namaqua Rock entrance indictated with yellow arrow). Likely a colonial Mouse (Aethomys namaquensis) shelter such as Whistling rats (Paratomys spp.) or Bushveld Gerbil (Gerbiliscus leucogaster).
Photo 53: Dung of a small carnivore, likely Black-backed Photo 54: Bird species that has fallen prey to a small jackal (Canis mesomelas) carnivore species, likely Black-backed jackal or African Wild Cat (Felis silvestris)
Photo 55: Ground agama (Agama aculeata distantii) Photo 56: Common Barking Gecko (Ptenopus garrulus maculatus)
84 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 57: Striped Skink (Mabuya striata) Photo 58: Cape Skink (Mabuya capensis)
Photo 59: Toad Grasshopper (Batrachotetrix stolli) with Photo 60: Toad Grasshopper (Batrachotetrix stolli) an adapted form, colour and texture to perfectly blend in with an adapted form, colour and texture to perfectly with quartz pebbles (see variation in next photo) blend in with coarse quartzitic rocks.
3.11 Avifauna Survey
3.11.1 Avian micro-habitats
Most of the abundance and distribution of avian species can usually be attributed to the vegetation types and bioregions within an area. In determining the suitability of the study area for avian species, it is necessary to look at the habitats available to determine where the relevant species will most likely occur within the study area. These “micro habitats” do not always correspond to vegetation types and are determined by a combination of vegetation type, topography, land use, food sources and other various intrinsic factors.
Investigation of the study area revealed the following important avian micro- habitats.
85 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Riparian Woodlands of the intermittent streams, ephemeral washes and depression features (correlating with habitat types 1,2 and 3 as described in Section 3.9) » Open grass and shrublands (correlating with habitat types 4 and 5) » Artificial landscapes
In each case, some of the species likely to make use of the various micro-habitats have been described. It must be emphasised that birds will, by virtue of their mobility, utilise almost any area in a landscape from time to time.
Open grass and shrublands
For a description of this micro-habitat type refer to Section 3.9
This micro-habitat is utilised primarily by ground-dwelling species with many species displaying a nomadic life history. These bird species are capable of moving or migrating between areas as resources are depleted or become available (e.g. as water and food become available after rainfall events). Relevant bird species that will be attracted to these areas include Bustards and Korhaans (Family: Otididae), such as Kori Bustard (Ardeotis kori), Karoo Korhaan (Eupodotis vigorsii) and Northern Black Korhaan (Afrotis afraoides), as well as a variety of Lark species (Family: Alaudidae). Species such as Chats, Thrushes and Scrub-robin will also move around between the open areas and the patches of taller shrubs (mainly Senegalia mellifera, Lycium bosciifolium and Boscia foetida). Denser patches of Senegalia mellifera also provide nesting habitat for smaller species such Yellow-bellied Eremomela (Eremomela ictyropygialis), Black-chested Prinia (Prinia flavicans), Rufous-eared Warbler (Malcorus pectoralis) and possibly also Pririt Batis (Batis pririt). The shrub S. mellifera is a host to the semi- parasitic Tapinanthus oleifolius, and along with Cabada aphylla and Aloe claviflora, T. oleifolius provide nectar relished by various insects and avifaunal species including African Red-eyed Bulbul (Pycnonotus nigricans), Yellow-bellied Eremomela (Eremomela icteropygialis), Marico Sunbird (Cinnyris mariquensis) and Dusky Sunbird (Cinnyris fuscus).
Current land use within this habitat includes predominantly stock farming (cattle). A few smaller farm twin tracks traverse this habitat type as well as the Eskom service road and associated 132kV Power Line. A second power line runs parallel to the north-eastern boundary of Tungsten Lodge 638
The proposed layout of the solar facility (Sirius PV Solar Project Four) as well as the proposed 132kV power line is almost entirely located within this micro- habitat. The potential impacts associated with the mentioned infrastructure
86 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
within this micro-habitat, include moderate displacement due to habitat loss and disturbance, as well as collision with the power line (Bustards and Korhaans).
Riparian Woodlands (of the intermittent streams, ephemeral washes and pans).
For a description of this micro-habitat type refer to Section 3.9
These areas provides habitat for various species such as Chats, Scrub-robbins various Larks (Family: Alaudidae), Robin-Chats, Thrushes, Namaqua Sandgrouse, (Pterocles namaqua) Yellow-bellied Eremomelas (Eremomela ictyropygialis), Black-chested Prinias (Prinia flavicans), Rufous-eared Warblers (Malcorus pectoralis) Pririt Batis (Batis pririt), Chestnut-vented Tit-Babbler (Parisoma subcaeruleum), Bokmakierie (Telophorus zeylonus), Sociable Weaver (Philetairus socius), Acacia Pied Barbet (Tricholaema leucomelas), Orange River White-eye (Zosterops pallidus), Wattled Starling (Creatophora cineaea) and Marico Sunbird (Cinnyris mariquensis). These riparian woodlands, especially along the larger intermittent streams, provide important corridors of larger vegetation and provide valuable cover, forage and nesting opportunities for many of these species. Especially the larger Acacia erioloba trees occurring along the riparian fringes of the Helbrandleegte and Helbrandskoopspruit rivers are preferred nesting sites for Sociable Weavers (Philetairus socius) with numerous large active nests recorded within these trees.
Current land use and disturbance within this micro-habitat is limited and includes grazing by livestock, small farm tracks and the existing 132kV power line and associated service road (the power line crosses both the Helbrandleegte and Helbrandskloofspruit watercourses only once).
The major potential impacts associated with the proposed development include limited habitat destruction, disturbance and collisions with the power lines (existing McTarggats/Oasis132kV power line and potentially the new 132kV power line in the absence of the necessary mitigation measures).
Artificial landscapes
Artificial habitats are provided by the existing overhead power line that traverses the study site including the development footprint area. The towers are used by various species including raptors such as Lanner Falcon (Falco biarmicus), crows Upington (Pied Crow, Corvus albus) and Sociable Weavers (Philetairus socius) as nesting sites. In addition, a series of small reservoirs and water troughs are present within the study site. These contain water all year around and are used by a variety of avifaunal species.
87 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
3.11.2 Important Bird Areas (IBA)
The proposed PV solar Facility and associated infrastructure are located approximately 99.4km east of the Augrabies Falls National Park (SA029) Important Bird Area and will thus have no impact on this area.
3.11.3 Avifauna species composition
According to the SABAP 1 and 2 data sets a total of 190 species were recorded within the broader area surrounding the study site. This includes 7 IUCN red- listed species (Table 16), all of which except for the Black Stork are likely to occur at the site at least occasionally basis. In addition to the species recorded by SABAP, a pair of Secretary birds as well as Ludwig’s Bustard were also observed nearby indicating that these species are also likely to be present at the site on occasion. Korri Bustard were occasionally observed at the site (one carcass underneath the existing power line traversing the site was also observed) as well as on other sites nearby, indicating that this species is regularly present in the area at least when conditions are favourable. Furthermore, 12 species are southern African endemics and 23 are near-endemics (33%). Southern Africa contains 13 avifaunal endemic biomes including Grasslands, Western Arid, Woodland, Evergreen Forest, Fynbos, Montane, Rocky slopes and cliffs, Marine and Inland Waters (MacLean 1998). The Western Arid avifaunal biome, where the study area is located, contains the highest number of endemics (30 species). Overall, the study area potentially contains a total of 34 endemic and near- endemic species, which is 20% of the total southern African endemics and near- endemics (Hockey et al. 2005).
Reporting rates are an indication of the relative density of a species on the ground in that it reflects the number of times that a species was recorded relative to the total amount of cards that were completed for the pentad1.
During the site survey a total of 46 bird species were recorded within the study area.
The most commonly recorded species within the study sites were passerine species of which Spike-heeled Lark (Chersomanes albofasciata), Sabota lark (Calendulauda sabota) Yellow Canary (Crithagra flaviventris), Ant Eating Chat (Mymecocihla formicivora), Southern Fiscal (Lanius collaris), African Red-eyed Bulbul (Pycnonotus nigricans), Lark-like Bunting (Emberiza impetuani) and Sociable Weavers (Philetarius socius). Where the vegetation becomes taller, Rufous-eared Warbler (Malcorus pectoralis) and Black-chested Prinia (Prinnia
88 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
flavicans) become more active. The higher and denser tree covering along the peripheral portions of the intermittent rivers and pans contained the highest avian diversity as opposed to the karroid/grassy landscape. Sociable weavers were especially active within and around these areas, with large nests recorded within large specimens of Acacia erioloba occurring along the larger watercourses. Most of the larger Acacia mellifera trees along the riparian fringes were parasitized by Tapananthus oleifolius which provided a valuable nectar source for various avifaunal species, as already mentioned. Other avifaunal species frequently observed within these riparian woodlands included; Laughing Dove (Spilopelia senegalensis), Pririt Batis (Batis pririt), Wattled Starling (Creatophora cinerea), Black-chested Prinia (Prinnia flavicans), Orange River White-eye (Zosterops pallidus), Yellow-bellied Eremomela (Eremomela icteropygialis), African Red-eyed Bulbul (Pycnonotus nigricans), Acacia Pied Barbet (Tricholaema leucomelas) and Namaqua Dove (Oena capensis). The calcrete and quarzitic flats were actively visited in the early mornings by small groups of Karoo Korhaan (Eupodotis vigorsii) and Kori Bustard (Ardeotis kori). The power line present provided perching site for Lanner Falcon (Falco biarmicus), Pied Crow (Corvus albus) as well as Cape Sparrow (Passer meanurus) and Red-billed Quelea (Quelea quelea). Sociable weavers also utilised some of the tower structures (of the power lines) for their nests. The artificial water points for livestock located to the north-west were also relatively high in passerine diversity such as Yellow Canary, Red- headed Finch (Amadina erythrocephala), Southern Masked-Weaver (Ploceus velatus), Cape sparrow (Passer meanurus), African Red-eyed Bulbul, Namaqua Dove (Oena capensis) and Cape Turtle-Dove (Streptopelia capicola).
Endemic species recorded during the site survey included Karoo Korhaan (Eupodotis vigorsii), White-backed Mousebird (Colius colius), Ant-eating Chat (Myrmecocichla formicivora), Rufous-eared Warbler (Malcorus pectoralis), Bokmakiere (Telophorus zeylonys) and Sociable weaver (Philetairus socius).
Red listed and protected species recorded within and around the development footprint area included Kori Bustard - Ardeotis kori (Near Threatened), Lanner Falcon - Falco biarmicus (Vulnerable) and Sociable Weaver – Philetairus socius (Protected – NCNCA). Listed avifaunal species not recorded within the site although highly likely to occur within the area include Martial Eagle - Polemaetus bellicosus (Endangered) and Secretary Bird - Sagittarius serpentarius (Vulnerable) and Ludwig’s Bustard - Neotis ludwigii (Endangered)
89 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 62: Closer view of the large Sociable Weaver’s Photo 61: Large camel thorn tree with a large Sociable nest Weaver’s nest
Photo 63: Existing power line pylon used as a nesting site Photo 64: Sociable weaver by sociable weavers.
Photo 65: Nest of a White-browed Sparrow Weaver Photo 66: Nest most likely of a Scaly-feathered Finch
90 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Photo 67: Nest of the Cape Penduline Tit Photo 68: Karoo korhaan
Photo 70: Pririt Batis Photo 69: Spike-heeled Lark
Photo 71: Kori Bustard carcass observed underneath the Photo 72: Kori Bustard existing power line (death likely due to collision with the power line)
91 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Table 16: Red listed species that may potentially occur within the site and nearby surroundings. (NT = Near Threatened; VU = Vulnerable; EN = Endangered; LC = Least Concern; CR = Critically Endangered) Red Data Susceptible to Taxonomic Common Likelihood of (Regional, Endemism Habitat name Name occurrence Global)
Ciconia nigra Stork, Black VU, LC Forages singly, occasionally in pairs/small Low Collision / Electrocution groups in wetland habitats, dried up watercourses and small isolated pools. Roosts on cliff, tree or pylon.
Ciconia abdimii Stork, Abdim's NT, LC Gregarious and usually in flocks. Grassland, Low Habitat Loss / Savannah woodland, pan edges, pastures and Disturbance / Collision cultivated areas. Regularly found foraging on / Electrocution irrigated lands, pastures and ploughed fields. Roost in large trees (incl. Eucalyptus), or cliffs.
Phoenicopterus Flamingo, NT, LC Flocks greatly variable in size. Open water Highly Unlikely Collision
ruber Greater bodies (e.g. dams, sewage treatment works, ephemeral pans, river mouths and coastal mudflats). Breeds at recently flooded, large, eutrophic, shallow salt pans
Phoenicopterus Flamingo, NT, NT Flocks greatly variable in size. Open, Highly Unlikely Collision
minor Lesser eutrophic, shallow wetlands. Small, ephemeral freshwater wetlands important for smaller flocks. Colonial nester. Breeds on saline lakes and saltpans
Sagittarius Secretarybird VU, VU Pairs or sometimes solitary. Open grassland Highly Likely Habitat loss / serpentarius with scattered trees and shrubs. Roosts in Disturbance / Collision crown of trees (mostly Acacia spp.).
Gyps coprotheres Vulture, Cape EN, VU E Roosts mostly in mountainous area but may Unlikely Collision / Habitat loss utilize large trees and pylons. Very wide and / Disturbance / varying foraging range (up to 121,655 km2).
92 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Colonial nester. Electrocution
Gyps africanus Vulture, White- CR, CR Savannah woodland and bushveld Likely Habitat loss / backed disturbance / collisions / electrocutions
Polemaetus Eagle, Martial EN, VU Open woodland in fairly flat country, also Highly Likely Collision / Electrocution bellicosus open shrubland with drainage line woodland or high-tension pylons, and open farmland with clumps of trees.
Aquila rapax Eagle, Tawny EN, LC Open Savannah woodland Likely Habitat loss / disturbance / Electrocution
Falco biarmicus Falcon, Lanner VU, LC Singly or in pairs. Open grassland, open or Confirmed Collision/ Disturbance / cleared woodland, and agricultural areas. Habitat loss / Nesting sites includes; cliffs (normally), large Electrocution trees, electricity pylons and buildings). May utilize existing nests of other species, e.g. crows and other raptor species.
Falco vespertinus Falcon, Red- NT, NT Gregarious. Open habitat with some trees, Likely Collision/ Disturbance / footed including semi-forested areas, forest fringes, Habitat loss / croplands and wetlands. Mostly associated Electrocution with open, grassy, arid woodland. Often utilizes dead trees, telephone poles and wire and fence lines as perches. Roosts in small tree clumps (often Eucalyptus stands). Non- breeding migrant.
Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon NT, LC Mostly restricted to mountainous, riparian or Unlikely Collision/ Disturbance / coastal habitats associated with high cliffs. Habitat loss / Also, utilizes quarries, dam walls, tall Electrocution buildings and large power line pylons
93 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Ardeotis kori Bustard, Kori NT, NT Dry open Savannah woodland, dwarf Confirmed Habitat loss / shrubland and occasionally grassland Disturbance / Collision
Neotis ludwigii Ludwig’s EN, EN Semi-arid dwarf shrublands and arid savanna Highly Likely Habitat loss / Bustard and fynbos Disturbance / Collision
Cursorius rufus Courser, VU, LC NE Sparsely vegetated arid regions Likely Habitat loss / Burchell’s Disturbance
94 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
4 SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT
The sensitivity map for the study site as well as the proposed development (footprint) area of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four site is illustrated below in Figures 19 and 20. The majority of the site consists of arid shrubland or grassy shrubland on open plains (habitat type 4 and 5) considered to be of low sensitivity. Within both these habitat types there are a few listed or protected species present and the significance of impacts on vegetation within these areas is likely to be relatively low. Even though both habitat types (4 and 5) were classified as low sensitivity, habitat type 5 is regarded as a slightly more significant habitat type due to its higher species diversity, including conservation important species.
The larger intermittent streams are the dominant sensitive features present in the proposed study site. While these watercourses are dry the majority of the time, they would on occasion carry significant amounts of water and, disturbance within or near these areas is not recommended. They are also important as corridors for faunal movement, especially between the Orange River in the south and the northern interior. Species such as Cape Clawless Otter and Water Mongoose use these corridors to access the larger pans in the area during wet years when the pans may contain frogs and other food resources. Due to the various ecological functions and services provided by this habitat type including a significant contribution to habitat and species diversity this habitat type is considered to be of High Sensitivity and should be treated as a No-Go Zone for most activities apart from the small section which will be crossed by the grid connection (approved location) as well as the approved sections earmarked for the access road crossing points.
The smaller drainage systems (ephemeral washes) are considered to be medium sensitivity and may only contain surface water for a very limited and short period of time during exceptional rainfall events (however this is very unpredictable). These ephemeral washes and their associated vegetation are responsible for the accumulation and filtering of runoff before the water enters the larger intermittent streams.
The only other high sensitive habitat identified within the study site are a few small depression like features. These habitats accumulate surface water from runoff, contributing to the seasonal recharge of ground-water resources, whilst also filtering out excessive minerals before the water reaches the ground-water table. These seasonal moist habitats may also provide habitat for invertebrates which are vital food sources for avifaunal and reptilian species. These depressions are however very small in size and the above described functions can
95 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
only be supplied to a limited extent. Subsequently, their potential loss to the development would not be likely to significantly impact the availability of this habitat in the wider area.
In terms of the footprint of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four and associated infrastructure, the bulk of the footprint is located within the low sensitivity shrubland and grassy shrubland. Furthermore, the proposed footprint will result in a minimal impact on the medium sensitive small ephemeral washes and will subsequently not have a significant impact on the hydrological drainage character of the project site as well as the larger downstream watercourses. The Sirius PV Solar Project Four’s footprint is situated outside of the boundaries of the high sensitive intermittent streams (Helbrandskloofspruit River and the Helbrandleegte River), and any impact on this habitat and its associated vegetation are regarded as low. Furthermore, only one depression like feature (high sensitive) is located within the solar facility’s footprint. However, as mentioned this moist derpression like feature’s potential loss to the development would not be likely to significantly impact the availability of this habitat in the wider area.
The proposed grid connection power line will cross small section of both intermittent streams (power line will cross each stream once). However, this power line will run parallel to the existing 132kV power line, subsequently the proposed stream crossings will be contained within an already disturbed portion of the stream (the existing service road can also be used further reducing the impact on this habitat). This is regarded as acceptable provided the recommended mitigation measures are implemented.
The access road will also cross both intermittent streams. However, the first crossing point (refer to Figure 20) is an existing access road effectively constructed to minimise potential upstream and downstream impacts (e.g. sedimentation, erosion and loss of riparian vegetation). Through the utilisation of existing stream crossing such as this one, additional potential impacts on the intermittent streams and their riparian vegetation are avoided. This stream crossing is regarded as acceptable. No appropriate existing access road and stream crossing exist for the Helbrandleegte River and the crossing of this watercourse to gain access to the proposed solar facility is unavoidable. Subsequently, a new stream crossing will have to be constructed. Acceptable crossing points area available along this watercourse. Such an acceptable crossing point should be characterised as follows: the channel itself should be as narrow as possible (less than 12m wide); the riparian fringe should be sparsely vegetated with the absence of large trees (comprise of medium to low shrubs); further listed and protected trees, A. erioloba and B. albitrunca, should be absent from the site. The potential crossing point 2 provided by the client (GPS
96 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Coordinates: -28.572979°; 21.100050°) appears to satisfy such conditions (Figure 20) and as such this crossing point is regarded as acceptable and will not significantly impact this high sensitivity feature.
Subsequently there are no areas within the proposed footprint that are considered as No-Go Zones.
Overall, it can be concluded that with the necessary mitigation measures implemented this development will have little impact on the Ecological character (Fauna, Flora and Avifauna) of the area with minimal loss due to habitat destruction and disturbance.
97 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 19: Sensitivity Map of the study site (Farm Tungsten Lodge 638) including the feasibility area for the Sirius PV Solar Project Four.
98 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 20: Sensitivity Map and feature map of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four footprint.
99 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
5 ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED IMPACTS
5.1 Assumptions
The following is assumed and/or known: » A thorough ecological walkthrough of all footprint areas (including the power line corridor) will be conducted to detect, and relocate, where possible, all plant species of conservation concern by a suitably qualified botanist prior to commencement of construction. • Such investigation must be carried out at a time when the maximum amount of species is actively growing and thus visible, (preferably between January and April) » Prior to development and after construction the development footprint will be routinely cleared of all alien invasive plants if detected. » The construction phase itself will be associated with clearing of vegetation within the development footprint only. » Where practically possible, the need for grading is expected to be minimal, limited mostly to contour buffer strips and/or small-scale levelling where necessary. » All removal of vegetation for construction purposes will be done mechanically, without the use of herbicides for indigenous species and in the case of Invasive Alien Plant only were deemed absolutely necessary and with the authorisation of the EO. » A continuous vegetation layer is the most important aspect of ecosystem functionality within and beyond the project site. • A weakened or absent vegetation layer not only exposes the soil surface, but also lacks the binding and absorption capacity that creates the buffering functionality of vegetation to prevent or lessen erosion as a result of floods. » All existing access and service roads along the power line will be used for the new proposed 132kV power line.
5.2 Fixed and Tracking PV Panels
Impacts on the environment will be influenced by the types of PV panel array to be used. The most important differences that are envisaged to influence the impact on the ecological environment (Tsoutsos et al. 2005, Turney and Fthenakis 2011, Strohbach 2012) can be summarised as follows:
100 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Aspect influenced Fixed panel Tracking panel
Size of land needed Smaller Larger
Shading and associated More continuous and More variable and less change of vegetation intense shading. intense overall shading.
Less stable and dense More stable and denser vegetation expected, vegetation cover expected, reduced buffering capacity smaller reduction of of extreme weather events buffering capacity of by vegetation expected. extreme weather events expected.
Effect on runoff and Larger continuous panel Smaller continuous panel accelerated erosion area, more concentrated areas, runoff more runoff, constant runoff dissipated, moderate edges potentially create variation of runoff edges more erosion, especially that are expected to create where vegetation is less erosion where weakened. vegetation is weakened.
Mounting height PV panels may be as low as Expected to be more than 1 50 cm above ground to m off the ground, increasing allow for higher panels, the possibility of low increasing the limits of vegetation establishment permissible vegetation due and small fauna movement to maintenance and fire without compromising risks. safety.
Preference and Acceptability Most preferred and Less preferred option but acceptable still acceptable
5.3 Monofacial (traditional opaque-backsheeted panels) vs Bificial modules
Bifacial photovoltaic (PV) technology has received considerable attention in recent years due to the potential to achieve higher annual energy yield compared to its mono-facial counterpart. Higher annual energy yield is a crucial factor (even more than to further reduce the module costs) because, with the use of higher power PV modules, the high BOS (Balance of System) costs can be reduced, resulting in the lowest LCOE (leveled cost of energy).
Bi-facial PV technology has some advantageous as well as disadvantageous when comparing the technology to conventional mono-facial PV technology.
101 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
For the construction phase both forms of PV panel technologies have similar associated impacts and it is only during the operational phase where some impacts differ in terms significance between the two PV panel technologies. It is however, not so much the panel design that causes the distinctions, but rather the reflective ground cover associated with bi-facial PV solar plant. These ground covers can either be reflective aggregate, panels or tarp and is used to enhance the reflective nature of the surface in order to maximise productivity.
From an ecological perspective the reflective aggregate is the preferred surface material as this material simulate to some extent the natural conditions associated with the extensive quartzite and calcrete plains found within the region (including the study site).
1. Cons of Bi-facial PV Solar Technology when compared to Mono-facial PV Solar Technology:
» Vegetation Cover and Rehabilitation Potential
The aggregate layer will impact the vegetation structure throughout the operational phase as well as the rehabilitation potential post-decommission phase.
Re-establishment of vegetation within the aggregate areas will impact the reflective nature and subsequently this will not be preferable from a productivity perspective.
• Through the prevention of the establishment of a natural vegetation cover these areas may become vulnerable (exposed) to the invasion of invasive alien plants (IAPs); • This may also impact the natural soil seed bank; • A local area devoid of vegetation may likely experience some loss of biological processes; and • May experience a locally altered micro-climate
Even though vegetation may persist or be encouraged to re-establishing under mono-facial PV solar panels the persisting vegetation cover will never entirely resemble that of the original natural vegetation cover due to impacts such as shading from the panels. This altered form of vegetation may however still allow for some continuation of biological processes (albeit also to a limited extent). The seedbank may also be maintained or even replenished to some extent.
102 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
The choice of PV technology may also have a bearing on the rehabilitation potential as well as the degree of effort needed to accomplish acceptable rehabilitation of the vegetation layer, post-decommission phase, and which will allow for the return of ecological functions and services. In this instance Mono-facial PV solar technology are again more preferable as vegetation rehabilitation will be much easier and cost less effort and intervention. The persistence of a natural seed bank will also contribute to this. On the other hand vegetation rehabilitation within pre-aggregate areas will require much more effort and intervention (re-seeding with a seed mix obtained from elsewhere)
» Disturbance and loss of Fauna and Avifauna Habitat
Habitat transformation and loss are much more pronounced during the operation phase for Bi-facial PV solar plants due to the cover of an unnatural reflective surface. The aggregate cover will result in a loss of potential habitat as these areas are likely to be unsuitable for most fauna as well as ground foraging and nesting bird species. Subsequently, the likelihood for some of the species that moved away from the area during the construction phase, returning to the study area during the operational phase, is very low (unlikely).
However, within mono-facial PV solar plants the encouragement of the re- establishment of some form of natural vegetation within the plant will allow for the return of some fauna and avifauna. Such species that may move back are likely to be smaller mammals and reptilian species as well as smaller ground foraging bird species.
» Potential Increase in IAP invasion during the operational phase
This impact is likely to be the most significant negative impact associated with a bi-facial PV solar plant.
The area of aggregate coverage will be highly susceptible to invasion by weedy and herbaceous IAPs due to the combination of shade created by the panels and the higher retention of soil moisture underneath the aggregate layer. This combination of shade and higher moisture content are regarded as a highly favourable condition for the establishment of weeds and IAPs.
Furthermore, mitigation methods for managing and eradication such weeds and IAPs may pose some challenge due to the fact that such
103 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
mitigation measures should take into account the integrity of the aggregate layer (may not disturb or damage this layer). • Mechanical methods such as the use of heavy machinery (rotary tractor-drawn brush-cutter) may severely damage the aggregate cover and is subsequently not a preferred option during the operational phase • Mechanical methods comprising the use of hand held machinery and equipment may be labour intensive and time consuming. • Chemical methods over such large areas and over extensive periods of time are not recommended from an ecological perspective due to the potential threat to the; - persisting natural seed bank, - fringing natural plant communities, - chemical makeup of the soils, - underground water resources, as well as - downstream fresh water resources (drainage systems and ephemeral watercourses)
Subsequently, from an ecological perspective the most appropriate method for the managing and eradication of IAPs will be • Frequent monitoring; and • regular eradication of weeds and IAPs through the use of mechanical methods where the sensitive portions of the aggregate layers are cleaned up using hand-held machinery and equipment.
In terms of the management of weeds and IAPs within mono-facial PV solar plants; initial management and eradication may be time consuming, but as a natural vegetation layer is allowed to re-establish and increase the extent and potential of invasion by IAPs will decrease. Management and eradication within such plants much less effor as there is no risk of disturbing/damaging the integrity of the reflective surface layer which may in turn impact the productivity of the plant.
2. Pros of Bi-facial PV Solar Technology when compared to Mono-facial PV Solar Technology:
» Potential threat of erosion during the operational phase and the protection of downstream water resources
The potential significance of this impact is significantly lower for bi-facial PV solar facilities and may even be a slightly positive impact as the aggregate cover may contribute to the stabilisation of the underlying soil
104 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
layer. Other positive impacts associated with the aggregate layer, reducing the significance of erosion include:
• Dissipating of stormwater runoff • Interference with splash detachment and the cushion effect that surface water exerts on drop impact. • Overland flow detachment, • A feedback effect due to the progressive thinning of stable grains during rainfall detachment and re-detachment.
Subsequently such an aggregate layer may contribute to soil conservation.
Furthermore this may also be a more effortless method of managing/preventing erosion when compared to the efforts put into trying to establish an acceptable natural vegetation cover, especially underneath shaded solar panels. This method of preventing erosion is also regarded more effective than attempting to stabilize extensive areas erosion feature with reno-mattresses, gabions, silt traps etc.
Additionally these positive attributes may furthermore; contribute to moisture infiltration into the soil layer underlying the aggregate cover and regulate surface runoff feeding into drainage systems and important downstream rivers (increase buffering capacity). This in turn will prevent potential erosion within these downstream habitats and regulate sediment inputs as well as turbidity.
Taking the pros and cons of a bi-facial PV solar plant into account, it can be concluded from an ecological perspective that a mono-facial PV solar plant with a sufficient rehabilitated vegetation cover will be the slightly preferable option. This is mainly due to the bi-facial PV solar plant’s impact on vegetation and habitat availability for fauna and avifauna as well as the threat of IAP invasion and the effort of managing these IAPs in such plants.
However, with the necessary adequate mitigation measures in place and the meticulous implementation of these mitigation measures by the contractor/developer, bi-facial PV solar technology would still be regarded as an acceptable alternative.
Adequate mitigation measures would include: • A comprehensive and site specific IAP Management Plan/Programme; and a • Post-decommission Vegetation Rehabilitation Management Plant/Programme.
105 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Additionally strips of natural vegetation can be encouraged at intervals between reflective aggregate patches as well as around the PV solar plant. This may allow for some maintenance of biological processes and a seed bank and provide some habitat for fauna and ground foraging avifauna.
5.4 Localised vs. cumulative impacts: some explanatory notes
Ecosystems consist of a mosaic of many different patches. The size of natural patches affects the number, type and abundance of species they contain. At the periphery of patches, influences of neighbouring patches become apparent, known as the ‘edge effect’. Patch edges may be subjected to increased levels of heat, dust, desiccation, disturbance, invasion of exotic species and other factors. Edges seldom contain species that are rare, habitat specialists or species that require larger tracts of undisturbed core habitat. Fragmentation due to development reduces core habitat and greatly extends edge habitat, which causes a shift in the species composition, which in turn puts great pressure on the dynamics and functionality of ecosystems (Perlman & Milder 2005).
Cumulative impacts of developments on population viability of species can be reduced significantly if new developments are kept as close as possible to existing developed and/or transformed areas or, where such is not possible, different sections of a development be kept as close together as possible. Thus, new power lines should follow routes of existing servitudes if such exist. Renewable energy facilities, like solar PVs should be constructed as close as possible to existing infrastructure or substations, and if several developments are planned within close proximity, these developments should be situated as close together as possible, not scattered throughout the landscape.
The development will contribute to cumulative impacts in the area, which are becoming increasingly large given the concentration of renewable energy facilities in the immediate area (34 renewable projects have been registered at DEA, refer to Figure 21). This includes additional facilities on the same site (approved Sirius PV Solar 1 and 2 as well as proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Three). The existin Abengoa Khi Solar One CSP facility is located north-west of the site. The concentration of development within the area will increase the fragmentation of the landscape and impact landscape connectivity. As the Orange River is an important landscape feature, movement to and from the river towards the west is especially vulnerable to impact and is clearly going to become increasingly constrained. Conclusion on cumulative impacts due to this and surrounding developments: » Transformation of intact, sensitive habitats could compromise the ecological functioning of these habitats and may contribute to the fragmentation of the landscape and would potentially disrupt the connectivity of the landscape for
106 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
fauna and flora and impair their ability to respond to environmental fluctuations. This contribution of this proposed project to this impact would be limited due to the fact that the proposed development is situated mostly within a low sensitivity area. » Excessive clearing of slow growing trees such as Acacia erioloba and Boscia albitrunca could significantly impact local and regional population dynamics and microhabitats and resources associated with these species available to other fauna and flora species. o Clearing of such trees, must be kept to the absolute minimum, and large vigorous specimens should be a priority for conservation and exclusion from development footprints. o Due to the fact that most of these species are assocated with the riparian fringes of the alluvial channels, which are largely excluded from the development footprint, the contribution to this impact will be minimal. » Excessive clearing of vegetation can and will influence runoff and stormwater flow patterns and dynamics, which could cause excessive accelerated erosion of plains, small ephemeral to larger intermittent drainage lines, wetlands, rivers and this could also have detrimental effects on the lower lying Orange River. o Rehabilitation and revegetation of all surfaces disturbed or altered during construction is desirable where applicable. o Runoff from sealed surfaces or surfaces that need to be kept clear of vegetation to facilitate operation of a development needs to be monitored regularly to ensure that erosion control and stormwater management measures are adequate to prevent the degradation of the surrounding environment. » Large-scale disturbance of indigenous vegetation creates a major opportunity for the establishment of invasive species and the uncontrolled spread of alien invasives into adjacent agricultural land and rangelands. o A regular monitoring and eradication protocol must be part of all developments long term management plans. » The loss of and transformation of intact habitats could compromise the status and ecological functioning of the Critical Biodiversity and Ecological Support Areas and may fracture and disrupt the connectivity of these CBAs and ESAs, impacting the Province’s ability to meet its conservation targets.
107 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 21: Location Map of the proposed Sirius PV Solar Project Four relative to the other solar facilities planned within a radius of 30 km.
108 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
5.5 Identification of Potential Ecological Impacts and Associated Activities
Potential ecological impacts resulting from the proposed development would stem from a variety of different activities and risk factors associated with the construction and operation phases of the project including the following:
Construction Phase » Human presence and uncontrolled access to the site may result in negative impacts on fauna and flora through poaching of fauna and uncontrolled collection of plants for traditional medicine or other purpose. » Site clearing and exploration activities for site establishment. » Vegetation clearing could impact listed plant species. Vegetation clearing would also lead to the loss of vegetation communities and habitats for fauna and avifauna and potentially the loss of faunal as well as avifaunal species, habitats and ecosystems. On a larger and cumulative scale (if numerous and uncontrolled developments are allowed to occur in the future) the loss of these vegetation communities and habitats may potentially lead to a change in the conservation status of the affected vegetation type as well as the ability of this vegetation type and associated features to fulfil its ecological responsibilities (functions). » Soil compaction and increased erosion risk would occur due to the loss of plant cover and soil disturbance created during the construction phase. This may potentially impact the downstream watercourses, wetlands and aquatic habitats, mainly due to an increase of surface water and silt inflow from the surrounding disturbed areas. These potential impacts may result in a reduction in the buffering capacities of the landscape during extreme weather events. » Movement of construction vehicles and placement of infrastructure within the boundary of the drainage line may lead to the disturbance of these habitats, removal of vegetation cover and a potential increase in erosion which may eventually spread into downstream areas. » Invasion by alien plants may be attributed to excessive disturbance to vegetation, creating a window of opportunity for the establishment of these alien invasive species. In addition, regenerative material of alien invasive species may be introduced to the project site by machinery traversing through areas with such plants or materials that may contain regenerative materials of such species. » Presence and operation of construction machinery on the project site. This will create a physical impact as well as generate noise, potential pollution and other forms of disturbance at the site.
109 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Increased human presence can lead to poaching, illegal plant harvesting and other forms of disturbance such as fire.
Operation Phase » The facility will require management and if this is not done effectively, it could impact adjacent intact areas through impacts such as erosion and the invasion of alien plant species.
Cumulative Impacts » The loss of unprotected vegetation types on a cumulative basis from the broad area may impact the country’s ability to meet its conservation targets. » Transformation of intact habitat would contribute to the fragmentation of the landscape and would potentially disrupt the connectivity of the landscape for fauna, avifauna and flora and impair their ability to respond to environmental fluctuations.
5.6 Assessment of Impacts
The impacts identified above are assessed below, during the construction and operation phases of the facility as well as before and after mitigation.
5.6.1 For the SOLAR PV FACILITY (Entire project site including access roads, internal access roads, solar field, all laydown alternatives, all substation areas as well as the office).
» Laydown locations The three laydown areas are located in very similar habitat types which are all classified as low sensitivity and as such will have similar impacts. Laydown area 2 is mandatory for the second solar PV area. However, laydown areas 1 and 3 are alternative options for the first solar PV area and these need to be compared (in terms of potential impacts) in order to select the most appropriate site (from an ecological perspective). As mentioned above all three areas are located in very similar habitat types and as a result all laydown areas will pose similar potential impacts and furthermore, none of the different laydown areas will cause a significant change in the impact rating of the solar PV facility as a whole. Subsequently it was not deemed necessary to do a separate and comparative assessment of laydown areas 1 and 3. Hence it can be concluded that all three alternatives are regarded as acceptable options from an ecological and avifaunal perspective and as such the selection of an alternative as the preferred option remains the choice of the developer.
110 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Office alternatives The situation regarding the office alternatives are similar to that of the laydown areas in the sense that both office alternatives are situated within similar habitat types and as such the need to do a comparative assessment is unnecessary as the proposed impacts will, for both office alternatives, be near identical. Subsequently, both alternatives are regarded as acceptable options from an ecological and avifaunal perspective and as such the selection of an alternative as the preferred option remains the choice of the developer.
» On-site Substation Four substation and 11kV/132kV internal power lines have been identified, two for each solar PV area. Subsequently the most suitable “ecological” alternative for each solar PV area must be selected and as such substation area 1 and 4 and area 2 and 3 will be compared with each other.
All substation alternatives are located in very similar habitat types which area all classified as low sensitivity and as such will have similar impacts. As such it was not deemed necessary to do a comparative assessment of the proposed impacts.
Hence it can be concluded that all alternatives are regarded as acceptable options from an ecological and avifaunal perspective and as such the selection of an alternative as the preferred option remains the choice of the developer.
Please take note that the impact assessment for all impacts associated with the solar field are divided into two categories namely those impacts where there will be a diference between the significance for the different PV solar panel technologies and associated infrastructure (Mono-facial and Bi-facial) and were the different PV solar panel technologies will have no bearing on the significance of the listed impact.
111 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Listed Impacts Influenced by the Different PV Solar Panel Tehcnologies and Associated Infrastructure (Mono- and Bi- Facial PV Solar Technologies).
No. 1
Impact: Potential Impacts on vegetation and listed protected plant species
Phase(s): Construction and Operatianal Phase
Impact Nature: There are a number of listed and protected species present at the site and it is highly likely that some of these would be impacted by the development. Vegetation clearing during construction will lead to the loss of currently intact habitat within the development footprint and is an inevitable consequence of the development. As this impact is certain to occur it is assessed for the construction phase as this is when clearing will take place. The vegetation types within the affected area are however widespread and the loss of even a few thousand hectares of these vegetation would be of relatively minor significance when considered at a broad scale. MONO-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY BI-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY Without Mitigation With Mitigation Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1) Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4) Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Moderate (6) Minor (3) Moderate (7) Minor (3)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3) Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (44) Low (24) Medium (48) Low (24)
Status Negative Negative Negative Negative
Reversibility Low Moderate Low Moderate
Irreplaceable loss of Highly Probable Moderate Probability Highly Probable Moderate Probability resources Can impacts be Reasonably but with limited full restoration potential. Limited potential: Throughout the life of the project
112 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
mitigated? vegetation growth and re-establishment would be very limited due to the presence of the reflective aggregate as well as the maintenance thereof. Rehabilitation potential is regarded as reasonably but with limited full restoration potential. Residual Impacts Loss of vegetation is inevitable. The presence of a Some loss of vegetation is inevitable and cannot be vegetation cover during the life span of the project will be avoided. very limited Mitigation For both Mono- and Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » Avoid the riparian vegetation associated with the intermittent rivers. » Pre-construction walk-through of the final development footprint, by a suitably qualified botanist, for species of conservation concern that would be affected and that can be translocated (also to comply with the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act and DENC/DAFF permit conditions). » Any individuals of protected species affected by and observed within the development footprint during construction should be translocated under the supervision of the Contractor’s Environmental Officer (EO). » Pre-construction environmental induction for all construction staff on site must be provided to ensure that basic environmental principles are adhered to. This includes awareness of no littering, appropriate handling of pollution and chemical spills, avoiding fire hazards, minimising wildlife interactions, remaining within demarcated construction areas etc. » Demarcate all areas to be cleared with construction tape or similar material where practical. However, caution should be exercised to avoid using material that might entangle fauna. » Contractor’s EO must provide supervision and oversight of vegetation clearing activities and other activities which may cause damage to the environment, especially at the initiation of the project, when the majority of vegetation clearing is taking place. » Ensure that laydown areas, construction camps and other temporary use areas are located in areas of low and medium sensitivity and are properly fenced or demarcated as appropriate and practically possible. » All vehicles to remain on demarcated roads and no unnecessary driving in the veld outside these areas should be allowed. » Regular dust suppression during construction, if deemed necessary, especially along access roads.
113 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» No plants may be translocated or otherwise uprooted or disturbed for rehabilitation or other purpose without express permission from the Contractor’s EO, and without the relevant permits. » No fires must be allowed on-site.
For Mono-facial PV Solar Panels: » After construction, rehabilitate an acceptable vegetation layer according to rehabilitation recommendations as provided within a site-specific Plant Search and Rescue and Rehabilitation Plan compiled by a suitably qualified botanist following the walk-through survey. - Revegetation should occur naturally where topsoils were not severely altered The higher level of shading anticipated from panels may prevent or slow the re-establishment of desirable species, thus re-establishment must be monitored and species composition adapted if vegetation fails to establish sufficiently.
For Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » The use of reflective aggregate would be preferred above the use of reflective panels and tarp as this may simulate the quartizite and calcrete plains characterising large portions of this area. » Strip planting (re-seeding) or the maintenance of strips of natural vegetation patches at regular intervals between these reflective aggregate fields may be beneficial interms of the maintenance of some natural seedbank, allowing the functioning of some biological processes. » These strips or buffer areas of natural vegetation should be monitored annually in order to determine the health and vigor of vegetation growth as well as to identify potential areas exposed to invasion by invasive alien plants. - If it is found that the health and vigour of these strips are not sufficient or have deteriorated re-seeding within the next growing season will be necessary. This will have to occur throughout the operational phase until an acceptable layer have been established and have been stabil for a minimum of three years. - Annual monitoring and eradication Invasive alien plants within these stips should occur throughout the life span of the project. » This reflective aggregate should be effectively removed during decommission in order to allow for sufficient vegetation rehabilitation. » Following decommission rehabilitate an acceptable vegetation layer according to rehabilitation recommendations as
114 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
provided within a comprehensive site-specific Pos-Decommission Vegetation Rehabilitation Plan compiled by a suitably qualified botanist following the walk-through survey. » Additional re-seeding with indigenous shrubs, forbs and grasses will be necessary and should be addressed in the above mentioned Vegetation Rehabiliation Plan.
No. 2
Impact: Potential Faunal Impacts
Phase(s): Construction and Operatianal Phase
Impact Nature: Increased levels of noise, pollution, disturbance and human presence during construction will be detrimental to fauna. Sensitive and shy fauna would move away from the area during the construction phase as a result of the noise and human activities present, while some slow- moving species would not be able to avoid the construction activities and might be killed. Some impact on fauna is highly likely to occur during construction.
The development areas would also amount to habitat loss for most fauna, although there are some species which would potentially increase in the developed areas. Depending on how the development areas were fenced off, the fencing would probably also restrict animal movement and disrupt the connectivity of the landscape for fauna.
Some faunal species may move back into the development site post-construction and may even permanently recide within this area. However, habitat availability will remain very limited within a bi-facial PV solar plant as the revlective aggregate surface will limit the re-instatement of the original habitats and may also create an unfavourable climate for faunal species. MONO-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY BI-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY Without Mitigation With Mitigation Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1) Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Short-term (2) Short-term (2) Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Moderate (7) Minor (3) High (8) Moderate (6)
115 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3) Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (30) Low (18) Medium (52) Medium (33)
Status Negative Negative Negative Negative
Reversibility Moderate Moderate Low to Moderate Moderate
Irreplaceable loss of Moderate Probability Low Probability Highly Probable Moderate Probability resources Can impacts be Impacts mostly limited to construction phase: Impacts associated with construction and operational phase: mitigated? Noise and disturbance during the construction phase Noise and disturbance during the construction phase cannot cannot be avoided but would be transient in nature and be avoided but would be transient in nature and with with appropriate mitigation; no long-term impacts from the appropriate mitigation; no long-term impacts from the construction phase can be expected. construction phase can be expected. Impacts during the operational phase can be mitigated to some extent however the presence of the aggregate field will limit habitat re-establishment and the availability of habitat for fauna Residual Impacts The altered development area will contain a lower diversity The altered development area will contain a lower diversity of habitat types and niches for faunal species. Faunal of habitat types and niches for faunal species. Faunal diversity is relatively low and subsequently the residual diversity is relatively low and subsequently the residual impact will not be significant impact will not be significant Mitigation For both Mono- and Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » Any fauna directly threatened by the construction activities should be removed to a safe location by a suitably qualified person. » All personnel must undergo environmental induction with regards to fauna and in particular awareness about not harming or collecting species such as snakes, tortoises and owls which are often persecuted out of superstition. » All hazardous materials used during construction should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of the spill.
116 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit (30km/h is recommended) to avoid collisions with susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises. » When possible, no activity should be undertaken at the site between sunset and sunrise, except for security personnel guarding the development. » Any dangerous fauna (snakes, scorpions etc.) that are encountered during construction should not be handled or antagonised by the construction staff. A suitably qualified person(s) should be contacted to remove the animals to safety. » No litter, food or other foreign material must be thrown or left around the site and must be placed in demarcated and fenced rubbish and litter areas that are animal proof. » The collection, hunting or harvesting of any plants or animals at the site must be strictly forbidden. Personnel must not be allowed to wander off the demarcated construction site. » Fires must not be allowed on site.
For Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » Strip planting (re-seeding) or the maintenance of strips of natural vegetation patches at regular intervals between these reflective aggregate fields may be beneficial interms of the allowing the functioning of some biological processes within the affected area.
No. 3
Impact: Avifaunal Habitat Loss
Phase(s): Construction and Operatianal Phase
Impact Nature: Habitat destruction and the subsequent displacement and exclusion of threatened, endemic or range restricted species are impacts associated with solar energy facilities (Smit 2012). The extensive space requirements of the proposed photovoltaic solar facility (280 ha) will result in the loss of avian micro-habitats located within the development footprint. Furthermore, in terms of bi-facial PV solar technology, this impact will extend throughout the operational phase as natural vegetation will not be allowed to re-establish within the refective aggregate areas, subsequently limiting the re-intstatement of available avifauna habitat for ground nesting and foraging avifuana species.
117 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
It is envisaged that the only Red Data species that will be displaced by the habitat transformation that will take place as a result of the construction of the proposed solar facility are, Kori bustard (Ardeotis kori). The impact on smaller, non-Red Data species that are potentially breeding in the area will be local in extent, and will not have a significant effect on regional or national populations.
The large sociable weaver nests are all restricted to the large Acacia erioloba trees occurring within the riparian woodlands of the larger intermittent streams and as these watercourses are excluded from the development these habitats as well as the associated large trees will be left intact.
The area proposed for the PV facility is not a unique habitat within the landscape MONO-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY BI-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY Without Mitigation With Mitigation Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1) Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4) Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Moderate (6) Low (4) High (8) Moderate (6)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3) Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (44) Low (27) Medium (52) Medium (33) Status Negative Negative Negative Negative
Reversibility Low Moderate Low Moderate
Irreplaceable loss of Highly Probable Moderate Probability Highly Probable Moderate Probability resources Can impacts be Yes. However, due to the extensive space requirements, mitigated? some land and avian microhabitats will be impacted. Residual Impacts Moderate-Low. The vegetation within the development Moderate. The vegetation within the development footprint footprint can be rehabilitated after the life time of the can be rehabilitated after the life time of the project if project if proposed mitigation measures are put in place. proposed mitigation measures are put in place.
118 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Mitigation For both Mono- and Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » The temporal and spatial footprint of the development should be kept to a minimum. » The boundaries of the development footprint areas must be clearly demarcated and it must be ensured that all activities remain within the demarcated footprint area. » Any bird nests that are found during the construction period must be reported to the Environmental Officer (EO) and and a relevant specialist should be contacted in order to assist in the relocation of the nest. » The above measures must be included in a site specific EMPr.
For Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » Strip planting (re-seeding) or the maintenance of strips of natural vegetation patches at regular intervals between and around these reflective aggregate fields may be beneficial interms of the allowing the functioning of some biological processes as well as some natural habitat for ground foraging and nesting avifauna species.
No. 4
Impact: Potential increased alien plant invasion
Phase(s): Operation
Impact Nature: Increased alien plant invasion is one of the greatest risk factors associated with this development. The disturbed and bare ground that is likely to be present at the site during and after construction would leave the site vulnerable to alien plant invasion during the operation phase if not managed. Furthermore, the National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004), as well as the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, (Act No. 43 of 1983) requires that listed alien species are controlled in accordance with the Act.
For the bi-facial PV solar technology the aggregate surface may create a suitable habitat for weeds and invasive species due to the shaded effect of the panels along with the retention of moisture underneath such an aggregate surface. Subsequently this impact will likely be more significant for this PV solar technology. MONO-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY BI-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY Without Mitigation With Mitigation Without Mitigation With Mitigation
119 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Extent Local (2) Local (1) Local (2) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4) Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2) High (8) Minor (3)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3) Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (30) Low (21) Medium (56) Low (24)
Status Negative Negative Negative Negative
Reversibility Moderate - High High Moderate High
Irreplaceable loss of Moderate Probability Low Probability Moderate Probability Low Probability resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Residual Impacts With appropriate mitigation such as regular monitoring and eradication residual impacts will be very low will likely comprise of few alien plants establishing for short periods of time between monitoring and eradication phases. Mitigation For both Mono- and Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » Regular monitoring for alien plants at the site should occur and could be conducted simultaneously with erosion monitoring. » When alien plants are detected, these should be controlled and cleared using the recommended control measures for each species to ensure that the problem is not exacerbated or does not re-occur and increase to problematic levels. » Clearing methods should aim to keep disturbance to a minimum and must be undertaken in accordance with relevant guidelines. » No planting or importing of any alien species to the site for landscaping, rehabilitation or any other purpose should be allowed. » Chemical control is not recommended.
120 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
No. 5
Impact: Altered runoff patterns due to rainfall interception by PV panel infrastructure and compacted areas resulting in an increased risk of erosion and potentially high levels of erosion in some local areas. Phase(s): Operation
Impact Nature: Disturbance created during construction could take several years to fully stabilise and the presence of hardened surface will generate a lot of runoff which will pose a significant erosion risk, if not managed. Erosion is one of the greater risk factors associated with this type of development, and it is therefore essential that proper erosion control structures are built and maintained over the lifespan of the project.
For bi-facial PV solar technology this impacted may however be reduced due to the dissipating effect that the aggregate will have on surface water flow, preventing excessive soil erosion. Furthermore, this aggregate layer will also provide the bare soil its overlying protection against wind erosion.
MONO-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY BI-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY Without Mitigation With Mitigation Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (1) Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Short-term (1) Short-term (2) Short-term (1)
Magnitude Moderate (7) Minor (2) Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3) Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (52) Low (12) Low (21) Low (12)
Status Negative Neutral – Slightly Negative Negative Negative
Reversibility Low – if erosion has High Low – if erosion has reached High reached severe levels the severe levels the impacts will impacts will not be not be remedied easily remedied easily. Irreplaceable loss of Potential loss of important Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability resources resources.
121 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Residual Impacts With appropriate mitigation such as regular monitoring and eradication residual impacts will be very low will likely comprise of few alien plants establishing for short periods of time between monitoring and eradication phases. Mitigation For both Mono- and Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » Regular monitoring of the site (minimum of twice annually for the first 3 years and every 5 years therafter) to identify possible areas of erosion is recommended, particularly after large summer thunder storms have been experienced (monitoring and inspections done by the Operations and Management Team). » Monitor the area below and around the panels regularly after larger rainfall events to determine where erosion may be initiated and then mitigate by modifying the soil micro-topography and revegetation efforts accordingly. » Due to the nature and large runoff surfaces of the PV panels, the development area should be adequately landscaped and rehabilitated to contain expected accelerated erosion. » Runoff may have to be specifically channeled or storm water adequately controlled to prevent localised rill and gully erosion. » Any erosion problems observed within the development site should be rectified as soon as possible and monitored thereafter to ensure that they do not re-occur. » Roads and other disturbed areas within the development site should be regularly monitored for erosion problems and problem areas should receive follow-up monitoring to assess the success of the remediation.
For Mono- facial PV Solar Panels: » Shading from PV panels may prevent or slow down the re-establishment of some desirable vegetation species, therefore re-establishment should be monitored and species composition adapted if vegetation fails to establish sufficiently. » Alternatively, soil surfaces where no re-vegetation seems possible must be covered with gravel or small rock fragments to increase porosity of the soil surface, slow down runoff and prevent wind and water erosion.
122 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
No. 6
Impact: Altered runoff patterns due to rainfall interception by PV panel infrastructure and compacted areas resulting in high levels of erosion, sedimentation and turbidity within the high sensitivity lower lying intermittent river. Phase(s): Operation
Impact Nature: Disturbance created during construction could take several years to fully stabilise and the presence of hardened surface (roads) will generate a large amount of runoff which will pose a significant erosion risk, if not managed. For wetlands and intermittent watercourses, the primary threat related to PV developments during the operation phase, is such increased run-off, erosion, sediment inputs, as well as turbidity.
The potential risk and significance of this impact will be significantly reduced through the diligent implementation of effective mitigation measures.
For bi-facial PV solar technology this impacted may however be reduced due to the dissipating effect that the aggregate will have on surface water flow, preventing excessive soil erosion whilst allowing for an improved infiltration of surface water into the soil layer covered by the aggregate. Subsequently, potential downstream impacts (within lower lying intermittent rivers) such as an increase in sediment inputs and turbidity may be mitigated and occur more regulated and at a more acceptable (“natural”) level.
MONO-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY BI-FACIAL PV SOLAR TECHNOLOGY Without Mitigation With Mitigation Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (1) Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Permanent (5) Long-term (4) Medium-term (3) Short-term (1)
Magnitude Moderate (6) Minor (2) Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Probable (3) Improbable (2) Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (39) Low (14) Low (24) Low (12)
Status Negative Neutral – Slightly Negative Negative Negative (may even be slightly positive) Reversibility Low High High High
123 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Irreplaceable loss of Potential loss of important Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability resources resources due to the replacement of natural vegetation by invading alien plants. Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Residual Impacts Possible impact on the remaining catchment due to changes in run-off characteristics in the development site. With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures this residual impact is however regarded as unlikely Mitigation For both Mono- and Bi-facial PV Solar Panels: » Regular monitoring of the site (minimum of twice annually for the first 3 years and every 5 years therafter) to identify possible areas of erosion is recommended, particularly after large summer thunder storms have been experienced (monitoring and inspections done by the Operations and Management Team). » All mitigation measures pertaining to erosion should be strictly adhered to and promptly executed, which include regular monitoring. » Due to the low gradient of most of the development area any accidental spill or leakage of hazardous or harmful substances can be effectively contained around the source of the spillage and in the case of such an accidental spillage prompt and effective action is required in order to prevent the spillage from spreading and to successfully rehabilitate the contaminated area.
124 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Listed Impacts that are NOT Influenced by the Different PV Solar Panel Tehcnologies and Associated Infrastructure
No. 7
Impact: Avifaunal Disturbance during the Construction Phase
Phase(s): Construction
Impact Nature: The disturbance of avifauna during the construction of the solar facility may occur. Species sensitive to disturbance include ground-nesting species (e.g. bustards and korhaans) resident within the development footprint. Disturbance can also influence the community structure of avifauna within close proximity to the development although this may only occur to a very limited extent.
Disturbance could have a negative impact on the breeding activities of various species, particularly if this occurs during a sensitive period in the breeding cycle.
Species of concern are predominantly Kori Bustard. Other small avian species do occur within the development footprint but these species are non-Red Data species.
The large sociable weaver nests are all restricted to the large Acacia erioloba trees occurring within the riparian woodlands of the larger intermittent streams and as these watercourses are excluded from the development these nests will not be impacted.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Short-term (2) Short-term (2)
Magnitude Moderate (7) Minor (3)
Probability Highly Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (30) Low (18)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Moderate High
Irreplaceable loss of Moderate Probability Low Probability resources Can impacts be Noise and disturbance during the construction phase mitigated? cannot be avoided but would be transient in nature and with appropriate mitigation; no long-term impacts from the construction phase can be expected. Residual Impacts Moderate. Some disturbance during the construction phase is inevitable. It is likely that some species will be disturbed and potentially displaced by the development.
125 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Mitigation » Strict control must be maintained over all activities during construction, in line with an approved construction EMPr. » During construction, if any of the Red Data species identified in this report are observed to be roosting and/or breeding in the vicinity of the development footprint, the EO must be notified and where deemed necessary an appropriate buffer should be placed around the nests and/or roosting areas. If uncertain on the size of such buffer the EO should contact an avifaunal specialist for advice. » Contractors and working staff should stay within the development area and movement outside these areas especially into avian micro-habitats must be restricted. » Driving must take place on existing and new access roads and a speed limit of 30km/h must be implemented on all roads traversing the project site during the construction phase. » Breeding, egg lying and incubation occur typically between October and February for Kori bustard and most of the sensitive ground nesting avifaunal species. During these months’ disturbances within natural and near-natural habitats should be limited as far as possible. » Sociable weaver nests recorded during the survey were all located within the riparian woodland of the intermittent streams and should be avoided. » If a sociable weaver nest were to occur within the development area such a nest should be evaluated and only be removed with a permit and by a suitably qualified specialist, usually supervised by conservation staff. » Any impact, disturbance or removal of such sociable weaver nests may not occur without the necessary approval (permit) from the relevant nature conservation authority (NC DENC).
No. 8
Impact: Potential increased erosion risk during construction
Phase(s): Construction
Impact Nature: During construction, there will be a lot of disturbed and loose soil at the site which will render the area vulnerable to erosion. Erosion is one of the greater risk factors associated with the development and it is therefore critically important that proper erosion control structures are built and maintained over the lifespan of the
126 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
project.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Short-term (1)
Magnitude Moderate (6) Minor (2)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (48) Low (12)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Low – if erosion has High reached severe levels the impacts will not be remedied easily Irreplaceable loss of Moderate Probability Low Probability resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Residual Impacts The loss of fertile soil and soil capping resulting in areas which cannot fully rehabilitate itself with a good vegetation cover. With appropriate avoidance and mitigation residual impacts will be very low. Mitigation » Any erosion problems within the development area as a result of the construction activities observed should be rectified immediately and monitored thereafter to ensure that they do not re-occur. » All bare areas resulting from the development, should be re-vegetated with locally occurring species, to bind the soil and limit erosion potential. » Roads and other disturbed areas within the development area should be regularly monitored for erosion problems and problem areas should receive follow-up monitoring to assess the success of the remediation. » Silt traps should be used where there is a danger of topsoil or material stockpiles eroding and entering watercourses and other sensitive areas. » Topsoil should be removed from construction areas and stored separately from subsoil. Topsoil should be reapplied where appropriate as soon as possible in order to encourage and facilitate rapid regeneration of the natural vegetation on cleared areas. » Practical phased development and vegetation clearing should be practiced so that cleared areas
127 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
are not left un-vegetated and vulnerable to erosion for extended periods of time. » Construction of gabions and other stabilisation features must be undertaken to prevent erosion, where deemed necessary. » Activity at the site must be reduced after large rainfall events when the soils are wet. No driving off of hardened roads should occur at any time and particularly immediately following large rainfall events.
No. 9
Impact: Impact on sensitive habitats (riparian systems and alluvial watercourses) Phase(s): Construction
Impact Nature: Construction may lead to some direct or indirect loss of or damage to depression like features (not wetlands) local ephemeral washes (drainage lines). This will lead to localised loss of alluvial and riparian habitat and may potentially lead to downstream impacts that will potentially affect a greater extent of hydrological features. Where these habitats are already stressed due to degradation and transformation, the loss may lead to increased vulnerability (susceptibility to future damage) of the habitat. Physical alteration to wetlands can have an impact on the functioning of those systems. Consequences may include:
» increased loss of soil; » loss of or disturbance to indigenous vegetation; » loss of sensitive habitats; » loss or disturbance to individuals of rare, endangered, endemic and/or protected species that occur in these habitats; » fragmentation of sensitive habitats; » impairment of habitat function; » change in channel morphology in downstream wetlands, potentially leading to further loss of wetland vegetation; and » reduction in water quality in wetlands downstream.
By implementing mitigation measures, including the exclusion of any additional depression features and drainage lines as well as the downstream intermittent stream, from the proposed development footprint area, these habitat types can retain their character and functionality. Where drainage systems cannot be avoided (e.g. internal access road crossings), carefully considered mitigation measures, such as culvert design, size and placement as well as measures to control water flow (especially flash floods) and erosion (e.g. gabion structures, bank revegetation and rehabilitation etc.), should be in place. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
128 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Extent Local (2) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (30) Low (21)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Moderate - High High
Irreplaceable loss of Moderate Probability Low Probability resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Residual Impacts Possible impact on the remaining catchment due to changes in run-off characteristics in the development site. With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures this residual impact is however regarded as unlikely Mitigation » Only the small isolated depression feature (non- wetland) identified within this study site may be impacted by the development. » Only small drainage lines identified within this study to be impacted by the solar field. » For stream crossing point 1: o Existing stream crossing to be utilized o Helbrandleegte River may not be crossed at any other point. » For stream crossing point 2: o Suitable crossing of the Helbrandskloofspruit River should adhere to the following conditions: - the channel at the point of crossing should be as narrow as possible (less than 12m wide); - the riparian fringe should be sparsely vegetated with the absence of large trees (comprise of medium to low shrubs); - listed and protected trees, A. erioloba and B. albitrunca, should be absent from the site. - The engineering team must provide an effective means to minimise the potential upstream and downstream effects of sedimentation and erosion (erosion protection) as well as minimise the loss of riparian vegetation
129 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
- Where possible culvert bases must be placed as close as possible, with natural levels in mind, so that these don’t form additional steps/barriers. » No other drainage lines or the intermittent streams may be additionally impacted. » Control stormwater and runoff water to avoid erosion impacts on watercourses. » Rehabilitate any disturbed areas as quickly as possible » Adequate culvert is required to ensure that construction impacts do not permanently affect channel structure and morphology. » Construction of infrastructure must not cause the width of the drainage lines to be narrowed or the general morphology to be altered.
No. 10
Impact: Avifaunal Disturbance during the Operational Phase
Phase(s): Operation
Impact Nature: The disturbance of avifauna during the operation of the solar facility may occur. Species sensitive to disturbance include ground-nesting species resident within the development footprint. Disturbance can also influence the community structure of avifauna within close proximity to the development although this may only occur to a very limited extent.
Disturbance could have a negative impact on the breeding activities of various species, particularly if this occurs during a sensitive period in the breeding cycle.
Species of concern are predominantly Kori Bustard. Other small avian species do occur within the development footprint but these species are non-Red Data species.
The proposed development is located within an agricultural habitat close to National and Domestic roads. Therefore, species within this landscape often experience disturbance. As a result, disturbance of birds by the proposed solar facility is anticipated to be of moderate significance as birds will move away from the area temporarily during maintenance activities (through the noise and movement of maintenance equipment and personnel). However, species are particularly sensitive to disturbance during the breeding season and this must be borne in mind during the operational (maintenance) phase. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (2)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
130 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Medium (40) Low (24) Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Low Moderate
Irreplaceable loss of Moderate Probability Low Probability resources Can impacts be Noise and disturbance during maintenance activities cannot mitigated? be avoided but would be transient in nature and with appropriate mitigation; no long-term impacts from the construction phase can be expected. Residual Impacts Moderate. Some disturbance during the operational phase is inevitable. It is likely that some species will be disturbed and potentially displaced by the development. Mitigation » If birds are nesting on the infrastructure of the facility and cannot be tolerated due to operational risks of fire, electrical short, soiling of panels or other problems, birds must be prevented from accessing nesting sites by using mesh or other manner of excluding them. Birds must not be shot, poisoned or harmed as this is not an effective control method and has negative ecological consequences. Birds already with eggs and chicks must be allowed to fledge their chicks before nests are removed. » If there are any persistent problems with avifauna, then an avifaunal specialist should be consulted for advice on further mitigation. » Working staff must stay within the development area and movement outside these areas especially into avian micro-habitats must be restricted. » Driving must take place on existing and new access roads and a speed limit of 30km/h must be implemented on all roads running through the project site during the operation phase. » Breeding, egg lying and incubation occur typically between October and February for Kori bustard and most of the sensitive ground nesting avifaunal species. During these months’ disturbances should be limited as far as possible
131 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
No. 11
Impact: Avifaunal collision with solar panel infrastructure
Phase(s): Operation
Nature: The solar photovoltaic facility is comprised of panelling occupying a large area. Avifaunal species can be disorientated by the absorbent light, and consequently be displaced from an area more extensive than just the developed footprint of the facility.
Conversely, certain bird species may be attracted to the solar arrays. Waterbirds (especially waterfowl and comorants) may mistake the reflective surface for an expanse of water, and attempt to land on the panels resulting in injuries from colliding with the solar infrastructure. This impact has been termed as the “lake effect”. This impact has not yet been recorded in South Africa.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Low (4)
Probability Probable (3) Improbable (2)
Significance Low (27) Low (18)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Low (birds may be injured or killed) Irreplaceable loss of No No resources Can impacts be Possible. mitigated? The impact should be monitored by the Operation and Maintenance Manager (O&M Manager) and should this be Mitigation found to be a significant impact a suitably qualified avifaunal specialist should be consulted to recommend suitable mitigation. None. The solar panels will be decommissioned after 20 Residual Impacts years and when this occurs the impact will cease.
No. 12
Impact: Electrocution of birds on substations/switching infrastructure.
Phase(s): Operation
Impact Nature: Since there is live hardware in the substation yard, the potential is present for birds to bridge the gap between a phase and earth resulting in electrocution. However, very few electrocutions have been recorded on substations. Species likely to be affected are crows, ravens and other species that are tolerant of disturbance. Small
132 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
raptors such as Lanner Falcons are sometimes attracted into substation yards in pursuit of species nesting there such as sparrows and canaries and may be susceptible to electrocutions. The impact assessment found the impact of electrocution from substation infrastructure to be of low significance once mitigation in the form of bird friendly structures and bird deterrent measures have been put in place. Species likely to be affected are crows and other non-threatened species with the majority of threatened species (Kori Bustard) avoiding the substation yard as they are sensitive to disturbances.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Low (1) Low (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Improbable (2) Highly Improbable (1)
Significance Low (18) Low (7) Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Low (birds will be injured or Low (birds will be injured or killed) killed) Irreplaceable loss of Low Probability Low Probability resources Can impacts be Mitigation is very difficult to prescribe at this stage. There mitigated? are various factors and many different options in terms of birds getting electrocuted in substation and switching stations. It is suggested that the impact be monitored by the operations environmental manager and should it be found to be a significant impact a suitably qualified avifaunal specialist be consulted to recommend suitable mitigation. Mitigation » All relevant perching surfaces should be fitted with bird guards and perch guards as deterrents (Hunting, 2002). » Installation of artificial bird space perches and nesting platforms, at a safe distance from energised components (Goudie, 2006; Prinsen et al., 2012). Residual Impacts Moderate. The power line will be within the area over a long period of time if not permanent. However, if the power line is removed the impacts associated (avian mortalities) will cease.
133 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
No. 13
Impact: Altered drainage and waterflow patterns associated with the road crossings resulting in high levels of erosion, sedimentation and turbidity within the intermittent rivers. Phase(s): Operation
Impact Nature: The primary impact associated with roads is that of maintenance and the change in natural flow patterns through the culvert system which may result in: » the potential obstruction of natural flow (damming); » channelisation of water through the culverts resulting in: o an increase in levels of erosion, o sedimentation and o turbidity downstream of the road crossing o loss of riparian vegetation Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (1)
Duration Permanent (5) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Probable (3) Improbable (2)
Significance Medium (33) Low (14)
Status Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility Moderate High
Irreplaceable loss of Potential loss of important No resources resources due to the replacement of natural vegetation by invading alien plants. Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » During the operation phase, monitor culverts to see if erosion, sedimentation and incision issues arise and if any additional control measures are required. » Regular maintenance of all roads, with specific mention of stream crossings, must take place in order to minimise the risk of further degradation to watercourse and riparian habitat. » Monitor stream crossings for proliferation of alien vegetation. » All mitigation measures pertaining to erosion should be strictly adhered to and promptly executed, which include regular monitoring.
134 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Residual Impacts » Construction of stream crossing, altering stream and baseflow patterns and water velocities; » Increased water and sedimentation inputs to watercourse / riparian habitat due to runoff resulting from increased impermeable surface area.
These residual impacts can be significantly reduced through regular monitoring and if immediate and effective mitigation measures are applied.
5.6.2 For the Grid Connection Power Line
Construction Phase
Construction Impact 1: Potential Impacts on vegetation and listed protected plant species Impact Nature: There are a number of listed and protected species present at the site and it is highly likely that some of these would be impacted by the development. Vegetation clearing during construction will lead to the loss of currently intact habitat within the development footprint and is an inevitable consequence of the development. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Probable (3) Improbable (2)
Significance Low (27) Low (14)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Moderate High
Irreplaceable loss of Limited loss of resources Very limited loss of resources resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » Through the location of the proposed grid connection parallel to the existing 132kV Power Line and within or in close proximity to the cleared servitude of this existing power line, additional disturbance of vegetation can be minimilised, especially where the power line crosses the high sensitivity intermittent streams. » Furthermore, the unnecessary disturbance of large tree specimens within these sensitive habitats, especially listed species such as Acacia erioloba and
135 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Boscia albitrunca, will be avoided. » No pylons may be placed within the intermittent streams or associated riparian fringes. » The existing service road should be utilised as far as possible. » Aim to minimise the destruction of indigenous large shrubs and trees » After the final power line route has been negotiated, conduct a thorough footprint investigation to detect and map (by GPS) any protected plant species and animal burrows - Protected plant species: must be relocated where affected by pylons, maintenance tracks or construction (also to comply with the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act and DENC/DAFF permit conditions) » Strictly prohibit any off-road driving or parking of vehicles and machinery outside designated areas » Limit clearing of indigenous vegetation to pylon positions only » Prevent spillage of construction material, oils or other chemicals, strictly prohibit other pollution » Monitor the establishment of invasive species and remove as soon as detected, whenever possible before regenerative material can be formed » Pre-construction walk-through of the final development footprint, by a suitably qualified botanist, for species of conservation concern that would be affected and that can be translocated (With the necessary permits (approval) in place from NC DENC). Residual Impacts Some loss of vegetation is inevitable and cannot be avoided.
Construction Impact 2 Potential Faunal Impacts. Impact Nature: Increased levels of noise, pollution, disturbance and human presence during construction will be detrimental to fauna. Sensitive and shy fauna would move away from the area during the construction phase as a result of the noise and human activities present, while some slow-moving species would not be able to avoid the construction activities and might be killed. Some impact on fauna is highly likely to occur during construction. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Medium-term (3) Short-term (2)
Magnitude Minor (2) Small (1)
136 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low (18) Low (12)
Status Slightly Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility High High Irreplaceable loss of Very slight loss of resources Unlikely resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » Site access should be controlled and no unauthorised persons should be allowed onto the site. » Any fauna directly threatened by the construction activities should be removed to a safe location by a suitably qualified person. » The collection, hunting or harvesting of any plants or animals at the site should be strictly forbidden. Personnel should not be allowed to wander off the demarcated construction site. » Fires should not be allowed on site. » All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of the spill. » All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit (30km/h) to avoid collisions with susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises. » Construction vehicles limited to a minimal footprint on site (no movement outside of the earmarked footprint). Residual Impacts Residual impacts would be very low with a very slight loss of natural habitat for faunal species.
Construction Impact 3: Avifaunal Habitat Loss Due to Construction Impact Nature: During the construction of the power line, some habitat destruction and alteration will occur.
The disturbance and destruction of “unimpacted”, near-natural habitat will be significantly reduced through the placement of the power line witin close proximity, running parallel, with the existing power line.
It is envisaged that the only Red Data species that will be potentially displaced by the habitat transformation that will take place as a result of the construction of the power line is, Kori bustard (Ardeotis kori). This displacement will only be from a very restricted
137 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
area due to the small size of the area affected by the of the power line alternative. The impact on smaller, non-Red Data species that are potentially breeding in the area will be local and very restricted in extent, and will not have a significant effect on regional or national populations.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Short-term (2)
Magnitude Minor (3) Minor (2)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low (24) Low (15) Status Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility High High
Irreplaceable loss of Very limited loss of Unlikely resources resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » All construction activities must be carried out according to the generally accepted environmental best practice. » The temporal and spatial footprint of the development should be kept to a minimum. » The boundaries of the development footprint areas are to be clearly demarcated and it must be ensured that all activities remain within the demarcated footprint area. » Existing roads must be used as much as possible for access during construction. » Provide adequate briefing for site personnel on the possible important (Red Data) species occurring and/or nesting in the area and the procedures to be followed (for example notification of ECO and avoidance of area until appropriate recommendations have been provided by a relevant specialist). » Any bird nests that are found during the construction phase must be reported to the Environmental Officer (EO). » The above measures must be included in a site specific EMPr. Residual Impacts Moderate. The vegetation within the development footprint can be rehabilitated after the life time of the project if proposed mitigation measures are put in place.
138 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Construction Impact 4. Avifaunal Disturbance During Construction. Impact Nature: The disturbance of avifauna during the construction of the power line may occur. Species sensitive to disturbance include ground-nesting species resident within the development footprint. Disturbance can also influence the community structure of avifauna within close proximity to the development as certain species will be displaced and forced to find alternative territories.
Disturbance could have a negative impact on the breeding activities of various species, particularly if this occurs during a sensitive period in the breeding cycle.
Species of concern are predominantly Kori Bustards. Other small avian species do occur within the development footprint but these species are non-Red Data species. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Short-term (2) Short-term (2)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Low (28) Low (15) Status Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility Moderate High
Irreplaceable loss of Very limited loss of Very limited loss of resources resources resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » Strict control must be maintained over all activities during construction, in line with an approved construction EMPr. » During construction, if any of the Red Data species identified in this report are observed to be roosting and/or breeding in the vicinity of the development footprint, the EO must be notified and an applicable species should be contacted if the nest is deemed necessary to be removed. » Contractors and working staff should stay within the development area and movement outside these areas especially into avian micro-habitats must be restricted. » Driving must take place on existing and new access roads and a speed limit of 30km/h must be implemented on all roads traversing the project site during the construction phase. » Breeding, egg lying and incubation occur typically between October and February for Kori bustard and most of the sensitive ground nesting avifaunal species.
139 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
During these months’ disturbances within natural and near-natural habitats should be limited as far as possible. » Sociable weavers’ nests recorded during the survey were all located within the riparian woodland of the larger intermittent streams and should be avoided. Residual Impacts Low to Moderate. Some disturbance during the construction phase is inevitable. It is likely that some species will be disturbed and potentially displaced by the development.
Construction Impact 5: Potential increased erosion risk during construction Impact Nature During construction, there will be disturbed and loose soil at the site which will render the area vulnerable to erosion. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Medium-term (3) Short-term (2)
Magnitude Minor (2) Small (0)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low (18) Low (9)
Status Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility High High Irreplaceable loss of Very slight loss of Unlikely resources resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » Any erosion problems observed within the power line servitude or along access roads should be rectified immediately and monitored thereafter to ensure that they do not re-occur. » All bare areas (excluding agricultural land), affected by the development, should be re-vegetated with locally occurring species, to bind the soil and limit erosion potential. » Re-instate as much of the eroded area to its pre- disturbed, “natural” geometry (no change in elevation and any banks not to be steepened). » Roads and other disturbed areas within the power line servitude should be regularly monitored for erosion problems and problem areas should receive follow-up monitoring by the EO to assess the success of the remediation.
140 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Topsoil must be removed and stored separately from subsoil. Topsoil must be reapplied where appropriate as soon as possible in order to encourage and facilitate rapid regeneration of the natural vegetation on cleared areas. » Practical phased development and vegetation clearing must be practiced so that cleared areas are not left un-vegetated and vulnerable to erosion for extended periods of time. Residual Impacts With appropriate avoidance and mitigation residual impacts will be very low and may be limited to very limited and local area containing some erosion features with little potential to spread beyond the point of origin.
Construction Impact 6: Loss of riparian systems and alluvial watercourses Impact Nature: The physical removal of the narrow strips of riparian zones and disturbance of any alluvial watercourses by pylon construction and road crossings, being replaced by hard engineered surfaces during construction. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Minor (2) Small (0)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low (19) Low (15)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility High High
Irreplaceable loss of No No resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » Where the intermittent watercourses and associated riparian fringes will be crossed, place the power line as close as possible to the existing 132kV power line in order to minimise additional disturbance. » Use as far as possible the existing service roads through the riparian zones as well as intermittent watercourses. » No vehicles to refuel within watercourses/ riparian vegetation. » No pylons may be placed with the intermittent watercourses or within their fringing riparian woodlands.
141 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Residual Impacts Possible impact on the remaining catchment due to changes in run-off characteristics in the development site.
Operation Phase
Operation Impact 1: Potential increased alien plant invasion during operation Impact Nature: The disturbed and bare ground that is likely to be present at the site after construction will leave the site vulnerable to alien plant invasion for some time Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Medium-term (3) Short-term (2) Magnitude Minor (3) Minor (2)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low (21) Low (15)
Status Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility Medium High Irreplaceable loss of Slight loss of resources Very slight loss of resources resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » A site-specific eradication and management programme for alien invasive plants must be included in the Environmental Management Programme (EMPr). » Regular monitoring by the operation and maintenance team for alien plants at the within the power line servitude must occur and could be conducted simultaneously with erosion monitoring. » When alien plants are detected, these must be controlled and cleared using the recommended control measures for each species to ensure that the problem is not exacerbated or does not re-occur and increase to problematic levels. » Clearing methods must aim to keep disturbance to a minimum. » No planting or importing any listed invasive alien plant species (all Category 1a, 1b and 2 invasive species) to the site for landscaping, rehabilitation or any other purpose must be undertaken. Residual Impacts If the above recommended mitigation measures are strictly implemented and some re-establishment and rehabilitation of natural vegetation is allowed the residual
142 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
impact will be very low.
Operation Impact 2: Increased erosion risk during operation Impact Nature Increased erosion risk as a result of soil disturbance and loss of vegetation cover as well as increased runoff generated from hard impenetrable surfaces (i.e. compacted service and access roads and compacted and cleared areas around the pylons). Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Duration Local (1) Local (1)
Magnitude Medium-term (3) Short-term (2)
Probability Minor (2) Small (0)
Significance Probable (3) Probable (3)
Status Low (18) Low (9)
Reversibility Negative Slightly Negative Irreplaceable loss of High High resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » All roads and other hardened surfaces within the power line servitude should have runoff control features which redirect water flow and dissipate any energy in the water which may pose an erosion risk. » Regular monitoring for erosion within the power line servitude and along access roads must be undertaken after construction to ensure that no erosion problems have developed as a result of the disturbance. » All erosion problems observed within the power line servitude and along access roads as a result of the development should be rectified as soon as possible, using the appropriate erosion control structures and revegetation techniques. » All cleared areas within the power line servitude should be revegetated (no invasive plants may be used). Residual Impacts If erosion at the site is controlled, then there will be no residual impact.
Operation Impact 3. Disturbance of avifauna along the Power Line. Impact Nature: The disturbance of avifauna during the operation of the power line may occur. Species sensitive to disturbance include ground-nesting species resident
143 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
within the development footprint. Disturbance can also influence the community structure of avifauna within close proximity to the development as certain species will be displaced and forced to find alternative territories.
Disturbance could have a negative impact on the breeding activities of various species, particularly if this occurs during a sensitive period in the breeding cycle.
Species of concern are predominantly Kori Bustards. Other small avian species do occur within the development footprint but these species are non-Red Data species. Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (1) Local (1)
Duration Medium-term (3) Short-term (2)
Magnitude Low (4) Minor (2)
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low (24) Low (15) Status Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility Moderate High
Irreplaceable loss of Very limited loss of Unlikely resources resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » Strict control must be maintained over all activities during operation (maintenance), in line with an approved EMPr. » If birds are nesting on the power line infrastructure and cannot be tolerated due to operational risks of fire, electrical short, or other problem, birds should be prevented from accessing nesting sites by using appropriate meausres and methods. Birds must not be shot, poisoned or harmed as this is not an effective control method and has negative ecological consequences. Birds already with eggs and chicks should be allowed to fledge their chicks before nests are removed. » If there are any persistent problems with avifauna, then an avifaunal specialist should be consulted for advice on further mitigation. » Contractors and working staff should stay within the development area and movement outside these areas especially into sensitive avian microhabitats must be restricted. » Vehicle movements must be restricted to existing and newly constructed access roads and a speed limit
144 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
of 30km/h must be implemented on all roads running through the project site during the operational phase. Residual Impacts Moderate. Some disturbance during the operational phase is inevitable. It is likely that some species will be disturbed and potentially displaced by the development.
Operation Impact 4: Electrocution of Birds on Power Line Infrastructure Impact Nature: Electrocutions of birds on associated power infrastructure results in injuries or death and could potentially affect large, perching species in the area such as raptors and storks.
Avian electrocutions occur when a bird perches or attempts to perch on an electrical structure and causes an electrical short circuit by physically bridging the gap between live components and/or live and earthed components (van Rooyen, 2004b; Lehman et al., 2007).
The impact of electrocution is considered to be of moderate significance, and low significance after the implementation of mitigation in the form of bird friendly structures.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Small (2)
Probability Probable (3) Improbable (2)
Significance Low (30) Low (14)
Status Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility Low (birds will be injured or killed) Irreplaceable loss of Limited loss of resources Unlikely resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? » A “Bird Friendly” structure, with a bird perch (as per standard Eskom guidelines) must be used for the tower infrastructure. » All relevant perching surfaces should be fitted with Mitigation bird guards and perch guards as deterrents (Hunting, 2002). » Installation of artificial bird space perches and nesting platforms, at a safe distance from energised components (Goudie, 2006; Prinsen et al., 2012). Low. The power line will be within the area over a long Residual Impacts period of time if not permanent. However, if the power
145 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
line is removed the impacts associated (avian mortalities) will cease.
Operation Impact 5: Collision With The Power Line Impact Nature: Collisions are the biggest single threat posed by transmission power lines to birds in Southern Africa (van Rooyen 2004). Avian species most susceptible and impacted upon are bustards, storks and cranes (especially bustards which have been confirmed are at risk within the project site). These species are heavy-bodied birds with limited manoeuvrability (as a result of high wing loading), which makes it difficult for them to take the necessary evasive action to avoid colliding with power lines (Van Rooyen 2004, Anderson 2001). Many of the collision sensitive species are considered threatened in Southern Africa.
The Red Data species that are vulnerable to power line collisions are generally long living, slow reproducing species. Furthermore, various species require specific conditions for breeding, resulting in very few successful breeding attempts and breeding might be restricted to very small areas. Consistent high adult mortality over an extensive period could have a serious long-term effect on the population.
Potential collision impacts (risk) with the proposed power line by certain species such as Kori Bustard and Secretarybird are possible. This is particularly true for the Bustards which have low manoeuvrability once in flight. All three species mentioned have been recorded within the top ten avian species in South Africa prone to collisions with overhead power lines.
Overall, the impact assessment found this risk impacts to be of moderate to low significance. However, this is related to the amount and frequency large avifaunal species such as bustard and korhaan inhabit or visit the traversed habitat.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Extent Local (2) Local (1)
Duration Long-term (4) Long-term (4)
Magnitude Moderate (6) Low (4)
Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)
Significance Moderate (48) Low (27)
Status Negative Negative Low (birds will be injured Low (birds will be injured or Reversibility or killed) killed) Irreplaceable loss of Limited loss of resources Limited loss of resources resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » Construction of the power line in close proximity to
146 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
the existing line will reduce the cumulative impacts and collision risk. » All relevant perching surfaces must be fitted with bird guards and perch guards as deterrents (Hunting 2002). » Mark sections of line in high sensitivity areas with anti-collision marking devices (diurnal and nocturnal diverters) to increase the visibility of the power line and reduce likelihood of collisions. Marking devices should be spaced 10 m apart. » These line marking devices include spiral vibration dampers, strips, Bird Flight Diverters, bird flappers, aerial marker spheres, ribbons, tapes, flags and aviation balls (Prinsen et al. 2012). Low. The power line will be within the area over a long period of time if not permanent. However, if the power Residual Impacts line is removed the impacts associated (avian mortalities) will cease.
5.6.3 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative Impact 1: Reduced ability to meet conservation obligations and targets Impact Nature: The loss of unprotected vegetation types on a cumulative basis from the broader area impacts the Province’s ability to meet its conservation targets. Overall impact of the Cumulative impact of the proposed project project and other projects considered in isolation within the area Extent Local (1) Regional (3)
Duration Long Term (4) Long-Term (4)
Magnitude Small (1) Low (4)
Probability Improbable (2) Probable (3)
Significance Low (12) Medium (33)
Status Neutral – Slightly Negative Negative
Reversibility Low Low
Irreplaceable loss of No Likely resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » The development footprints of various facilities in the area must be kept to a minimum and natural vegetation should be encouraged to return to disturbed areas.
147 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» An open space management plan should be developed for each individual development which must include management of biodiversity within the fenced area. » Reduce the footprint of facilities within sensitive habitat types as much as possible.
Cumulative Impact 2: Impacts on Ecological Support Areas and Broad-Scale Ecological Processes Impact Nature: Transformation of intact habitat could potentially compromise ecological processes of CBAs and ESAs as well as ecological functioning of important habitats and would contribute to the fragmentation of the landscape and would potentially disrupt the connectivity of the landscape for fauna and flora and impair their ability to respond to environmental fluctuations. Overall impact of the Cumulative impact of the proposed project project and other projects considered in isolation within the area Extent Local (1) Regional (2)
Duration Long Term (4) Long Term (4)
Magnitude Small (1) Low (4)
Probability Improbable (2) Improbable (2)
Significance Low (12) Low (20)
Status Neutral – Slightly Negative Slightly Negative
Reversibility Low Low
Irreplaceable loss of No Likely resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » The development footprints of the individual facilities should be kept to a minimum and natural vegetation should be encouraged to return to disturbed areas. » An open space management plan should be developed for the individual developments, which should include management of biodiversity within the fenced area. » Reduce the footprints of the facilities within sensitive habitat types as much as possible. » Small to medium sized mammals must be allowed to move between the different development footprints and surrounding areas by creating artificial passageways underneath boundary fences (this is optional and may be implemented by developer if deemed necessary).
Cumulative Impact 3: Cumulative impacts due to nearby renewable energy developments - Large-scale disturbance of indigenous vegetation
148 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Impact Nature: Cumulative loss of habitats (including sensitive habitats) and further increase in the fractured nature of the landscape may lead to the loss of features responsible for maintaining biodiversity and providing ecosystem goods and services and may potentially lead to; » A change in the status of the affected vegetation type, subsequently also reducing the ability to meet national conservation obligations and targets; » A reduction in biodiversity and even the loss of some species from the area; » Fracturing and isolation of landscapes may cut off important migration routes and prevent genetic variability thus reducing “genetic health” which may in turn lead to weaker species incapable to adapt and react to potential environmental changes and consequently also to a reduction in biodiversity and the extinction of some species from certain areas; » Large-scale disturbance of indigenous vegetation creates a major opportunity for the establishment of invasive species and the uncontrolled spread of alien invasives into adjacent agricultural land and rangelands. Overall impact of the Cumulative impact of the proposed project project and other projects considered in isolation within the area Extent Local (1) Regional (2)
Duration Long Term (4) Long Term (4)
Magnitude Minor (2) Moderate (6)
Probability Very Improbable (1) Probable (3)
Significance Low (7) Medium (36)
Status Neutral Slightly Negative
Reversibility Low Low
Irreplaceable loss of No Moderate Probability resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » The development footprints of the individual facilities must be kept to a minimum and natural vegetation should be encouraged to return to disturbed areas. This must be undertaken by each respective applicant. » An open space management plan should be developed for the individual developments by each respective applicant, which should include management of biodiversity within the fenced area. » Reduce the footprint of the facilities within sensitive habitat types as much as possible. This must be undertaken by each respective applicant.
149 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Cumulative Impact 4: Cumulative impacts due to nearby renewable energy developments – Influence on runoff and stormwater flow patterns and dynamics (Due to excessive clearing of vegetation) Impact Nature: The interception of rain by the impervious surface of the solar panels produces an “umbrella effect” that delineates a sheltered area. By contrast, its contour receives the collected fluxes, whose intensity or amounts may locally exceed those of the control conditions, depending on the dimensions, height and tilting angle of the panels as well as on wind velocity and direction.
» Cumulatively this alteration could cause excessive accelerated erosion of plains, lower lying small ephemeral to larger intermittent drainage lines, wetlands and river systems and this may ultimately have an effect on the lower lying intermittent stream as well as the Orange River. Overall impact of the Cumulative impact of the proposed project project and other projects considered in isolation within the area Extent Local (1) Regional (3)
Duration Long Term (4) Long Term (4)
Magnitude Small (1) High (7)
Probability Very Improbable (1) Improbable (2)
Significance Low (6) Low (28)
Status Neutral Negative
Reversibility Low Low
Irreplaceable loss of No Moderate Probability resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » The development footprints of the individual developments must be kept to a minimum and natural vegetation should be encouraged to return to disturbed areas. This must be undertaken by each respective applicant. » An open space management plan must be developed for the individual developments by each respective applicant, which should include management of biodiversity within the fenced area.
The following on-site mitigation measures are recommended throughout the operational phase in order to minimize the contribution of this development to the described impact:
150 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
» Regular monitoring of the site (minimum of twice annually) to identify possible areas of erosion is recommended, particularly after large summer thunder storms have been experienced. » The higher level of shading anticipated from PV panels may prevent or slow down the re-establishment of some desirable species, therefore re-establishment should be monitored and species composition adapted if vegetation fails to establish sufficiently. » Alternatively, soil surfaces where no revegetation seems possible will have to be covered with gravel or small rock fragments to increase porosity of the soil surface, slow down runoff and prevent wind- and water erosion. » Monitor the area below and around the panels regularly after larger rainfall events to determine where erosion may be initiated and then mitigate by modifying the soil micro-topography and revegetation efforts accordingly. » Due to the nature and larger runoff surfaces of the PV panels, the development area should be adequately landscaped and rehabilitated to contain expected accelerated erosion. » Runoff may have to be specifically channeled or storm water adequately controlled to prevent localised rill and gully erosion. » Any erosion problems observed should be rectified as soon as possible and monitored thereafter to ensure that they do not re-occur. » Roads and other disturbed areas should be regularly monitored for erosion problems and problem areas should receive follow-up monitoring to assess the success of the remediation.
Cumulative Impact 5: Cumulative impacts due to nearby renewable energy developments – Intensification of the displacement and loss of Avifauna habitat Impact Nature: Regional losses of natural habitat and subsequent displacement of avifauna Overall impact of the Cumulative impact of the proposed project project and other projects considered in isolation within the area Extent Local (1) Regional (3)
Duration Long Term (4) Long Term (4)
Magnitude Low (4) Moderate (6)
151 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)
Significance Low (27) Medium (39)
Status Negative Negative
Reversibility Moderate Low
Irreplaceable loss of Low Probability Moderate Probability resources Can impacts be Yes, to a large extent mitigated? Mitigation » The development footprints of the individual developments must be kept to a minimum and natural habitat should be encouraged to return to disturbed areas. This must be undertaken by each respective applicant. » An open space management plan must be developed for the individual developments by each respective applicant, which should include management of biodiversity within the fenced area. » Conolidation of infrastructure where possible (e.g. proposed power lines) to areas where existing impacts have already occurred (e.g. placing proposed power lines alongside road reserves or within existing power line servitudes).
5.7 Comparison of Laydown Alternative Options
Laydown areas 1 and 3 are alternative options for the first PV area and these needed to be compared. These two laydown alternatives are located in very similar habitat types which are all classified as low sensitive and as such will have similar impacts.
Subsequently both alternatives are regarded as acceptable options from an ecological and avifaunal perspective and as such the selection of an alternative as the preferred option remains the choice of the developer.
5.8 Comparison of Office Alternative Options
The situation regarding the office alternatives are similar to that of the laydown areas in the sense that both office alternatives are situated within similar habitat types and as such the need to do a comparative assessment is unnecessary as the proposed impacts will, for both office alternatives, be near identical. Subsequently, both alternatives are regarded as acceptable options from an
152 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
ecological and avifaunal perspective and as such the selection of an alternative as the preferred option remains the choice of the developer.
5.9 Comparison of the Substation and 11kV/132kV internal power line
Four substations have been identified, two for each PV area. Subsequently the most suitable “ecological” alternative for each PV area must be selected and as such substation 1 and 4 and area 2 and 3 will be compared with each other. All substation alternatives are located in very similar habitat types which area all classified as low sensitive and as such will have similar impacts. As such it was not deemed necessary to do a comparative assessment of the proposed impacts. Hence it can be concluded that all alternatives are regarded as acceptable options from an ecological and avifaunal perspective and as such the selection of an alternative as the preferred option remains the choice of the developer.
6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The majority of the site consists of arid dwarf shrubland or grassy shrubland on open plains (Bushman Arid Grassland merging into Kalahari Karroid Shrubland) considered to be of low sensitivity. These areas should be the focus of development within the site. The study site (Farm Tungsten Lodge 638) is drained by numerous smaller ephemeral washes and small isolated pans. The majority of the ephemeral washes drain into important intermittent streams which in turn terminate into the Orange River. These larger intermittent streams are the dominant sensitive features (high sensitive) present in the proposed study site. While these watercourses are dry the majority of the time, they would on occasion carry significant amounts of water, fulfilling a vital hydrological function. Furthermore, these intermittent streams as well as their peripheral riparian woodlands play a pivotal role in increasing and maintaining the region’s biodiversity (flora, fauna and avifauna).
The abundance of listed and protected species within the site is relatively moderate and consists largely of occasional or scattered individuals of Boscia albitrunca, Acacia erioloba and Boscia foetida. B. albitrunca and A. erioloba are mostly associated with the riparian woodlands of the intermittent streams with large specimens of A. erioloba providing valuable nesting habitat for large sociable weaver nests. A few listed and protected succulent species are mostly associated with the dwarf (karroid) shrubland whilst occasional B. foetida specimens where associated with the grassy shrubland. As B. albitrunca and A. erioloba (including large sociable weaver nests) are mostly associated with the intermittent stream these specimens can and must be avoided (within this habitat type) and impact on these species would be minimal and are not considered
153 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
highly significant for these relative common and widespread species. B. foetida is however more widespread at the site and larger numbers of this species would be impacted. B. foetida is however abundant in the area and elsewhere are the loss of the plants from the development footprint does not constitute a significant impact on this species.
The proposed footprint for the Sirius PV Solar Project Four is located almost entirely within the low sensitivity dwarf shrubland and grassy shrubland whilst minimally impact will be on the medium sensitive, small ephemeral washes as well as a small depression like feature (non-wetland). Even though, these depression features within the study site where collectively classified as high sensitive features, this isolated depression feature (which will be impacted) is only able to fulfil limited extent of services and functions (due to size, isolation and high level of disturbance). Subsequently, the potential loss of this specific depression feature to the development would not be likely to significantly impact the availability of this habitat in the wider area. In terms of the high sensitivity intermittent streams (Helbrandskloofspruit River and the Helbrandleegte River), the Sirius PV Solar Project Four’s footprint is situated almost entirely outside of the boundaries of these high sensitivity features. Only two small areas will be impacted by access road crossings. The first crossing point will be along an existing access road crossing, subsequently avoiding any additional impacts on this portion of the Helbrandskloofspruit River. The second stream crossing however, will have to be constructed as no suitable crossing exist for the Helbrandleegte River. Adequate crossing locations are available along this stream and the most suitable crossing point should be selected. Such an acceptable crossing point should be characterised as follows: the channel itself should be as narrow as possible (less than 12m wide); the riparian fringe should be sparsely vegetated with the absence of large trees (comprise of medium to low shrubs); further listed and protected trees, A. erioloba and B. albitrunca, should be absent from the site. The potential crossing point 2 provided by the client (GPS Coordinates: -28.572979°; 21.100050°) appears to satisfy such conditions, however this will have to be confirmed during the pre-construction walkthrough of the development footprint. The proposed grid connection power line will cross small section of both intermittent streams (power line will cross each stream once). However, this activity will be of very limited extent (acceptable level), and can furthermore be reduced through the placement of the grid connection as close as possible and parallel to the existing 132kV power line, and also through the use of the existing service roads.
Two panel technologies were assessed namely; the conventional mono-facial PV solar panel and the bi-facial PV solar panel accompanied with an artificical
154 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
reflective surface layer. The following conclutions were drawn following the comparison of the two panel technologies and their associated impacts:
» For the construction phase both forms of PV panel technologies have similar associated impacts and it is only during the operational phase where some impacts differ in terms significance. » From an ecological perspective the reflective aggregate is the preferred surface material as this material simulate to some extent the natural conditions associated with the extensive quartzite and calcrete plains found within the region (including the study site). » A significant positive feature of the reflective aggregate surface associated with a bi-facial PV solar plant are soil stabilisation and concervation through preventing local erosion and in turn also protecting downstream water resources against erosion, sedimentation and turbidity. » Taking all the the pros and cons of a bi-facial PV solar plant into account; it can be concluded from an ecological perspective that a mono-facial PV solar plant with a sufficient rehabilitated vegetation cover will be the slightly preferable option. This is mainly due to the bi-facial PV solar plant’s impact on vegetation and habitat availability for fauna and avifauna as well as the threat of IAP invasion and the effort of managing these IAPs in such plants. » However, with the necessary adequate mitigation measures in place and the meticulous implementation of these mitigation measures by the contractor/developer, bi-facial PV solar technology would still be regarded as an acceptable alternative. Adequate mitigation measures would include: o A comprehensive and site specific IAP Management Plan/Programme; and a o Post-decommission Vegetation Rehabilitation Management Plant/Programme. » Additionally strips of natural vegetation can be encouraged at intervals between reflective aggregate patches as well as around the PV solar plant. This may allow for some maintenance of biological processes and a seed bank and provide some habitat for fauna and ground foraging avifauna.
In terms of the general ecological impacts associated with the development, impacts on vegetation and fauna during the construction phase are likely to be relatively high (rated as medium significance prior to mitigation) and are difficult to mitigate as little can be done to avoid the large amounts of disturbance associated with this phase of the develgeneopment. This is however transient and disturbance levels during operation would be much lower. As the affected vegetation types are widespread and have been little impacted by transformation to date, the impact on vegetation is likely to be of locally high intensity, but is not considered to be of broader significance. Similarly, while there are likely to be
155 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
some listed fauna and avifauna utilising the site, these are widespread species and the development would not be likely to generate a significant impact on the populations of these species. Subsequently the development will not compromise the survival of any specific flora or terrestrial vertebrate species on the study area or beyond if mitigation measures are fully implemented. Potential cumulative impacts are however a concern given the abundance of other renewable energy developments in the area. However, this contribution of the proposed project to suchy cumulative impacts would be limited and low due to the fact that the proposed development is situated mostly within a low sensitivity area. The significance of such potential cumulative impacts can be even furher minimised by reducing the footprint of the facility as far as possible and only fencing off the developed area, allowing space for fauna to pass by the facility within the remaining natural vegetation.
General development recommendations
Intermittent stream and associated riparian woodland: » The intermittent stream and its associated riparian woodlands must be treated as No-Go Zones apart from certain approved activities (road and grid connection power line). » It is expected that the grid connection will cross of both intermittent streams (power line will cross each stream once). o However, this grid connection should be placed as close as possible, and parallel to the existing 132kV power line and the existing access roads (and crossing point) should be utilized. o This will ensure that proposed grid connection will be located in an already disturbed area, reducing the impact on natural areas and avoiding conservation important tree species. o For construction purposes of the grid connection, no trees, regardless of protection status (unless it is an alien invasive), may be cut down in the riparian woodlands. However, where unavoidable, such trees may be trimmed (only to an extent that will allow safe and successful construction and operation of the power line. o No pylons may be placed inside or within the riparian woodland fringe of the stream itself. o All indigenous shrubs that will be cleared should be shredded and added to the soil as mulch. o Alien species that may be present or that could become established after disturbance of the area, must be cleared as soon as detected, following the Invasive Species Management Plan.
156 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
o This will ensure that proposed grid connection will be located in an already disturbed area, reducing the impact on natural areas and avoiding conservation important tree species. o For construction purposes of the grid connection, no trees, regardless of protection status (unless it is an alien invasive), may be cut down in the riparian woodlands. o No pylons may be placed inside or within the riparian woodland fringe of the stream itself. o All indigenous shrubs that will be cleared should be shredded and added to the soil as mulch. o Alien species that may be present or that could become established after disturbance of the area, must be cleared as soon as detected, following the Invasive Species Management Plan. » The proposed access road will cross both intermittent streams (crossing of each stream once). o Stream crossing point 1 (Helbrandleegte River) - Existing stream crossing to be utilized - Helbrandleegte River may not be crossed at any other point. o Stream crossing point 2 (Helbrandskloofspruit River) - The channel, at the point of crossing, should be as narrow as possible (less than 12m wide); - the riparian fringe should be sparsely vegetated with the absence of large trees (comprise of medium to low shrubs); - listed and protected trees, A. erioloba and B. albitrunca, should be absent from the site. - The engineering team must provide an effective means to minimise the potential upstream and downstream effects of sedimentation and erosion (erosion protection) as well as minimise the loss of riparian vegetation - Where possible culvert bases must be placed as close as possible, with natural levels in mind, so that these don’t form additional steps/barriers. o During the operation phase: - Monitor culverts to see if erosion, sedimentation and incision issues arise and if any additional control measures are required. - Regular maintenance of all roads, with specific mention of stream crossings, must take place in order to minimise the risk of further degradation to watercourse and riparian habitat. - Monitor stream crossings for proliferation of alien vegetation. - All mitigation measures pertaining to erosion should be strictly adhered to and promptly executed, which include regular monitoring.
157 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Smaller drainage systems (ephemeral washes): » In terms of the smaller drainages (ephemeral washes), construction should be limited to the absolute minimum (only within the earmarked footprint). » For channels that will be modified by the proposed developments, adequate stormwater and erosion control measures should be put in place to slow down and disperse runoff volumes and prevent the degradation of other channels and valley floor vegetation. » If some of these habitats are impacted or will be altered by the proposed development, channels may under no circumstance be sealed with any impermeable material, as this will lead to a loss of runoff- and related retention/replenishment of soil moisture reserves, nutrients and seeds. » Further, it is advisable that offices, substations and switching stations are not placed within such systems. » There is a potential of establishment and spread of alien invasive species, especially from machinery moving from infested areas (e.g. next to main traffic routes) through such habitats. o Monitoring of the establishment of indigenous and alien invasives will have to be carried out during the entire construction and operational phase of the development. o New establishments should be controlled as soon as they are detected. » After construction, surface flow regimes should be re-instated as far as possible to pre-construction states, with adequate measures in place to prevent erosion – most importantly excessive sheet and wind erosion.
Depression like features (non-wetland) and associated wooded peripheries: » No depression like features apart from the identified small moist depression identified within the development footprint may be impacted. » This depression’s potential loss to the development would not be likely to significantly impact the availability of this habitat in the wider area. o Whilst the loss of some moist depression features will not have a large enough cumulative effect to significantly affect seasonal availability of surface water and associated biota, the disturbance of larger moist depression features may have a significant negative effect on a large portion of the natural food chain. Whilst it is difficult to determine a ‘size-threshold’ for a non-significant loss of ecosystem function if pans are lost, it could be argued that any moist depression feature with a diameter of 30 m or more should not be transformed (avoid), and any moist depression feature with a diameter above 100 m (even if 100 m in only one direction) should be treated as a NO GO area. A buffer of at least 100 m around this No-Go moist depression’s edge should be
158 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
maintained in a natural state, as this also influenced the resilience and functionality of the moist depression. » Components of the proposed development that may under no circumstance be located in or within 30 m of any moist depression features would include: o Man-camps and/or ablution facilities o Any form of waste/soil/overburden disposal o Any infrastructure that will be sensitive to inundation in case of an extreme (rainfall) event » Further, it is advisable that offices, substations and switching stations are never placed within or close to such moist depression features. » Vehicle traffic and excavations in such small moist depression features within the development footprint should be kept to a minimum (cabling trenches taken around pans), especially after rainfall events when soils are moist.
Shrubby grassland and dwarf (karroid) shrubland: » Vehicle traffic should be limited to minimise compaction of topsoils. » All burrows will need to be inspected prior to construction for the presence of fauna, which will need to be relocated to other areas within the selected farm portions. » Dust and erosion should be controlled, and establishment of alien invasive species monitored until decommissioning phase, followed by eradication action when necessary. » Vegetation clearing to be kept to a minimum. No unnecessary vegetation to be cleared. » After construction, it will be important to re-establish a low vegetation layer where possible, with adequate measures in place to prevent erosion – most importantly excessive sheet and wind erosion. » A pre-construction walk-through of the final development footprint, by a suitably qualified botanist, for species of conservation concern that would be affected and that can be translocated must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the construction phase. » Following the pre-construction walk-through, a Rehabilitation and Search- and Rescue plan will have to be compiled and implemented.
From an ecological perspective no objective or motives (identification of impacts of high ecological significance etc.) were identified which would hinder the development of the Sirius PV Solar Project Four and associated infrastructure on the proposed site. The development will be appropriate and acceptable from an ecological perspective and will not cause detrimental impacts to the ecological (fauna, flora and avifaua) features located within the affected and surrounding
159 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
properties. Therefore, it is the opinion of the specialist that the development may be authorised, constructed and operated, subject to the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures.
7 REFERENCES
Apps, P. (ed.). 2012. Smither’s Mammals of Southern Africa. A field guide. Random House Struik, Cape Town, RSA
Alexander, G. & Marais, J. 2007. A Guide to the Reptiles of Southern Africa. Struik Nature, Cape Town.
Anhaeusser, C.R., Johnson, M.R., Thomas, R.J. (2008). The Geology of South Africa. Council for Geosciences.
Bates, M.F., Branch, W.R., Bauer, A.M., Burger, M., Marais, J., Alexander, G.J. & de Villiers, M. S. 2014. Atlas and Red List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 32. SANBI, Pretoria.
Branch W.R. 1998. Field guide to snakes and other reptiles of southern Africa. Struik, Cape Town.
Cobbing, J.E. 2017. An updated water balance for the Grootfontein aquifer near Mahikeng. Water SA, 44 (1): 54 – 64.
CRITICAL BIODIVERSITY AREAS MAPS (PER MUNICIPALITY) AND GIS DATA AVAILABLE FROM: Biodiversity GIS (BGIS), South African National Biodiversity Institute, Tel. +27 21 799 8739 or CapeNature, Tel. +27 21 866 8000. Or on the web at: http://bgis.sanbi.org/fsp/project.asp
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, 2007. National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act 10 of 2004): Publication of lists of Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable and Protected Species. Government Gazette, Republic of South Africa
Department of Water and Sanitation. 2014. A Desktop Assessment of the Present Ecological State, Ecological Importance and Ecological Sensitivity per Sub Quaternary Reaches for Secondary Catchments in South Africa. Secondary: [W5 (for example)]. Compiled by RQIS DM: https://www.dwa.gov.za/iwqs/rhp/eco/peseismodel.aspx accessed on 7/10/2018.
160 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
De Wit, M.C.J. 2016. Early Permian diamond-bearing proximal eskers in the Lichtenburg/Ventersdorp area of the North West Province, South Africa. S Afr J Geol., 119 (4): 585 - 606
Du Preez, L. & Carruthers, V. 2009. A Complete Guide to the Frogs of Southern Africa. Struik Nature., Cape Town.
Friedmann, Y. & Daly, B. 2004. Red data book of the mammals of South Africa, a conservation assessment. Johannesburg, Endangered Wildlife Trust.
Hoare, D. 2012. David Hoare Consulting cc (2012). Impact Assessment Report: Specialist ecological study on the potential impacts of the proposed Hidden Valley Wind Energy Facility Project near Matjiesfontein, Northern Cape.
Marais, J. 2004. Complete Guide to the Snakes of Southern Africa. Struik Nature, Cape Town.
Meyer, R. 2014. Hydrogeology of Ground Water Region 10: The Karst Belt. Water Research Commission, WRC Report No. TT553/15.
Morris, J.W. 1976. Automatic classification of the highveld grassland of Lichtenburg, North-western Transvaal. Bothalia, 12(4): 267 - 292
Mucina L. & Rutherford M.C. (eds) 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria
Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ & Kloepfer D (eds). 2004. Atlas and Red Data book of the frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. SI/MAB Series no. 9. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Raimondo, D., Von Staden, L., Foden, W., Victor, J.E., Helme, N.A., Turner, R.C. Kamundi, D.A. & Manyama, P.A. (Eds.). 2009. Red list of South African plants 2009. Strelitzia 25:1-668
Skinner, J.D. & Chimimba, C.T. 2005. The mammals of the Southern African Subregion. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Strohbach, M. 2013. Mitigation of ecological impacts of renewable energy facilities in South Africa. The Sustainable Energy Resource Handbook (Renewable Energy) South Africa 4: 41 – 47.
161 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Strohbach, M. 2013. Savannah Environmental (2013) Ecological Scoping Report: Proposed Gihon Solar Energy Facility South of Bela-Bela, Limpopo Province.
Tessema, A & Nzotta, U. 2014. Multi-Data Integration Approach in Groundwater Resource Potential Mapping: A Case Study from the North West Province, South Africa. WRC Report No. 2055/1/13. Water Research Commision.
Todd, S. 2015. Simon Todd Consulting (2015). Terrestrial Fauna & Flora Specialist Impact Assessment: Proposed Wolmaransstad 75 MW Solar Energy Facility in the North West Province.
Wilson, M.G.C., Henry, G. & Marshall, T.R. 2016. A review of the alluvial diamond industry and the gravels of the North West Province, South Africa. S Afr J Geol., 109: 301 – 314.
Websites:
AGIS, 2007. Agricultural Geo-Referenced Information System, accessed from www.agis.agric.za
ADU, 2012. Animal Demography Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Cape Town. http://www.adu.org.za
BGIS: http://bgis.sanbi.org/website.asp
SANBI databases:
South African National Biodiversity Institute. 2016. Botanical Database of Southern Africa (BODATSA) [2018-07-13_235408064-BRAHMSOnlineData]. http://SIBIS.sanbi.org
Climate: http://en.climate-data.org/location/10658/
162 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
8 APPENDICES:
Appendix 2. List of bird species identified within the study site during the site visit. Conservation Status Number Scientific Name Common Name Endemism (2014) Southern Pale Chanting 162 Melierax canorus Goshawk
182 Falco rupicoloides Greater Kestrel
172 Falco biarmicus Lanner Falcon Vulnerable
181 Falco rupicolis Rock Kestrel Near-Endemic
230 Ardeotis kori Kori Bustard Near Threatened
235 Eupodotis vigorsii Karoo Korhaan Endemic
293 Afrotis afraoides Northern Black Korhaan
255 Vanellus coronatus Crowned Lapwing
344 Pterocles namaqua Namaqua Sandgrouse Near-Endemic
354 Streptopelia capicola Cape Turtle-Dove
355 Spilopelia senegalensis Laughing Dove
356 Oena capensis Namaqua Dove
425 Colius colius White-backed Mousebird Endemic
465 Tricholaema leucomelas Acacia Pied Barbet
163 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
498 Calendulauda sabota Sabota Lark Near-Endemic
511 Spizocarys starki Stark's Lark Near-Endemic
506 Chersomanes albofasciata Spike-heeled Lark
518 Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow
548 Corvus albus Pied Crow
567 Pycnonotus nigricans African Red-eyed Bulbul Near-Endemic
590 Cercomela tractrac Tractrac Chat Near-Endemic
595 Myrmecocichla formicivora Ant-eating Chat Endemic
665 Cisticola aridulus Desert Cisticola
615 Cercotrichas paena Kalahari Scrub-Robin
653 Eremomela icteropygialis Yellow-bellied Eremomela
557 Anthoscopus minutus Cape Penduline Tit
796 Zosterops pallidus Orange River White-eye Near-endemic
621 Parisoma subcaeruleum Chestnut-vented Tit-Babbler
688 Malcorus pectoralis Rufous-eared Warbler Endemic
685 Prinnia flavicans Black-chested Prinia
760 Creatophora cinerea Wattled Starling
164 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
703 Batis pririt Pririt Batis Near-Endemic
732 Lanius collaris Common Fiscal
746 Telophorus zeylonys Bokmakierie Endemic
741 Nilaus afer Brubru
779 Cinnyris mariquensis Marico Sunbird
788 Cinnyris fuscus Dusky Sunbird
803 Passer meanurus Cape Sparrow Near-Endemic
800 Philetairus socius Sociable Weaver Endemic
814 Ploceus velatus Southern Masked-Weaver
856 Amadina erythrocephala Red-headed Finch Near-Endemic
806 Spropipes squamifrons Scaly-feathered Weaver
821 Quelea quelea Red-billed Quelea
878 Crithagra flaviventris Yellow Canary Near-Endemic
879 Crithagra albogularis White-throated Canary Near-Endemic
887 Emberiza impetuani Lark-like Bunting
165 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Appendix 2. Listed Plant Species
List of plant species of conservation concern which are known to occur in the vicinity of study area. The list is derived from the POSA website
Family Species Family Species ACANTHACEAE Acanthopsis hoffmannseggiana ACANTHACEAE Barleria lichtensteiniana ACANTHACEAE Barleria rigida ACANTHACEAE Blepharis mitrata ACANTHACEAE Monechma desertorum ACANTHACEAE Monechma divaricatum ACANTHACEAE Monechma incanum ACANTHACEAE Monechma spartioides ACANTHACEAE Peristrophe cernua AIZOACEAE Aizoon asbestinum AIZOACEAE Aizoon schellenbergii AIZOACEAE Galenia africana Trianthema parvifolia AIZOACEAE Plinthus karooicus AIZOACEAE var. parvifolia AMARANTHACEAE Amaranthus praetermissus AMARANTHACEAE Amaranthus thunbergii AMARANTHACEAE Leucosphaera bainesii AMARANTHACEAE Sericocoma avolans APOCYNACEAE Adenium oleifolium APOCYNACEAE Brachystelma huttonii Gomphocarpus APOCYNACEAE Ceropegia sp. APOCYNACEAE tomentosus subsp. tomentosus APOCYNACEAE Huernia hystrix subsp. hystrix APOCYNACEAE Orbea variegata APOCYNACEAE Sarcostemma pearsonii ASPARAGACEAE Asparagus lignosus ASPHODELACEAE Aloe claviflora ASPHODELACEAE Aloe dichotoma ASTERACEAE Berkheya annectens ASTERACEAE Brachylaena ilicifolia ASTERACEAE Cineraria geraniifolia ASTERACEAE Cineraria saxifraga ASTERACEAE Cotula sericea ASTERACEAE Dicoma capensis ASTERACEAE Dimorphotheca cuneata ASTERACEAE Dimorphotheca sinuata Eriocephalus ASTERACEAE Dimorphotheca zeyheri ASTERACEAE microphyllus var. pubescens ASTERACEAE Euryops brachypodus ASTERACEAE Felicia echinata Felicia hyssopifolia ASTERACEAE Felicia filifolia subsp. filifolia ASTERACEAE subsp. hyssopifolia Felicia muricata subsp. Felicia muricata subsp. ASTERACEAE ASTERACEAE cinerascens muricata ASTERACEAE Felicia ovata ASTERACEAE Gazania leiopoda ASTERACEAE Geigeria ornativa ASTERACEAE Geigeria pectidea ASTERACEAE Gnaphalium capense ASTERACEAE Gnaphalium vestitum ASTERACEAE Gymnostephium ciliare ASTERACEAE Helichrysum sp. ASTERACEAE Ifloga sp. ASTERACEAE Kleinia longiflora ASTERACEAE Leysera tenella ASTERACEAE Matricaria sp. Metalasia pulcherrima forma ASTERACEAE ASTERACEAE Nidorella auriculata pulcherrima Osteospermum ASTERACEAE Nidorella sp. ASTERACEAE grandidentatum ASTERACEAE Osteospermum imbricatum ASTERACEAE Osteospermum junceum ASTERACEAE Othonna eriocarpa ASTERACEAE Pegolettia retrofracta ASTERACEAE Pentzia dentata ASTERACEAE Pentzia incana ASTERACEAE Pentzia pinnatisecta ASTERACEAE Pentzia spinescens ASTERACEAE Pteronia sordida ASTERACEAE Pteronia teretifolia
166 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Family Species Family Species Schistostephium ASTERACEAE Pteronia unguiculata ASTERACEAE crataegifolium Senecio erubescens var. ASTERACEAE Senecio asperulus ASTERACEAE erubescens Senecio juniperinus var. ASTERACEAE Senecio hastatus ASTERACEAE juniperinus ASTERACEAE Senecio macroglossus ASTERACEAE Senecio monticola ASTERACEAE Senecio othonniflorus ASTERACEAE Senecio puberulus ASTERACEAE Senecio retrorsus ASTERACEAE Senecio sp. ASTERACEAE Tarchonanthus camphoratus ASTERACEAE Tarchonanthus littoralis Plagiochasma rupestre var. AYTONIACEAE BIGNONIACEAE Rhigozum obovatum rupestre Ehretia rigida subsp. BIGNONIACEAE Rhigozum trichotomum BORAGINACEAE rigida BORAGINACEAE Heliotropium ciliatum BORAGINACEAE Lappula heteracantha Wahlenbergia capillacea BUDDLEJACEAE Buddleja saligna CAMPANULACEAE subsp. capillacea Boscia foetida subsp. CAMPANULACEAE Wahlenbergia tenella var. tenella CAPPARACEAE foetida CAPPARACEAE Cadaba aphylla CHENOPODIACEAE Salsola glabrescens CHENOPODIACEAE Salsola namibica CHENOPODIACEAE Salsola rabieana Cotyledon orbiculata var. COLCHICACEAE Ornithoglossum viride CRASSULACEAE orbiculata CRASSULACEAE Cotyledon woodii CUCURBITACEAE Coccinia rehmannii DIPSACACEAE Scabiosa angustiloba EBENACEAE Euclea undulata Euphorbia avasmontana ERIOSPERMACEAE Eriospermum flagelliforme EUPHORBIACEAE var. sagittaria Euphorbia gariepina subsp. EUPHORBIACEAE EUPHORBIACEAE Euphorbia glanduligera balsamea Euphorbia inaequilatera var. Euphorbia mauritanica EUPHORBIACEAE EUPHORBIACEAE inaequilatera var. mauritanica EUPHORBIACEAE Euphorbia rudis EUPHORBIACEAE Euphorbia spinea Acacia mellifera subsp. FABACEAE Acacia karroo FABACEAE detinens Argyrolobium FABACEAE Amphithalea williamsonii FABACEAE harveyanum Aspalathus tridentata FABACEAE Aspalathus subtingens FABACEAE subsp. staurantha FABACEAE Dipogon lignosus FABACEAE Indigastrum argyraeum Indigofera alternans var. FABACEAE FABACEAE Indigofera angustata alternans FABACEAE Indigofera auricoma FABACEAE Indigofera heterotricha FABACEAE Indigofera holubii FABACEAE Indigofera zeyheri FABACEAE Parkinsonia africana FABACEAE Pomaria lactea Prosopis glandulosa var. FABACEAE FABACEAE Prosopis velutina glandulosa Ptycholobium biflorum subsp. FABACEAE FABACEAE Tephrosia angulata biflorum Tephrosia dregeana var. FABACEAE Tephrosia capensis var. capensis FABACEAE dregeana FABACEAE Tephrosia grandiflora GERANIACEAE Monsonia burkeana Pelargonium GERANIACEAE Monsonia umbellata GERANIACEAE anethifolium Pelargonium reniforme GERANIACEAE Pelargonium inquinans GERANIACEAE subsp. reniforme Gisekia pharnacioides GESNERIACEAE Streptocarpus sp. GISEKIACEAE var. pharnacioides
167 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Family Species Family Species HYACINTHACEAE Albuca setosa HYACINTHACEAE Dipcadi ciliare HYACINTHACEAE Dipcadi viride HYACINTHACEAE Ledebouria undulata Ornithogalum tenuifolium subsp. HYACINTHACEAE IRIDACEAE Dierama pulcherrimum tenuifolium Lophiocarpus IRIDACEAE Tritonia strictifolia LOPHIOCARPACEAE polystachyus Triaspis hypericoides LORANTHACEAE Tapinanthus oleifolius MALPIGHIACEAE subsp. nelsonii MALVACEAE Hermannia abrotanoides MALVACEAE Hermannia flammea MALVACEAE Hermannia gracilis MALVACEAE Hermannia modesta Hermannia salviifolia MALVACEAE Hermannia mucronulata MALVACEAE var. grandistipula MALVACEAE Hermannia sp. MALVACEAE Hermannia spinosa MELIACEAE Nymania capensis MENISPERMACEAE Cissampelos capensis MESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Lithops bromfieldii MESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Psilocaulon coriarium MESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Psilocaulon granulicaule MESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Ruschia vulvaria Limeum aethiopicum subsp. Limeum myosotis var. MOLLUGINACEAE MOLLUGINACEAE aethiopicum var. aethiopicum confusum Grielum humifusum var. MOLLUGINACEAE Mollugo cerviana var. cerviana NEURADACEAE humifusum Ochna arborea var. NYCTAGINACEAE Phaeoptilum spinosum OCHNACEAE arborea OLEACEAE Olea capensis subsp. capensis ORCHIDACEAE Holothrix burchellii OROBANCHACEAE Hyobanche sanguinea OXALIDACEAE Oxalis bowiei OXALIDACEAE Oxalis imbricata var. violacea PASSIFLORACEAE Adenium repanda PEDALIACEAE Sesamum capense PHYLLANTHACEAE Phyllanthus incurvus PHYLLANTHACEAE Phyllanthus maderaspatensis PLANTAGINACEAE Plantago sp. POACEAE Anthephora pubescens POACEAE Aristida adscensionis Aristida congesta subsp. POACEAE POACEAE Cenchrus ciliaris barbicollis POACEAE Enneapogon desvauxii POACEAE Enneapogon scaber POACEAE Eragrostis annulata POACEAE Eragrostis biflora POACEAE Eragrostis echinochloidea POACEAE Eragrostis porosa POACEAE Eragrostis rotifer POACEAE Eragrostis sp. POACEAE Fingerhuthia africana POACEAE Panicum lanipes POACEAE Schmidtia kalahariensis POACEAE Setaria verticillata POACEAE Sporobolus nervosus POACEAE Stipagrostis anomala POACEAE Stipagrostis ciliata var. capensis POACEAE Stipagrostis obtusa Stipagrostis uniplumis var. Stipagrostis uniplumis POACEAE POACEAE neesii var. uniplumis POACEAE Tragus berteronianus POLYGALACEAE Polygala seminuda Persicaria attenuata subsp. POLYGONACEAE PORTULACACEAE Portulaca quadrifida africana PORTULACACEAE Talinum arnotii ROSACEAE Cliffortia linearifolia Kohautia caespitosa ROSACEAE Cliffortia serpyllifolia RUBIACEAE subsp. brachyloba RUBIACEAE Kohautia cynanchica RUBIACEAE Nenax microphylla Pavetta capensis subsp. Thesium gnidiaceum var. RUBIACEAE SANTALACEAE capensis gnidiaceum Aptosimum lineare var. SCROPHULARIACEAE Aptosimum albomarginatum SCROPHULARIACEAE lineare
168 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Family Species Family Species SCROPHULARIACEAE Aptosimum marlothii SCROPHULARIACEAE Aptosimum procumbens Jamesbrittenia SCROPHULARIACEAE Aptosimum spinescens SCROPHULARIACEAE atropurpurea subsp. pubescens SOLANACEAE Lycium oxycarpum SOLANACEAE Solanum capense SOLANACEAE Solanum nigrum THYMELAEACEAE Gnidia burchellii THYMELAEACEAE Gnidia nana THYMELAEACEAE Gnidia sp. THYMELAEACEAE Struthiola argentea VERBENACEAE Chascanum cuneifolium VERBENACEAE Chascanum incisum ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Tribulus terrestris ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Tribulus zeyheri subsp. zeyheri ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum dregeanum Zygophyllum ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum flexuosum ZYGOPHYLLACEAE lichtensteinianum ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum rigidum
169 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Appendix 3. List of Mammals
List of Mammals which may potentially occur within the surrounding area. Taxonomy notes are derived from Skinner & Chimimba (2005), while conservation status is according to the IUCN 2010.
Scientific Name Common Name Status Habitat Likelihood Macroscledidea (Elephant Shrews): Species of open country, with preference for shrub Macroscelides Round-eared Elephant bush and sparse grass cover, also occur on hard LC High proboscideus Shrew gravel plains with sparse boulders for shelter, and on loose sandy soil provided there is some bush cover Rocky koppies, rocky outcrops or piles of boulders Elephantulus Western Rock Elephant LC where these offer sufficient holes and crannies for Low rupestris Shrew refuge. Tubulentata: Wide habitat tolerance, being found in open Orycteropus afer Aardvark LC woodland, scrub and grassland, especially associated Definite with sandy soil Hyracoidea
(Hyraxes) Outcrops of rocks, especially granite formations and Procavia capensis Rock Hyrax LC Definite dolomite intrusions in the Karoo. Also erosion gullies
Lagomorpha (Hares and Rabbits): Lepus capensis Cape Hare LC Dry, open regions, with palatable bush and grass Definite Common in agriculturally developed areas, especially Lepus saxatilis Scrub Hare LC in crop-growing areas or in fallow lands where there High is some bush development. Rodentia
(Rodents): Hystrix Cape Porcupine LC Catholic in habitat requirements. Definite africaeaustralis Occur widely on open sandy ground or sandy scrub, Pedetes capensis Springhare LC on overgrazed grassland, on the fringes of vleis and High dry river beds. South African Ground Open terrain with a sparse bush cover and a hard Xerus inauris LC Definite Squirrel substrate Associated with sandstones of Cape Fold mountains, Graphiurus ocularis Spectacled Dormouse LC Low which have many vertical and horizontal crevices.
Four-striped Grass Essentially a grassland species, occurs in wide Rhabdomys pumilio LC High Mouse variety of habitats where there is good grass cover. Southern Mastomys coucha LC Wide habitat tolerance. High Multimammate Mouse Thallomys Acacia Tree Rat LC Associated with stands of Acacia woodland Low paedulcus Thallomys Black-tailed Tree Rat LC Associated with stands of Acacia woodland Low nigricauda Catholic in their habitat requirements, but where Aethomys Namaqua Rock Mouse LC there are rocky koppies, outcrops or boulder-strewn Definite namaquensis hillsides they use these preferentially Associated with a dry sandy substrate in more arid parts of the Nama-karoo and Succulent Karoo. Parotomys brantsii Brants' Whistling Rat LC High Species selects areas of low percentage of plant cover and areas with deep sands.
170 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status Habitat Likelihood
Parotomys Littledale’s Whistling Riverine associations or associated with Lycium LC Low littledalei Rat bushes or Psilocaulon absimile
Desmodillus Cape Short-tailed Tend to occur on hard ground, unlike other gerbil LC High auricularis Gerbil species, with some cover of grass or karroid bush
Gerbils associated with Nama and Succulent Karoo Gerbillurus paeba Hairy-footed Gerbil LC preferring sandy soil or sandy alluvium with a grass, High scrub or light woodland cover Gerbilliscus Predominantly associated with light sandy soils or Bushveld Gerbil LC Low leucogaster sandy alluvium Sandy soils or sandy alluvium with some cover of Gerbilliscus brantsii Higheld Gerbil LC High grass, scrub or open woodland
Saccostomus Catholic habitat requirements, commoner in areas Pouched Mouse LC High campestris where there is a sandy substrate.
Found predominantly in Nama and Succulent Karoo Malacothrix typica Gerbil Mouse LC biomes, in areas with a mean annual rainfall of 150- High 500 mm. Primates: Can exploit fynbos, montane grasslands, riverine Papio ursinus Chacma Baboon LC courses in deserts, and simply need water and Definite access to refuges. Most abundant in and near riparian vegetation of Cercopithecus mitis Vervet Monkey LC Definite savannahs Eulipotyphla (Shrews):
Occurs in relatively dry terrain, with a mean annual Reddish-Grey Musk Crocidura cyanea LC rainfall of less than 500 mm. Occur in karroid scrub Low Shrew and in fynbos often in association with rocks.
Erinaceomorpha (Hedgehog)
South African Generally found in semi-arid and subtemperate Atelerix frontalis LC Moderate Hedgehog environments with ample ground cover
Carnivora: Common in the 100-600mm rainfall range of Proteles cristata Aardwolf LC country, Nama-Karoo, Succulent Karoo Grassland Definite and Savanna biomes
Nama and Succulent Karoo and the drier parts of the Hyaena brunnea Brown Hyaena NT Low Grassland and Savanna Biomes Caracals tolerate arid regions, occur in semi-desert Caracal caracal Caracal LC High and karroid conditions Felis silvestris African Wild Cat LC Wide habitat tolerance. High Associated with arid country with MAR 100-500 mm, particularly areas with open habitat that provides Felis nigripes Black-footed cat VU High some cover in the form of tall stands of grass or scrub. Genetta genetta Small-spotted genet LC Occur in open arid associations High Open arid country where substrate is hard and Suricata suricatta Meerkat LC stony. Occur in Nama and Succulent Karoo but also High fynbos Cynictis penicillata Yellow Mongoose LC Semi-arid country on a sandy substrate Definite Catholic habitat requirements but does not occur in Galerella sanguinea Slender Mongoose LC Low the south. Herpestes Cape Grey Mongoose LC Wide habitat tolerance High pulverulentus
171 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status Habitat Likelihood
Associated with well-watered terrain, living in close Atilax paludinosus Marsh Mongoose LC Low association with rivers, streams, marshes, etc.
Associated with open country, open grassland, Vulpes chama Cape Fox LC grassland with scattered thickets and coastal or High semi-desert scrub Canis mesomelas Black-backed Jackal LC Wide habitat tolerance, more common in drier areas. High Open country with mean annual rainfall of 100-600 Otocyon megalotis Bat-eared Fox LC High mm Predominantly aquatic and do not occur far from Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter LC Low permanenet water Ictonyx striatus Striped Polecat LC Widely distributed throughout the sub-region High IUCN Mellivora capensis Ratel/Honey Badger LC/SA RDB Catholic habitat requirements High EN Rumanantia (Antelope): Sylvicapra grimmia Common Duiker LC Presence of bushes is essential High Raphicerus Steenbok LC Inhabits open country, Definite campestris Chiroptera (Bats) Wide habitat tolerances, but often found near open Pipistrellus capensis Cape Serotine Bat LC High water Egyptian Free-tailed Tadarida aegyptiaca LC In arid areas. often associated with water sources High Bat Nycteris thebaica Egyptian Slit-faced Bat LC Wide habitat tolerance High Rhinolophus denti Dent's Horseshoe Bat LC Arid areas but require caves or rock crevices High Rhinolophus Darling's Horsehoe Bat LC Savanna woodland species but requires caves Low darlingi Straw-coloured fruit Eidolon helvum LC Occasional migratory visitors within southern Africa Low bat
172 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Appendix 4. List of Reptiles.
List of reptiles which are likely to occur within the surrounding area. Habitat notes and distribution records are based on Branch (1988) and Alexander and Marais (2007), while conservation status is from the IUCN Red Lists 2012.
Scientific Name Common Name Distribution Habitat Likelihood Tortoises and Terrapins: Psammobates Data Karoo and Kalahari Kalahari Tent Tortoise Endemic High oculiferus Deficient shrublands Snakes:
Delalande's Beaked Blind Data Varied: semi-desert, coastal Rhinotyphlops lalandei Endemic Low Snake Deficient bush, fynbos & savannah Common in highveld grassland & arid karroid Data Lamprophis capensis Brown House Snake Widespread regions, but found High Deficient everywhere & tolerant of urban sprawl Lowland forest and fynbos to Data Lycophidion capense Common Wolf Snake Widespread moist savanna, grassland and High Deficient karoo scrub Sandy scrubland in SW Cape, Data highveld grassland & Pseudaspis cana Mole Snake Widespread High Deficient mountainous & desert regions Data Rocky, sandy areas. Cape Dipsina multimaculata Dwarf Beaked Snake Endemic High Deficient karroid areas. Psammophis Data Arid scrubland & karroid Karoo Sand or Whip Snake Widespread High notostictus Deficient regions Mainly Kalahari thornveld but Data Psammophis trinasalis Kalahari Sand Snake Widespread may also occur in savanna High Deficient and grassland Common/Rhombic Egg Absent only from true desert Dasypeltis scabra Widespread LC High Eater & closed-canopy forest Arid karroid regions, particularly along river Data Naja nivea Cape Cobra Widespread courses, entering well High Deficient drained open areas along the southern coast Data Absent only from desert & Bitis arietans Puff Adder Widespread High Deficient mnt tops Data Sandy regions, throughout Bitis caudalis Horned Adder Widespread High Deficient Karoo Worm Lizards Dusky Spade-snouted Data Monopeltis infuscata Widespread Dry and moist savannah High Worm Lizard Deficient Lizard and Skinks: Very varied: arid karroid Data Mabuya capensis Cape Skink Widespread veld, moist coastal bush, High Deficient montane grassland, etc Western Three-Striped Data Arid Savanna karroid veld Mabuya occidentalis Widespread High Skink Deficient and desert Mabuya spilogaster Kalahari Tree Skink Widespread Arid Savannah High Data Mabuya sulcata Western Rock Skink Widespread Karroid areas High Deficient
173 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Distribution Habitat Likelihood
Data Varied, except desert areas, Mabuya striata Striped Skink Widespread High Deficient succulent karoo and fynbos Extremely varied; desert, Data karroid veld, montane Mabuya variegata Variegated Skink Widespread High Deficient grassland, savanna, coastal bush & valley bushveld Data Heliobolus lugubris Bushveld Lizard Widespread Arid and mesic savannah High Deficient Data Varied, arid savanna to Meroles suborbitalis Spotted Desert Lizard Endemic High Deficient desert Very varied: karroid veld, Pedioplanis Data Spotted Sand Lizard Endemic valley bushveld & arid & High lineoocellata Deficient mesic savannah Pedioplanis Data Namaqua Sand Lizard Widespread Karroid veld High namaquensis Deficient Montane grassland, savanna, Gerrhosaurus Yellow-throated Plated Data Widespread bushveld and low open Low flavigularis Lizard Deficient coastal forest Karroid regions, coastal Data Cordylus polyzonus Karoo Girdled Lizard Endemic renosterveld and succulent High Deficient karoo Data Savanna and arid karroid Varanus albigularis Rock Monitor Widespread High Deficient areas Data Varanus niloticus Water Monitor Widespread Rivers pans and major lakes High Deficient Data Agama aculeata Ground Agama Widespread Semi desert and savanna High Deficient Data Agama anchietae Anchieta's Agama Widespread Semi desert and arid savanna High Deficient Geckos:
Chondrodactylus Gravel plains, interdune Giant Ground Gecko Endemic LC High angulifer spaces & sandy flats Chondrodactylus Data Rocky outcrops, cliffs and Bibron's Tubercled Gecko Endemic High bibronii Deficient large trees Data Karroid veld, grassland and Pachydactylus capensis Cape Thick-toed Gecko Widespread High Deficient mesic savannah Pachydactylus Data Flat sandy plains with sparse Marico Thick-toed Gecko Endemic High mariquensis Deficient vegetation Desert and semi-desert on Data various soil types, preferring Ptenopus garrulus Common Barking Gecko Endemic High Deficient flat stable sandy soils with sparse vegetation cover
174 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Appendix 5. List of Amphibians.
List of amphibians which are likely to occur within the surrounding area. Habitat notes and distribution records are based on Du Preez and Carruthers (2009), while conservation status is from the IUCN Red Lists 2012.
Scientific Name Common Name Status Habitat Distribution Likelihood
Around open pools, dams, vleis and Amietophrynus gutturalis Guttural Toad Not Threatened other semi-permanent or permenent Widespread Low water
Western Olive Around vleis and pans in thornveld Amietophrynus poweri Not Threatened Widespread Low Toad savanna
Rivers and stream in grassland and Amietophrynus rangeri Raucous Toad Not Threatened Endemic Low fynbos
Vandijkophrynus Karoo Toad Not Threatened Karoo Scrub Widespread High gariepensis
Breed in shallow margins of rain- Pyxicephalus adspersus Giant Bullfrog Near Threatened Widespread Low filled depressions.
Xenopus laevis Common Platanna Not Threatened Any more or less permanent water Widespread High
Marshy areas, vleis and shallow Cacosternum boettgeri Common Caco Not Threatened Widespread High pans
Common River Banks of slow-flowing streams or Amietia angolensis Not Threatened Widespread High Frog permanent bodies of water
Tomopterna cryptotis Tremelo Sand Frog Not Threatened Savanna and grassland Widespread High
Tomopterna tandyi Tandy's Sand Frog Not Threatened Nama karoo grassland and savanna Widespread High
175 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Appendix 6. Specialist CV.
CURRICULUM VITAE:
Gerhard Botha
Name: : Gerhardus Alfred Botha
Date of Birth : 11 April 1986
Identity Number : 860411 5136 088
Postal Address : PO Box 12500
Brandhof
9324
Residential Address : 3 Jock Meiring Street
Park West
Bloemfontein
9301
Cell Phone Number : 084 207 3454
Email Address : [email protected]
Profession/Specialisation : Ecological and Biodiversity Consultant
Nationality: : South African
Years Experience: : 8
Bilingualism : Very good – English and Afrikaans
Professional Profile:
Gerhard is a Managing Director of Nkurenkuru Ecology and Biodiversity (Pty) Ltd. He has a BSc Honours degree in Botany from the University of the Free State Province and is currently completing a MSc Degree in Botany. He began working as an environmental specialist in 2010 and has since gained extensive experience in conducting ecological and biodiversity assessments in various development field, especially in the fields of conventional as
176 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
well as renewable energy generation, mining and infrastructure development. Gerhard is a registered Professional Natural Scientist (Pr. Sci. Nat.)
Key Responsibilities:
Specific responsibilities as an Ecological and Biodiversity Specialist include, inter alia, professional execution of specialist consulting services (including flora, wetland and fauna studies, where required), impact assessment reporting, walk through surveys/ground-truthing to inform final design, compilation of management plans, compliance monitoring and audit reporting, in-house ecological awareness training to on-site personnel, and the development of project proposals for procuring new work/projects.
Skills Base and Core Competencies
▪ Research Project Management ▪ Botanical researcher in projects involving the description of terrestrial and coastal ecosystems. ▪ Broad expertise in the ecology and conservation of grasslands, savannahs, karroid wetland and aquatic ecosystems. ▪ Ecological and Biodiversity assessments for developmental purposes (BAR, EIA), with extensive knowledge and experience in the renewable energy field (Refer to Work Experiences and References) ▪ Over 3 years of avifaunal monitoring and assessment experience. ▪ Mapping and Infield delineation of wetlands, riparian zones and aquatic habitats (according to methods stipulated by DWA, 2008) within various South African provinces of KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, Free State, Gauteng and Northern Cape Province for inventory and management purposes. ▪ Wetland and aquatic buffer allocations according to industry best practice guidelines. ▪ Working knowledge of environmental planning policies, regulatory frameworks and legislation ▪ Identification and assessment of potential environmental impacts and benefits. ▪ Assessment of various wetland ecosystems to highlight potential impacts, within current and proposed landscape settings, and recommend appropriate mitigation and offsets based on assessing wetland ecosystem service delivery (functions) and ecological health/integrity. ▪ Development of practical and achievable mitigation measures and management plans and evaluation of risk to execution ▪ Qualitative and Quantitative Research ▪ Experienced in field research and monitoring ▪ Working knowledge of GIS applications and analysis of satellite imagery data ▪ Completed projects in several Provinces of South Africa and include a number of projects located in sensitive and ecological unique regions.
Education and Professional Status
Degrees:
▪ 2015: Currently completing a M.Sc. degree in Botany (Vegetation Ecology), University of the Free State,
177 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Bloemfontein, RSA. ▪ 2009: B.Sc. Hons in Botany (Vegetation Ecology), University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, RSA. ▪ 2008: B.Sc. in Zoology and Botany, University of the Free State, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, RSA. Courses:
▪ 2013: Wetland Management (ecology, hydrology, biodiversity and delineation) – University of the Free State accredited course. ▪ 2014: Introduction to GIS and GPS (Code: GISA 1500S) – University of the Free State accredited course. Professional Society Affiliations:
▪ The South African Council of Natural Scientific Professions: Pr. Sci. Nat. Reg. No. 400502/14 (Botany and Ecology).
Employment History
▪ December 2017 – Current: Nkurenkuru Ecology and Biodiversity (Pty) Ltd ▪ 2016 – November 2017: ECO-CARE Consultancy ▪ 2015 - 2016: Ecologist, Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd ▪ 2013 – 2014: Working as ecologist on a freelance basis, involved in part-time and contractual positions for the following companies • Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd • GreenMined (Pty) Ltd • Eco-Care Consultancy (Pty) Ltd • Enviro-Niche Consulting (Pty) Ltd • Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd • Esicongweni Environmental Services (EES) cc ▪ 2010 - 2012: Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd
Publications
Publications:
▪ Botha, G.A. & Du Preez, P.J. 2015. A description of the wetland and riparian vegetation of the Nxamasere palaeo-river’s backflooded section, Okavango Delta, Botswana. S. Afr. J. Bot., 98: 172-173 . Congress papers/posters/presentations:
▪ Botha, G.A. 2015. A description of the wetland and riparian vegetation of the Nxamasere palaeo-river’s backflooded section, Okavango Delta, Botswana. 41st Annual Congress of South African Association of Botanists (SAAB). Tshipise, 11-15 Jan. 2015. ▪ Botha, G.A. 2014. A description of the vegetation of the Nxamasere floodplain, Okavango Delta, Botswana. 10st Annual University of Johannesburg (UJ) Postgraduate Botany Symposium. Johannesburg, 28 Oct. 2014.
Other
178 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
▪ Guest speaker at IAIAsa Free State Branch Event (29 March 2017) ▪ Guest speaker at the University of the Free State Province: Department of Plant Sciences (3 March 2017):
References:
▪ Christine Fouché Manager: GreenMined (Pty) LTD Cell: 084 663 2399 ▪ Professor J du Preez Senior lecturer: Department of Plant Sciences University of the Free State Cell: 082 376 4404
WORK EXPERIENCES
& References
Gerhard Botha
ECOLOGICAL RELATED STUDIES AND SURVEYS
Date Completed Project Description Type of Assessment/Study Client
2019 Sirius Three Solar PV Facility near Upington, Ecological Assessment (Basic Aurora Power Solutions Northern Cape Assessment)
2019 Sirius Four Solar PV Facility near Upington, Northern Ecological Assessment (Basic Aurora Power Solutions Cape Assessment)
2019 Lichtenburg 1 100MW Solar PV Facility, Lichtenburg, Ecological Assessment Atlantic Renewable North-West Province (Scoping and EIA Phase Energy Partners Assessments)
2019 Lichtenburg 2 100MW Solar PV Facility, Lichtenburg, Ecological Assessment Atlantic Renewable North-West Province (Scoping and EIA Phase Energy Partners Assessments)
2019 Lichtenburg 3 100MW Solar PV Facility, Lichtenburg, Ecological Assessment Atlantic Renewable North-West Province (Scoping and EIA Phase Energy Partners Assessments)
179 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
2019 Moeding Solar PV Facility near Vryburg, North-West Ecological Assessment (Basic Moeding Solar Province Assessment)
2019 Expansion of the Raumix Aliwal North Quarry, Fauna and Flora Pre- GreenMined Eastern Cape Province Construction Walk-Through Assessment
2018 Kruisvallei Hydroelectric 22kV Overhead Power Line, Faunal and Flora Rescue and Zevobuzz Clarens, Free State Province Protection Plan
2018 Kruisvallei Hydroelectric 22kV Overhead Power Line, Fauna and Flora Pre- Zevobuzz Clarens, Free State Province Construction Walk-Through Assessment
2018 Proposed Kruisvallei Hydroelectric Power Generation Ecological Assessment (Basic Zevobuzz Scheme in the Ash River, Free State Province Assessment)
2018 Proposed Zonnebloem Switching Station (132/22kV) Ecological Assessment (Basic Eskom and 2X Loop-in Loop-out Power Lines (132kV), Assessment) Mpumalanga Province
2018 Clayville Thermal Plant within the Clayville Ecological Comments Letter Savannah Environmental Industrial Area, Gauteng Province
2018 Iziduli Emoyeni Wind Farm near Bedford, Eastern Ecological Assessment (Re- Emoyeni Wid Farm Cape Province assessment) Renewable Energy
2018 Msenge Wind Farm near Bedford, Eastern Cape Ecological Assessment (Re- Amakhala Emoyeni Province assessment) Renewable Energy
2017 H2 Energy Power Station near Kwamhlanga, Ecological Assessment Eskom Mpumalanga Province (Scoping and EIA phase assessments)
2017 Karusa Wind Farm (Phase 1 of the Hidden Valley Ecological Assessment (Re- ACED Renewables Wind Energy Facility near Sutherland, Northern assessment) Hidden Valley Cape Province)
2017 Soetwater Wind Farm (Phase 2 of the Hidden Valley Ecological Assessment (Re- ACED Renewables Wind Energy Facility near Sutherland, Northern assessment) Hidden Valley Cape Province)
2017 S24G for the unlawful commencement or Ecological Assessment Savannah Environmental continuation of activities within a watercourse, Honeydew, Gauteng Province
2016 - 2017 Noupoort CSP Facility near Noupoort, Northern Cape Ecological Assessment Cresco Province (Scoping and EIA phase assessments)
2016 Buffels Solar 2 PV Facility near Orkney, North West Ecological Assessment Kabi Solar Province (Scoping and EIA phase assessments)
2016 Buffels Solar 1 PV Facility near Orkney, North West Ecological Assessment Kabi Solar Province (Scoping and EIA phase assessments)
180 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
2016 132kV Power Line and On-Site Substation for the Ecological Assessment (Basic Terra Wind Energy Authorised Golden Valley II Wind Energy Facility Assessment) near Bedford, Eastern Cape Province
2016 Kalahari CSP Facility: 132kV Ferrum–Kalahari–UNTU Fauna and Flora Pre- Kathu Solar Park & 132kV Kathu IPP–Kathu 1 Overhead Power Lines, Construction Walk-Through Kathu, Northern Cape Province Assessment
2016 Kalahari CSP Facility: Access Roads, Kathu, Fauna and Flora Pre- Kathu Solar Park Northern Cape Province Construction Walk-Through Assessment
2016 Karoshoek Solar Valley Development – Additional Ecological Assessment Emvelo CSP Facility including tower infrastructure (Scoping Assessment) associated with authorised CSP Site 2 near Upington, Northern Cape Province
2016 Karoshoek Solar Valley Development –Ilanga CSP 7 Ecological Assessment Emvelo and 8 Facilities near Upington, Northern Cape (Scoping Assessment) Province
2016 Karoshoek Solar Valley Development –Ilanga CSP 9 Ecological Assessment Emvelo Facility near Upington, Northern Cape Province (Scoping Assessment)
2016 Lehae Training Academy and Fire Station, Gauteng Ecological Assessment Savannah Environmental Province
2016 Metal Industrial Cluster and Associated Ecological Assessment Northern Cape Infrastructure near Kuruman, Northern Cape (Scoping Assessment) Department of Economic Province Development and Tourism
2016 Semonkong Wind Energy Facility near Semonkong, Ecological Pre-Feasibility Study Savannah Environmental Maseru District, Lesotho
2015 - 2016 Orkney Solar PV Facility near Orkney, North West Ecological Assessment Genesis Eco-Energy Province (Scoping and EIA phase assessments)
2015 - 2016 Woodhouse 1 and Woodhouse 2 PV Facilities near Ecological Assessment Genesis Eco-Energy Vryburg, North West Province (Scoping and EIA phase assessments)
2015 CAMCO Clean Energy 100kW PV Solar Facility, Ecological Assessment (Basic CAMCO Clean Energy Thaba Eco Lodge near Johannesburg, Gauteng Assessment) Province
2015 CAMCO Clean Energy 100kW PV Solar Facility, Ecological Assessment CAMCO Clean Energy Thaba Eco Lodge near Johannesburg, Gauteng Province (Basic Assessment)
2015 Sirius 1 Solar PV Project near Upington, Northern Fauna and Flora Pre- Aurora Power Solutions Cape Province Construction Walk-Through Assessment
2015 Sirius 2 Solar PV Project near Upington, Northern Fauna and Flora Pre- Aurora Power Solutions Cape Province Construction Walk-Through Assessment
181 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
2015 Sirius 1 Solar PV Project near Upington, Northern Invasive Plant Management Aurora Power Solutions Cape Province Plan
2015 Sirius 2 Solar PV Project near Upington, Northern Invasive Plant Management Aurora Power Solutions Cape Province Plan
2015 Sirius 1 Solar PV Project near Upington, Northern Plant Rehabilitation Aurora Power Solutions Cape Province Management Plan
2015 Sirius Phase 2 Solar PV Project near Upington, Plant Rehabilitation Aurora Power Solutions Northern Cape Province Management Plan
2015 Sirius 1 Solar PV Project near Upington, Northern Plant Rescue and Protection Aurora Power Solutions Cape Province Plan
2015 Sirius Phase 2 Solar PV Project near Upington, Plant Rescue and Protection Aurora Power Solutions Northern Cape Province Plan
2015 Expansion of the existing Komsberg Main Ecological Assessment (Basic ESKOM Transmission Substation near Sutherland, Northern Assessment) Cape Province
2015 Karusa Wind Farm near Sutherland, Northern Cape Invasive Plant Management ACED Renewables Province) Plan Hidden Valley
2015 Proposed Karusa Facility Substation and Ancillaries Ecological Assessment (Basic ACED Renewables near Sutherland, Northern Cape Province Assessment) Hidden Valley
2015 Eskom Karusa Switching Station and 132kV Double Ecological Assessment (Basic ESKOM Circuit Overhead Power Line near Sutherland, Assessment) Northern Cape Province
2015 Karusa Wind Farm near Sutherland, Northern Cape Plant Search and Rescue and ACED Renewables Province) Rehabilitation Management Hidden Valley Plan
2015 Karusa Wind Energy Facility near Sutherland, Fauna and Flora Pre- ACED Renewables Northern Cape Province Construction Walk-Through Hidden Valley Assessment
2015 Soetwater Facility Substation, 132kV Overhead Ecological Assessment (Basic ACED Renewables Power Line and Ancillaries, near Sutherland, Assessment) Hidden Valley Northern Cape Province
2015 Soetwater Wind Farm near Sutherland, Northern Invasive Plant Management ACED Renewables Cape Province) Plan Hidden Valley
2015 Soetwater Wind Energy Facility near Sutherland, Fauna and Flora Pre- ACED Renewables Northern Cape Province Construction Walk-Through Hidden Valley Assessment
2015 Soetwater Wind Farm near Sutherland, Northern Plant Search and Rescue and ACED Renewables Cape Province Rehabilitation Management Hidden Valley Plan
2015 Expansion of the existing Scottburgh quarry near Botanical Assessment (for EIA) GreenMined Amandawe, KwaZulu-Natal Environmental
2015 Expansion of the existing AFRIMAT quarry near Botanical Assessment (for EIA) GreenMined
182 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Hluhluwe, KwaZulu-Natal Environmental
2014 Tshepong 5MW PV facility within Harmony Gold’s Ecological Assessment (Basic BBEnergy mining rights areas, Odendaalsrus Assessment)
2014 Nyala 5MW PV facility within Harmony Gold’s mining Ecological Assessment (Basic BBEnergy rights areas, Odendaalsrus Assessment)
2014 Eland 5MW PV facility within Harmony Gold’s mining Ecological Assessment (Basic BBEnergy rights areas, Odendaalsrus Assessment)
2014 Transalloys circulating fluidised bed power station Ecological Assessment (for Trans-Alloys near Emalahleni, Mpumalanga Province EIA)
2014 Umbani circulating fluidised bed power station near Ecological Assessment Eskom Kriel, Mpumalanga Province (Scoping and EIA)
2014 Gihon 75MW Solar Farm: Bela-Bela, Limpopo Ecological Assessment (for NETWORX Renewables Province EIA)
2014 Steelpoort Integration Project & Steelpoort to Fauna and Flora Pre- Eskom Wolwekraal 400kV Power Line Construction Walk-Through Assessment
2014 Audit of protected Acacia erioloba trees within the Botanical Audit Eco-Care Consultancy Assmang Wrenchville housing development footprint area
2014 Rehabilitation of the N1 National Road between Peer review of ecological EKO Environmental Sydenham and Glen Lyon report
2014 Rehabilitation of the N6 National Road between Peer review of ecological EKO Environmental Onze Rust and Bloemfontein report
2011 Illegally ploughed land on the Farm Wolwekop Vegetation Rehabilitation Plan EnviroWorks 2353, Bloemfotnein
2011 Rocks Farm chicken broiler houses Botanical Assessment (for EIA) EnviroWorks
2011 Botshabelo 132 kV line Ecological Assessment (for CENTLEC EIA)
2011 De Aar Freight Transport Hub Ecological Scoping and EnviroWorks Feasibility Study
2011 Proposed establishment of the Tugela Ridge Eco Ecological Assessment (for EnviroWorks Estate on the farm Kruisfontein, Bergville EIA)
2010 - 2011 National long-haul optic fibre infrastructure network Vegetation Rehabilitation Plan NEOTEL project, Bloemfontein to Beaufort West for illegally cleared areas
2010 - 2011 National long-haul optic fibre infrastructure network Invasive Plant Management NEOTEL project, Bloemfontein to Beaufort West Plan
2010 - 2011 National long-haul optic fibre infrastructure network Protected and Endangered NEOTEL project, Bloemfontein to Beaufort West Species Walk-Through Survey
2011 Optic Fibre Infrastructure Network, Swartland Botanical Assessment (for EIA) Dark Fibre Africa Municipality - Assisted Dr Dave McDonald 2011 Optic Fibre Infrastructure Network, City of Cape Botanical Assessment (for EIA) Dark Fibre Africa
183 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Town Municipality - Assisted Dr Dave McDonald 2010 Construction of an icon at the southernmost tip of Botanical Assessment (for EIA) SANPARKS Africa, Agulhas National Park
2010 New boardwalk from Suiderstrand Gravel Road to Botanical Assessment (for EIA) SANPARKS Rasperpunt, Agulhas National Park
2010 Farm development for academic purposes (Maluti Ecological Assessment Agri Development FET College) on the Farm Rosedale 107, Harrismith (Screening and Feasibility Solutions Study)
2010 Basic Assessment: Barcelona 88/11kV substation Botanical Assessment (for EIA) Eskom Distribution and 88kV loop-in lines
2011 Illegally ploughed land on the Farm Wolwekop Vegetation Rehabilitation Plan EnviroWorks 2353, Bloemfotnein
WETLAND DELINEATION AND HYDROLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS
Date Completed Project Description Type of Assessment/Study Client
In progress Steynsrus PV 1 & 2 Solar Energy Facilities near Wetland Assessment Cronimet Mining Power Steynsrus, Free State Province Solutions
2019 Lichtenburg 1 100MW Solar PV Facility, Lichtenburg, Surface Hydrological Atlantic Renewable North-West Province Assessment (Scoping and EIA Energy Partners Phase)
2019 Lichtenburg 2 100MW Solar PV Facility, Lichtenburg, Surface Hydrological Atlantic Renewable North-West Province Assessment (Scoping and EIA Energy Partners Phase)
2019 Lichtenburg 3 100MW Solar PV Facility, Lichtenburg, Surface Hydrological Atlantic Renewable North-West Province Assessment (Scoping and EIA Energy Partners Phase)
2019 Moeding Solar PV Facility near Vryburg, North-West Wetland Assessment (Basic Moeding Solar Province Assessment)
2018 Kruisvallei Hydroelectric 22kV Overhead Power Line, Wetland Assessment Zevobuzz Clarens, Free State Province (Basic Assessment
2017 Nyala 5MW PV facility within Harmony Gold’s mining Wetland Assessment BBEnergy rights areas, Odendaalsrus
2017 Eland 5MW PV facility within Harmony Gold’s mining Wetland Assessment BBEnergy rights areas, Odendaalsrus
2017 Olifantshoek 10MVA 132/11kV Substation and 31km Surface Hydrological Eskom Power Line Assessment (Basic Assessment)
184 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
2017 Expansion of the Elandspruit Quarry near Wetland Assessment Raumix Ladysmith, KwaZulu-Natal Province
2017 S24G for the unlawful commencement or Aquatic Assessment & Flood Savannah Environmental continuation of activities within a watercourse, Plain Delineation Honeydew, Gauteng Province
2017 Noupoort CSP Facility near Noupoort, Northern Cape Surface Hydrological Cresco Province Assessment (EIA phase)
2016 Wolmaransstad Municipality 75MW PV Solar Energy Wetland Assessment (Basic BlueWave Capital Facility in the North West Province Assessment)
2016 BlueWave 75MW PV Plant near Welkom Free State Wetland Delineation BlueWave Capital Province
2016 Harmony Solar Energy Facilities: Amendment of Wetland Assessment (Basic BBEnergy Pipeline and Overhead Power Line Route Assessment)
AVIFAUNAL ASSESSMENTS
Date Completed Project Description Type of Assessment/Study Client
2019 Sirius Three Solar PV Facility near Upington, Avifauna Assessment (Basic Aurora Power Solutions Northern Cape Assessment)
2019 Sirius Four Solar PV Facility near Upington, Northern Avifauna Assessment (Basic Aurora Power Solutions Cape Assessment)
2019 Moeding Solar PV Facility near Vryburg, North-West Avifauna Assessment (Basic Moeding Solar Province Assessment)
2018 Proposed Zonnebloem Switching Station (132/22kV) Avifauna Assessment (Basic Eskom and 2X Loop-in Loop-out Power Lines (132kV), Assessment) Mpumalanga Province
2017 Olifantshoek 10MVA 132/11kV Substation and 31km Avifauna Assessment (Basic Eskom Power Line Assessment)
2016 TEWA Solar 1 Facility, east of Upington, Northern Wetland Assessment Tewa Isitha Solar 1 Cape Province (Basic Assessment
2016 TEWA Solar 2 Facility, east of Upington, Northern Wetland Assessment Tewa Isitha Solar 2 Cape Province
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ▪ Barcelona 88/11kV substation and 88kV loop-in lines – BA (for Eskom). ▪ Thabong Bulk 132kV sub-transmission inter-connector line – EIA (for Eskom).
185 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
▪ Groenwater 45 000 unit chicken broiler farm – BA (for Areemeng Mmogo Cooperative). ▪ Optic Fibre Infrastructure Network, City of Cape Town Municipality – BA (for Dark Fibre Africa (Pty) Ltd). ▪ Optic Fibre Infrastructure Network, Swartland Municipality – BA (for Dark Fibre Africa). ▪ Construction and refurbishment of the existing 66kV network between Ruigtevallei Substation and Reddersburg Substation – EMP (for Eskom). ▪ Lower Kruisvallei Hydroelectric Power Scheme (Ash river) – EIA (for Kruisvallei Hydro (Pty) Ltd). ▪ Construction of egg hatchery and associated infrastructure – BA (For Supreme Poultry). ▪ Construction of the Klipplaatdrif flow gauging (Vaal river) – EMP (DWAF).
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AUDITING AND ECO ▪ National long haul optic fibre infrastructure network project, Bloemfontein to Laingsburg – ECO (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.). ▪ National long haul optic fibre infrastructure network project, Wolmaransstad to Klerksdorp – ECO (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.). ▪ Construction and refurbishment of the existing 66kV network between Ruigtevallei Substation and Reddersburg Substation – ECO (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.). ▪ Construction and refurbishment of the Vredefort/Nooitgedacht 11kV power line – ECO (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.). ▪ Mining of Dolerite (Stone Aggregate) by Raumix (Pty) Ltd. on a portion of Portion 0 of the farm Hillside 2830, Bloemfontein – ECO (for GreenMined Environmental (Pty) Ltd.). ▪ Construction of an Egg Production Facility by Bainsvlei Poultry (Pty) Ltd on Portions 9 & 10 of the farm, Mooivlakte, Bloemfontein – ECO (for Enviro-Niche Consulting (Pty) Ltd.). ▪ Environmental compliance audit and botanical account of Afrisam’s premises in Bloemfontein – Environmental Compliance Auditing (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.).
OTHER PROJECTS: ▪ Keeping and breeding of lions (Panthera leo) on the farm Maxico 135, Ficksburg – Management and Business Plan (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.) ▪ Keeping and breeding of lions (Panthera leo) on the farm Mooihoek 292, Theunissen – Management and Business Plan (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.) ▪ Keeping and breeding of wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) on the farm Mooihoek 292, Theunissen – Management and Business Plan (for Enviroworks (Pty) Ltd.) ▪ Existing underground and aboveground fuel storage tanks, TWK AGRI: Pongola – Environmental Management Plan (for TWK Agricultural Ltd). ▪ Existing underground fuel storage tanks on Erf 171, TWK AGRI: Amsterdam – Environmental
186 | P a g e
Sirius solar pv project Four, northern cape province: ECOLOGY (fauna, flora & avifauna) REPORT SEPTEMBER 2019
Management Plan (for TWK Agricultural Ltd). ▪ Proposed storage of 14 000 L of fuel (diesel) aboveground on Erf 32, TWK AGRI: Carolina – Environmental Management Plan (for TWK Agricultural Ltd). ▪ Proposed storage of 23 000 L of fuel (diesel) above ground on Portion 10 of the Farm Oude Bosch, Humansdorp – Environmental Management Plan (for TWK Agricultural Ltd). ▪ Proposed storage of 16 000 L of fuel (diesel) aboveground at Panbult Depot – Environmental Management Plan (for TWK Agricultural Ltd). ▪ Existing underground fuel storage tanks, TWK AGRI: Mechanisation and Engineering, Piet Retief – Environmental Management Plan (for TWK Agricultural Ltd). ▪ Existing underground fuel storage tanks on Portion 38 of the Farm Lothair, TWK AGRI: Lothair – Environmental Management Plan (for TWK Agricultural Ltd).
187 | P a g e