WAAIHOEK BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM AND RESEVOIR: TERRESTRIAL BIODVERSITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

PROPOSED WAAIHOEK BATTERY STORAGE SYSTEM AND RESEVOIR, EMADLANGENI LM, KWAZULU-NATAL

TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

Prepared for:

Waaihoek Wind Farm (Pty) Ltd A subsidiary of South Africa Mainstream Renewable Power Developments (Pty) Ltd 4th Floor, Mariendahl House, Newlands on Main Corner Main and Campground Roads Claremont, 7708, Cape Town 021 657 4045 www.mainstreamrp.com

Prepared by:

Cape Town

Also, in Cape Town, East London, Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth, Maputo (Mozambique) and Romsey (UK)

www.cesnet.co.za

JANUARY 2021

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

REVISIONS TRACKING TABLE

CES Report Revision and Tracking Schedule Document Title: Waaihoek Battery Storage System and Reservoir Ecological Impact Assessment Report Client Name & Mainstream Renewable Power Address:

Status: Final

Issue Date: January 2021

Authors: Ms Tarryn Martin [email protected] Dr Greer Hawley [email protected] Ms Amber Jackson [email protected]

Reviewer: Dr Greer Hawley [email protected]

No. of hard No. electronic Report Distribution Circulated to copies copies

Report Version Date

12 January 2021

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

rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of CES. The document is subject to all confidentiality, copyright, trade secrets rules and intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power ii

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

SPECIALIST TEAM

Ms Tarryn Martin, Principal Environmental Consultant and Botanical Specialist (400018/14) Tarryn holds a BSc (Botany and Zoology), a BSc (Hons) in African Vertebrate Biodiversity and an MSc with distinction in Botany from Rhodes University. Tarryn’s Master’s thesis examined the impact of fire on the recovery of C3 and C4 Panicoid and non-Panicoid grasses within the context of climate change for which she won the Junior Captain Scott-Medal (Plant Science) for producing the top MSc of 2010 from the South African Academy of Science and Art as well as an Award for Outstanding Academic Achievement in Range and Forage Science from the Grassland Society of Southern Africa. She conducts vegetation assessments including vegetation and sensitivity mapping to guide developments and thereby minimise their impacts on sensitive vegetation. Tarryn has undertaken several vegetation and impact assessments in Mozambique (to IFC standards) which include the Lurio Forestry Project in Nampula, the Syrah Graphite Mine in Cabo Delgado and the Baobab Iron Ore Mine in Tete, Mozambique. She has undertaken critical habitat assessments, to IFC standards, for a solar farm in Cameroon and a graphite mine in Mozambique. She has co-designed and implemented the Terrestrial Monitoring Program for the Kenmare Namalope heavy minerals mine in Mozambique and has recently developed a Biodiversity Management Plan and monitoring plan for the Kenmare Pilivilli deposit. She has also worked on the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority botanical baseline survey for Phase 2 of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project.

Dr Greer Hawley-McMaster, Principal Environmental Consultant and Ecologist Dr Greer Hawley-McMaster has a BSc degree in Botany and Zoology, a BSc (Honours) in Botany from the University of Cape Town and a PhD (Microbiology) from Rhodes University. Greer has a diverse skill set including biodiversity surveys and assessments (plants, fungi and terrestrial ecosystems), developing environmental management policy (EMP’s and EMF’s), analysis and interpretation of environmental and biodiversity spatial datasets, training, feasibility assessments, environmental impact assessments for a wide range of land use activity proposals, aquaculture feasibility assessments, alien invasive management planning, conservation management planning and stakeholder engagement. Greer has a strong understanding of South Africa's approach to systematic biodiversity planning, prioritisation and mainstreaming and current methodologies and practices used. She has undertaken stakeholder engagement at all levels, ranging from Provincial and Regional authorities during the review Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (2019) to community meetings for project level engagement.

Professional Natural Scientist: Registration No. 400321/14

Ms Amber Jackson, Principal Environmental Consultant and Faunal Specialist Amber is a Principal Environmental Consultant and has been employed with CES since September 2011. She holds a Masters in Environmental Management and has a background in both Social and Ecological work. Her honours and undergraduate degree focused on Ecology, Conservation and Environment with reference to landscape effects on Herpetofauna, while her masters focused on the environmental management of social and ecological systems. With a dissertation in food security that investigated the complex food system of informal and formal distribution markets. During her time at CES Amber has worked extensively in Mozambique managing several Environmental and Social Impact Assessment.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power iii

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Amongst which she has conducted large scale faunal impact assessments in the both South Africa and northern of Mozambique to both national standards and international lenders standards (AfDB, EIB and IFC), alone and assisted by and to Prof Bill Branch. Her interests include, lenders requirements, range limitation, island biogeography, ecology as well as land use and natural resource management. Professional Natural Scientist: Registration No. 100125/12

DECLARATION

Role on Study Declaration of independence Team

Report • I, Tarryn Martin, declare that, in terms of the National Environmental production Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended and the Amended Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2017; • I act as the independent specialist in this application; • 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 report 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.

……………………………………….. …………………………12 January 2021

SIGNED DATE

Report • I, Greer Hawley, declare that, in terms of the National Environmental production Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended and the Amended and Field Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2017; Survey • I act as the independent specialist in this application; • 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;

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power iv

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

• 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 report 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.

……………………………………….. …………………………26/01/2021

SIGNED DATE

Faunal • I, Amber Jackson, declare that, in terms of the National Environmental Assessment Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended and the Amended Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2017; • I act as the independent specialist in this application; • 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 report 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.

……………………………………….. …………………………25/01/2021

SIGNED DATE

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power v

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

ACRONYM LIST

AOO Area of Occupancy

CBA Critical Biodiversity Area

CES Coastal and Environmental Services

CR Critically Endangered

ECO Environmental Control Officer

EDGE Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered

EN Endangered

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

EOO Extent of Occupancy

GBIF Global Biodiversity Information Facility

GIS Geographical Information System

IBA Important Birding Areas

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

KBA Key Birding Areas

LC Least Concern

NBSAP National Biodiversity and Strategy Action Plan

NEMBA National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act

NGO Non-Government Organisation

PNCO Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance

SCC Species of Conservation Concern

QDS Quarter Degree Square

SA South Africa

SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute

SCC Species of Conservation Concern

TOPS Threatened and Protected Species

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power vi

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

DEFINITIONS

Alien Invasive Species refers to an exotic species that can spread rapidly and displace native species causing damage to the environment

Biodiversity is the term that is used to describe the variety of life on Earth and is defined as “the variability among living organisms from all sources including terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems, and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems” (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2005).

Habitat Fragmentation occurs when large expanses of habitat are transformed into smaller patches of discontinuous habitat units isolated from each other by transformed habitats such as farmland.

Important Bird Areas are sites of global significance for the conservation of birds.

Key Biodiversity Area are globally recognised sites that contain significant concentrations of biodiversity.

Natural Habitat refers to habitats composed of viable assemblages of plant and/or animal species of largely native origin and/or where human activity has not essentially modified an area’s primary ecological function and species composition.

Protected Area is a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values. (IUCN Definition 2008)

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power vii

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

SPECIALIST CHECK LIST

The contents of this specialist report complies with the legislated requirements as described in the Protocol for the Specialist Assessment and Minimum Report Content Requirements for Environmental Impacts on Terrestrial Biodiversity (GN R. 320 of 2020).

SPECIALIST REPORT REQUIREMENTS ACCORDING TO GN R. 320 SECTION OF REPORT 3.1 The Terrestrial Biodiversity Specialist Assessment Report must contain, as a minimum, the following information: 3.1.1 Contact details of the specialist, their SACNASP registration Page ii – vi and number, their field of expertise and a curriculum vitae; Appendix 6 3.1.2 A signed statement of independence by the specialist; Page iv and Appendix 6 3.1.3 A statement of the duration, date and season of the site inspection and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the Section 2.1 assessment; 3.1.4 A description of the methodology used to undertake the site verification and impact assessment and site inspection, including Chapter 2 equipment and modelling used, where relevant; 3.1.5 A description of the assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge or data as well as a statement of the timing Section 1.4 and intensity of site inspection observations; 3.1.6 A location of the areas not suitable for development, which are to Chapter 4 be avoided during construction and operation (where relevant); 3.1.7 Additional environmental impacts expected from the proposed Chapter 6 development; 3.1.8 Any direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed Chapter 6 development; 3.1.9 The degree to which the impacts and risks can be mitigated; 3.1.10 The degree to which the impacts and risks can be reversed; Chapter 6 3.1.11 The degree to which the impacts and risks can cause loss of irreplaceable resources; 3.1.12 Proposed impact management actions and impact management outcomes proposed by the specialist for inclusion in the Section 7.2 Environmental Management Programme (EMPr); 3.1.13 A motivation must be provided if there were development footprints identified as per paragraph 2.3.6 above that were N/A identified as having a “low” terrestrial biodiversity sensitivity and that were not considered appropriate; 3.1.14 A substantiated statement, based on the findings of the specialist assessment, regarding the acceptability, or not, of the proposed Chapter 7 development, if it should receive approval or not; and 3.1.15 Any conditions to which this statement is subjected. Section 7.2 and 7.3 3.2 The findings of the Terrestrial Biodiversity Specialist Assessment must be incorporated into the Basic Assessment Report or the Environmental Impact ✓ Assessment Report, including the mitigation and monitoring measures as identified, which must be incorporated into the EMPr where relevant. 3.3 A signed copy of the assessment must be appended to the Basic Page iv Assessment Report or Environmental Impact Assessment Report.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power viii

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

1.1 Project Description ...... 1 1.2 Locality ...... 2 1.3 Alternatives ...... 3 1.4 Objectives and terms of Reference ...... 2 1.5 Limitations and Assumptions ...... 2 2 METHODOLOGY ...... 3

2.1 The Assessment ...... 3 2.2 Species of Conservation Concern ...... 3 2.3 Vegetation Mapping ...... 3 2.4 Sensitivity assessment...... 4 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ...... 6

3.1 Description of the Biophysical Environment ...... 6 3.1.1 Climate ...... 6 3.1.2 Topography ...... 6 3.1.3 Geology and Soils ...... 7 3.2 The current land use ...... 8 3.3 Description of the Vegetation and Floristics ...... 9 3.3.1 National Vegetation Map: Expected Vegetation Types ...... 9 3.3.2 Vegetation types recorded on site ...... 11 3.3.3 Species of Special Concern ...... 13 3.3.4 Alien Invasive Species Present on site...... 14 3.4 Description of Fauna ...... 14 3.4.1 Amphibians ...... 14 3.4.2 Reptiles ...... 16 3.4.3 Mammals ...... 17 3.4.4 Birds ...... 19 4 SITE SENSITIVITY ...... 23

4.1 Critical Biodiversity Areas ...... 23 4.2 Ecosystem Threat Status ...... 23 4.3 DEFF Screening Report Sensitivities ...... 24 4.4 Sensitivity Analysis ...... 25 4.5 Site Sensitivity ...... 25

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power ix

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

5 ALTERNATIVE SITES ...... 27

6 IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT ...... 28

6.1 Construction Phase ...... 28 6.2 Operation Phase ...... 33 6.3 Decommissioning Phase ...... 35 6.5 Cumulative Impacts ...... 38 7 IMPACT STATEMENT, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 39

7.1 Conclusions ...... 39 7.2 Conditions of EMPr, EA and Monitoring ...... 39 7.3 Ecological Statement and Opinion of the Specialist ...... 40 8 REFERENCE LIST ...... 41

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED FROM THE WAAIHOEK WEF PROJECT AREA...... 43

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF AMPHIBIAN SPECIES...... 45

APPENDIX 3: LIST OF REPTILE SPECIES...... 47

APPENDIX 4: LIST OF MAMMAL SPECIES...... 50

APPENDIX 5: LIST OF BIRD SPECIES...... 53

APPENDIX 6: SPECIALIST CVS AND DECLARATIONS ...... 57

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1: Assessment of Alternatives ...... 1 Table 2-1: Criteria used for the analysis of the sensitivity of the area...... 4 Table 3-1: Amphibians Endemic and Near-Endemic to the KZN (IUCN, 2020)...... 15 Table 3-2: Threatened Mammal Species with a distribution that includes the project area .. 18 Table 3-3: Endemic Mammals with a distribution that includes the study area ...... 19 Table 3-4: Bird SCC with a distribution range that includes the project area ...... 22

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1: Typical layout of a BESS ...... 2 Figure 1-2: Example of what the reservoir will look like...... 2 Figure 1-3: The location of the proposed BESS and Reservoir in relation to the WEF, Vryheid (east) and Utrecht (north-west)...... 3 Figure 1-4: Proposed BESS and reservoir sites in relation to the authorised Waaihoek WEF substation area (blue block)...... 1 Figure 3-1:Topography Map of the study area...... 6 Figure 3-2: Elevation of profile of the study site from south-west to north-east (Google Earth Pro, 2020)...... 7

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power x

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3-3: Elevation of profile of the study site from north-west to south-east (Google Earth Pro, 2020)...... 7 Figure 3-4: Landcover of the project area and surrounds...... 8 Figure 3-5: National Vegetation Map showing the proposed project site in relation to the expected vegetation types found on site...... 10 Figure 3-6: KZN Systematic Conservation Plan (KZNSCP) vegetation types...... 10 Figure 3-7: Distribution of White-winged Flufftail in relation to the study area – blue star (BirdLife International. 2018.)...... 20 Figure 3-8: Distribution of Rudd’s Lark in relation to the study area - blue star (Birdlife Int, 2017)...... 21 Figure 4-1: Map showing the proposed project site in relation to Critical Biodiversity Areas, Ecological Support Areas and surrounding protected areas...... 23 Figure 4-2: Ecosystem Threat Status of the proposed project site ...... 24 Figure 4-3: Sensitivity map showing areas of high and moderate sensitivity...... 26 Figure 6-1: Pie charts summarising the number of high, moderate and low impacts before and after mitigation...... 39

LIST OF PLATES

Plate 3-1: a) Exposed rock with Pin-cushion euphorbias and Aloes, b) Grassland vegetation on shallow soil with exposed rock in the background, c) Rocky outcrops supporting stunted trees and shade-loving understory species...... 12 Plate 3-2: Species of Special Concern recorded on site ...... 13 Plate 3-3: Acacia mearnsii present within the site ...... 14 Plate 3-4: Olive Grass Snake (Psammophis mossambicus) recorded in the BES site...... 16

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power xi

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

South Africa Mainstream Renewable Power Developments (Pty) Ltd is a leading independent developer of utility-scale wind and solar power plants. The company is focused on delivering a high-quality portfolio of more than seven gigawatts of wind and solar assets across high- growth markets in Europe, the Americas, Africa and Asia.

In South Africa, Mainstream has been awarded wind and solar projects, one of which is the Waaihoek Wind Farm. In addition to the Wind Farm, Mainstream would like to construct and operate a Battery Storage Energy System (BESS) (Figure 1.1) and reservoir adjacent to the on-site substation and office building in association with the authorised Waaihoek Wind Energy Facility (WEF) (14/12/16/3/3/2/655 and 14/12/16/3/3/2/654). It is anticipated that the BESS will have a footprint of up to 2ha and that the capacity of the reservoir will be at least 250m3. The need for a BESS stems from the fact that electricity is only produced by the renewable energy facility while the sun is shining or wind is blowing, while the peak demand may not necessarily occur during the daytime. Therefore, the storage of electricity and supply thereof during peak-demand will mean that the facility is more efficient, reliable and electricity supply more constant.

The reservoir will be used to meet the water demands during construction (Figure 1.2). The reservoir will be built on well compacted 150-250mm thick G5 material and the sides will be constructed of corrugated iron lined with sail. It will be approximately 2.5m high with a diameter of 15m. Water tankers will abstract water from boreholes and transport it to the reservoir. Thereafter, when water is required from the reservoir, the water tankers will abstract via a pump and transport the water to the WEF batching plant. Refer to Chapter 2 of the Basic Assessment Report for a more detailed project description.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 1

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 1-1: Typical layout of a BESS

Figure 1-2: Example of what the reservoir will look like.

1.2 LOCALITY

The project site is located 16km south east of Utrecht and 34 km north west of Vryheid in the eMadlangeni Local Municipality, Amajuba District, in Kwa-Zulu Natal Province of South Africa (Figure 1.2). The R34 is south west of the site. The BESS itself is located adjacent to the on- site substation which is within the property portions that were assessed as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment undertaken for the Waaihoek Wind Farm in 2014 (Figure 1.3).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 2

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 1-3: The location of the proposed BESS and Reservoir in relation to the WEF, Vryheid (east) and Utrecht (north-west).

1.3 ALTERNATIVES

Table 1-1 provides a description of alternatives assessed as part of the proposed development. The table also includes the assessment of the advantages and disadvantages and provides further comments on the selected alternatives.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 3

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Table 1-1: Assessment of Alternatives ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES FURTHER COMMENT TYPE CONSIDERATION/ ASSESSMENT? FUNDAMENTAL ALTERNATIVES BESS Alternative 1 (preferred): current proposed site • Outside urban edge, and • Clearance of natural YES The main LOCATION not close to residential vegetation. determining factor ALTERNATIVES Located on Farms 152/1 and 17068/5. Coordinates: areas. • Within 500m from seep for selecting the 27°44'47.98"S; 30°26'47.49"E • Existing access road to wetlands. proposed location Location alternatives are limited to the proposed the site. • No existing infrastructure was because the project study area as the proposed Waaihoek BESS • No sensitive heritage and services. proposed BESS will connect to the approved (but not existing) features identified within • Sensitivities as identified needs to be Waaihoek substation (to be located within the blue the site. by the National Screening adjacent to the shaded area below) situated within the larger • Livestock grazing will be Tool authorised (but not Waaihoek WEF development area. Micro-siting of the able to continue around existing) Waaihoek 2 ha BESS within the 130 ha BESS assessment area the BESS development substation. (green shaded area below) will take place in footprint. accordance to the outcome of the site sensitivity • Suitable topography, assessment of this report. gentle slope. • Located adjacent to the approved Waaihoek substation area.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 1

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES FURTHER COMMENT TYPE CONSIDERATION/ ASSESSMENT?

No alternative site locations have been identified because the preferred alternative, which Alternative location 2: allows for micro- • N/A • N/A N/A No alternative site locations have been identified. siting within the 130ha study area, has been identified as a suitable location alternative for the Waaihoek BESS.

Alternative 1 (preferred): within substation assessment area The proposed Located on Farms 152/1. Coordinates: 27°44'53.67"S; reservoir is to be 30°26'52.09"E placed in close proximity to the RESERVOIR The proposed Waaihoek reservoir is proposed to be substation or LOCATION • As above • As above YES located within the Waaihoek substation area (blue BESS, which ALTERNATIVES shaded area above). Micro-siting of the placement of minimises the the reservoir within the 25 ha reservoir assessment construction area (blue shaded area above) will take place in footprint in terms of accordance to the outcome of the site sensitivity access roads, etc. assessment of this report. Alternative 2: within BESS assessment area

Located on Farms 152/1 and 17068/5. Coordinates: • As above • As above YES 27°44'47.98"S; 30°26'47.49"E

TYPE OF Alternative activity 1: The development of the • The Waaihoek BESS will • The loss of 2-3 ha of The No-Go Option ACTIVITY proposed Waaihoek BESS within the proposed supplement the indigenous vegetation, has been assessed This refers to the location. authorised Waaihoek specifically Wakkerstroom as an alternative to YES fundamental WEF and allow electricity Montane Grassland the development of activity options which is produced by the (Gm14), as well as a the proposed within the Waaihoek WEF while the contribution to the Waaihoek BESS.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 2

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES FURTHER COMMENT TYPE CONSIDERATION/ ASSESSMENT? proposed wind is blowing to store cumulative loss of this location. energy for the peak vegetation type. demand period. • The loss of 2 ha of faunal • The Waaihoek BESS will habitat. allow the Waaihoek WEF • The loss of 2 ha of to operate more efficiently grazing land. and enable the WEF to provide a more reliable and constant electricity supply. • The construction and operation of the Waaihoek BESS will create employment opportunities. • The benefits associated with the proposed Waaihoek BESS, such as • The site will remain largely supplementing the undeveloped/in a natural Waaihoek WEF state and will continue to development and be used as grazing land. ensuring a more reliable Alternative activity 2: The “no-go” option, which • Most of the adverse and constant electricity entails no development within the proposed location. impacts associated with supply, will be lost. YES the Waaihoek BESS and • The benefits associated associated infrastructure with the proposed are unlikely to occur in Waaihoek BESS, such as the absence of the the creation of development. employment opportunities during the construction and operation of the BESS, will be lost INCREMENTAL (DESIGN/LAYOUT/TECHNOLOGY) ALTERNATIVES • The preferred layout • Clearance of natural The layout BESS DESIGN alternative will consider vegetation. alternatives consist & LAYOUT Alternative layout 1: Current proposed layout to be the environmental • Within 500m from seep of the siting of the determined based on the assessment of the sensitivity sensitivities of the 130-ha wetlands. YES proposed BESS within the 130-ha study area (Preferred alternative) study area, including all • No existing infrastructure and associated sensitivities identified by and services. infrastructure with a the National Screening 2-ha development

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 3

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES FURTHER COMMENT TYPE CONSIDERATION/ ASSESSMENT? Tool and specialist • Sensitivities as identified footprint, within the assessments, to by the National Screening assessed 130 ha determine the suitable site Tool. study area. for the 2 ha BESS, associated infrastructure and reservoir development footprint. Alternative layout 2: The layout alternatives consist of different possible locations within the 130-ha study • As above • As above N/A area. • High level of energy efficiency. • Relatively high energy • Fire risk due to thermal The technology density. runaway. alternatives which • Fast response to • High cost due to limited have been unpredictable variations in abundance in lithium. considered for the demand and generation. • Risk of annual Alternative technology 1: Li-ion (lithium ion) Battery battery storage • Low maintenance. degradation. YES Technology include Li-ion, • Relatively long lifecycle • Battery protection is Vanadium Redox BATTERY (approximately 10 to 15 required. Flow and Zinc- TECHNOLOGY years’ service life). • Power and energy Hybrid ALTERNATIVES • Ability to offset grid capacity directly coupled technologies. Li- - fluctuations. (expensive to scale). ion Battery A high-level risk • Currently the most widely Technology is the assessment will used BESS technology. preferred be done for all • Fast response to • Scarce and expensive alternative and the battery unpredictable variations in components (vanadium only technology technologies demand and generation. pentoxide). which has been considered for • Long life cycle • Lower level of energy assessed further the proposed (approximately 20 years’ efficiency. in the BA Process. BESS service life). • Lower energy density than Alternative 2: Vanadium Redox Flow Battery The Li-ion • Almost unlimited energy solid state batteries (such Technology technology is capacity. as li-ion). NO currently the most • No capacity degradation • Require the storage of widely used and over time. electrolyte chemicals in assessed battery • Electrolyte is inherently tanks for which a Major storage technology safe and non-flammable. Hazards Risk Assessment available • Independently tuneable may be required due to power rating and energy storage of hazardous capacity. goods.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 4

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES FURTHER COMMENT TYPE CONSIDERATION/ ASSESSMENT? • Requires a larger development footprint (unless the containers are stacked). • Currently not market competitive. • Currently an emerging technology with limited • Relatively low cost. deployment and a lack of Alternative 3: Zinc-hybrid (Zinc-Bromine (ZNBR)) • Among the latest available technical NO Flow Battery Technology advanced chemistries. information. • Currently not market competitive.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 5

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 1-4: Proposed BESS and reservoir sites in relation to the authorised Waaihoek WEF substation area (blue block).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 1

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

1.4 OBJECTIVES AND TERMS OF REFERENCE

The objectives for the ecological assessment are as follows: • Describe and map the vegetation types in the study area. • Describe the biodiversity and ecological state of each vegetation unit. • Establish and map sensitive vegetation areas showing the suitability for development and no-go areas. • Identify plant and animal species of conservation concern (Red Data List, PNCO and TOPS lists). In the case of the fauna, this was done at a desktop level. • Identify alien plant species, assess the invasive potential and recommend management procedures. • Identify and assess the impacts of development on the site’s natural vegetation and faunal species in terms of habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation of key ecosystems and, where feasible, provide mitigation measures to reduce these impacts.

1.5 LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS

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

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 2

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 THE ASSESSMENT

A site visit was undertaken on the 16 October 2020 to assess the site-specific ecological state, current land-use, identify potential sensitive ecosystems and identify plant species associated with the proposed project activities. The site visit also served to identify potential impacts of the proposed development, and its impact on the surrounding ecological environment. The findings from this site visit were supplemented with data from two previous site assessments that were conducted for the entire Waaihoek Wind Energy Facility and substation. These assessments were undertaken from the 9-12th September 2013 and from the 17th- 21st February 2014.

In addition to the site visit, key resources that were consulted include the following:

» The South African Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2018); » KZN vegetation types (Shaw and Escott, 2011); » KwaZulu-Natal Systematic Conservation Plan; » The National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA, 2011); » The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (NEMBA), 2004: List of Threatened Ecosystems (2011); » National Biodiversity Management: Biodiversity Act (NEMBA) List of Threatened or Protected Species; » The National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy (NPAES,2010); » The National Biodiversity Assessment (SANBI, 2018); » The Animal Demography Unit (ADU); » Plants of Southern Africa (POSA) – Quarter degree square level; » National Biodiversity Management: Biodiversity Act (NEMBA) List of Alien Invasive Vegetation; and » Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) List of Protected Trees (2014).

2.2 SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN

Data on the known distribution and conservation status for each potential species of conservation concern has to be obtained to develop a list of ‘Species of Concern’. These species are those that may be impacted significantly by the proposed activity. In general, these will be species that are already known to be threatened or at risk, or those that have restricted distributions (endemics) with a portion (at least 50%) of their known range falling within the study area i.e. strict endemic and near endemic species. Species that are afforded special protection, notably those that are protected by NEMBA (No. 10 of 2004), PNCO (1975), the National Forest Act or which occur on the South African Red Data List as species of conservation concern fall within this category.

2.3 VEGETATION MAPPING

Vegetation is mapped from satellite images and related to data gathered on the ground. This was supplemented with the vegetation and sensitivity maps from the WEF ecological report.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 3

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

2.4 SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT

This section of the report explains the approach to determining the ecological sensitivity of the study area on a broad scale. The approach identifies zones of high, medium and low sensitivity according to a system developed by CES and used in numerous proposed development studies. It must be noted that the sensitivity zonings in this study are based solely on ecological (primarily vegetation) characteristics and social and economic factors have not been taken into consideration. The sensitivity analysis described here is based on 12 criteria which are of importance in determining ecosystem and landscape sensitivity. The method predominantly involves identifying sensitive vegetation or habitat types, topography and land transformation (Table 2-1).

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

Table 2-1: Criteria used for the analysis of the sensitivity of the area. MODERATE LOW SENSITIVITY HIGH SENSITIVITY CRITERIA SENSITIVITY 1 10 5

1 Topography Level, or even Undulating; fairly steep Complex and uneven slopes with steep slopes

2 Vegetation - Extensive Restricted to a particular Restricted to a specific Extent or region/zone locality / site habitat type in the region

3 Conservation Well conserved Not well conserved, Not conserved - has a status of independent of moderate conservation high conservation value fauna/ flora or conservation value value habitats

4 Species of None, although No endangered or One or more conservation occasional regional vulnerable species, endangered and concern - endemics some indeterminate or vulnerable species, or Presence and rare endemics more than 2 endemics number or rare species

5 Habitat Extensive areas of Reasonably extensive Limited areas of this fragmentatio preferred habitat present areas of preferred habitat habitat, susceptible to n leading to elsewhere in region not elsewhere and habitat fragmentation loss of viable susceptible to susceptible to populations fragmentation fragmentation

6 Biodiversity Low diversity, or species Moderate diversity, and High species diversity, contribution richness moderately high species complex plant and richness animal communities

7 Visibility of Site is hidden or barely Site is visible from some Site is visible from many the site or visible from any vantage or a few vantage points or all angles or vantage landscape points with the exception but is not obtrusive or points. from other in some cases from the very conspicuous. vantage points sea.

8 Erosion Very stable and an area Some possibility of Large possibility of potential or not subjected to erosion. erosion or change due to erosion, change to the episodic events. site or destruction due

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 4

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

MODERATE LOW SENSITIVITY HIGH SENSITIVITY CRITERIA SENSITIVITY 1 10 5

instability of to climatic or other the region factors.

9 Rehabilitatio Site is easily There is some degree of Site is difficult to n potential of rehabilitated. difficulty in rehabilitation rehabilitate due to the the area or of the site. terrain, type of habitat or region species required to reintroduce.

10 Disturbance Site is very disturbed or There is some degree of The site is hardly or very due to human degraded. disturbance of the site. slightly impacted upon habitation or by human disturbance. other influences (Alien invasive)

10 Ecological Low ecological function. N/A High ecological function in the No corridors or niche function. Portions of landscape habitats (There are NO moderate entire sections of the (corridor, ecological functions. It is site contains corridors niche habitats) considered either high or or niche habitats low)

11 Ecological Low to no ecological Some sections of the site Most of the site contains services services on site contain ecological ecological services (food, water services filter, grazing, etc.)

12 Aquatic Outside of the 32m Within 32m of the Development within the environments watercourse buffer. watercourse. Within watercourse. (Rivers, Outside of the 500m 500m of a natural wetlands, wetland buffer wetland, but outside of drainage line 50m wetland buffer etc)

.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 5

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT

3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

3.1.1 Climate

Utrecht receives approximately 615mm of rain per year, with most rainfall occurring during mid-summer with the highest rainfall of 114mm typically recorded in January. July receives the lowest rainfall of 3mm. Average midday temperatures range from 18.7ºC in June to 26.1 ºC in January. The region is the coldest during July with average temperatures of 2.9ºC during the night.

3.1.2 Topography

The Waaihoek BESS and reservoir assessment area is located on top of a plateau forming the upper catchment for the Bloedrivier. The elevation of the project site ranges from 1580 - 1500 masl (Figure 3.1), with an average gradient of <4.5% (Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3).

Figure 3-1:Topography Map of the study area.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 6

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3-2: Elevation of profile of the study site from south-west to north-east (Google Earth Pro, 2020).

Figure 3-3: Elevation of profile of the study site from north-west to south-east (Google Earth Pro, 2020).

3.1.3 Geology and Soils

About two thirds of South Africa is covered by sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Karoo Supergroup which is made up of Volcanics (basalt and rhyolite); Sediments (sandstone, shale, siltstone); and dolerite. The underlying geology associated with the proposed Waaihoek BESS and reservoir project area consists of the Dwyka Group, Karoo Dolerite. Karoo Dolerite is apparent in the form of dykes and sills intruding into the surrounding rock. The Dwyka Group forms the base of the sequence and consists of diamictite. Upland areas, where the BESS is located are dominated by acrisoils. The site typically showed a thick brown hard surface crust horizon overlaying a weakly developed red/yellow massive subsurface horizon with a clay rich layer. The soil pattern is described as fertile, well drained with a high potential for arability.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 7

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3.2 THE CURRENT LAND USE

The general region associated with the Waaihoek WEF is mountainous with open grassland and sparse vegetation with a large proportion of the area being used for agriculture as a mixture of subsistence, commercial livestock and game farming.

Land-uses in the landscape adjacent to the proposed Waaihoek BESS and reservoir include:

• Waaihoek WEF, substation and powerline (authorised, but not existing); • Provincial roads (R33/34) to the west and south of the project area; • Protected area 5km north, currently operated as a private game park (Emlwane Game Park Private Nature Reserve). The Utrecht Town Park and Balele Valley Game Park is located further north-west, around the town of Utrecht.

According to the DEFF online interactive database, the land cover of the study site has been classified as ‘Unimproved Grasslands” (Figure 3.4). The project area is currently used as grazing land.

Figure 3-4: Landcover of the project area and surrounds.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 8

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE VEGETATION AND FLORISTICS

3.3.1 National Vegetation Map: Expected Vegetation Types

According to the National Vegetation Map (Mucina et al., 2018) the majority of the proposed BESS project site falls within the Wakkerstroom Montane Grassland (Gm14) (Figure 3.5). This vegetation type is associated with the Escarpment that links the southern and northern Drakensburg escarpments. The vegetation comprises of short montane grasslands on the relatively flat plateaus, with short forest and Leucosidea thickets occurring along steep, east- facing slopes and drainage areas. L. sericea is the dominant woody pioneer species that invades areas as a result of grazing mismanagement. Wakkerstroom Montane Grassland (Gm14) is classified as Least Threatened. By assigning this vegetation type a status of Least Threatened it indicates that this vegetation type has not experienced a significant loss of habitat or deterioration in condition (Grassland Ecosystem Guidelines, 2013).

The conservation target for this vegetation type is 27%. Only 1% has been statutorily protected but land use pressures on this vegetation type are generally low, probably as a result of the colder climate and shallow soils.

A very small portion of site occurs within the Northern Kwa-Zulu Natal Moist Grassland vegetation type. This grassland is associated with hilly and rolling landscapes dominated by grasses such as Themeda triandra and Hyparrhenia hirta. This vegetation type is classified as vulnerable with a conservation target of 24%. Vulnerable ecosystems are characterised by the majority of the original extent in good ecological condition, but with some loss of structure or function (Grassland Ecosystem Guidelines, 2013).

More refined vegetation mapping has been undertaken in KZN, resulting in some cases in further vegetation types being identified. Below is the KZN vegetation map of the project area (Figure 3.6). The vegetation map remains the same to that explained above, with the majority of the site occurring in Wakkerstroom Montane Grassland and a small portion occurring on Northern KwaZulu-Natal Moist Grassland.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 9

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3-5: National Vegetation Map showing the proposed project site in relation to the expected vegetation types found on site.

Figure 3-6: KZN Systematic Conservation Plan (KZNSCP) vegetation types.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 10

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3.3.2 Vegetation types recorded on site

While National level vegetation maps have described broad vegetation types, local conditions and micro-habitats (rainfall, soil structure, rocky outcrops, etc.) can result in variations in plant composition. According to the ecological assessment undertaken for the WEF, the site where the BESS will be located is dominated by Wakkerstroom Montane Grassland characterised by sparse grasslands dominated by graminoids and asteraceous herbs, shallow soils and exposed rock. It must be noted that the site visit was conducted during late spring after good rains and after a winter fire. The low grass cover therefore offered an excellent opportunity to observe the influence of the soil depth on the plant communities. Also, a number of post-fire species were recorded. Exposed rock was observed in large patches throughout the site. The exposed rocks at the edge of the plateau support Pin-cushion euphorbias (Euphorbia pulvinata) and Aloes (Aloe marlothii) (Plate 3-1a). Boulder crops were also observed, but were not distributed throughout the site but contained to top edges of the slopes and a few small patches in the south- west.Boulder outcrops supported stunted trees which included Cabbage trees (Cussonia paniculata), Guarri (Euclea crispa) and Currant trees (Searsia species) (Plate 3-1b). Shade- loving protected species, such as the Fire-ball lily (Scadoxus multiflorus), were observed in these boulder outcrops. Patches of relatively deeper soil supported a more contiguous grass-covered community, in which a number of geophytes were observed. These areas were mostly, but not always, associated with wetlands in the study area. The diversity of species of conservation interest was higher in these areas (Plate 3c).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 11

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Plate 3-1: a) Exposed rock with Pin-cushion euphorbias and Aloes, b) Grassland vegetation on shallow soil with exposed rock in the background, c) Rocky outcrops supporting stunted trees and shade-loving understory species.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 12

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3.3.3 Species of Special Concern

Approximately eight species of special concern were recorded during the field survey in October 2020 (Table 3.1).

Family Genus /Species Species of special concern Least Concern, Schedule 12 AMARYLLIDACEAE Brunsvigia radulosa (PNCO) Scadoxus puniceus Least Concern AMARYLLIDACEAE Cyrtanthus tuckii Least Concern, Schedule 12 (PNCO) AMARYLLIDACEAE Scadoxus multiflorus Least Concern, Schedule 12 subs multiflorus (PNCO) ASPHODOLACEAE Aloe marlothii Least Concern, Schedule 12 (PNCO) IRIDACEAE Undetermined sp. 1 Schedule 12 (PNCO) Undetermined sp. 2 Schedule 12 (PNCO) Moraea elliotii Schedule 12 (PNCO)

A full list of species likely to be found at the BESS site has been included in Appendix 1.

Plate 3-2: Species of Special Concern recorded on site

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 13

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3.3.4 Alien Invasive Species Present on site

Large areas of the broader region are covered with the alien invasive tree Acacia mearnsii (black wattle). There were small patches and individual trees observed within the site itself (Plate 3.3). It is currently being harvested on what appears to be a low-scale commercial level for wood fuel by farm inhabitants. Acacia mearnsii is listed as a Category 1b species. The law requires that this species is removed from site and that their spread is prevented.

Plate 3-3: Acacia mearnsii present within the site

3.4 DESCRIPTION OF FAUNA

South Africa is a diverse country, with approximately 1,663 terrestrial vertebrate faunal species of which 850 species are birds, 343 species are mammals, 350 species are reptiles and 120 species are amphibians spread across seven biomes and 122 million km². The Kwazulu-Natal (KZN) Province is home to approximately 87 reptile species, 72 amphibian species, 217 mammal species and 741 bird species (IUCN, 2020). 3.4.1 Amphibians

Of the 72 species of amphibians known to occur in the KZN, 31 of these species have a distribution which coincides with the project area (Appendix 2) (Du Preez & Carruthers, 2017; IUCN, 2020).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 14

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Of these 17 species have been recorded within a 30km2 radius of the project area (ADU, 2020):

• Bushveld Rain Frog • Common Platanna • Bronze Caco • Mozambique Rain Frog • Striped Grass Frog • Clicking Stream Frog • Raucous Toad • Delalande's River Frog • Tremelo Sand Frog • Guttural Toad • Cape River Frog • Natal Sand Frog • Painted Reed Frog • Common Caco • Rattling Frog • Yellow Striped Reed Frog • Bubbling Kassina

The KZN supports seven known threatened and near-threatened species (IUCN, 2020). None of these have a distribution that includes the study area.

In total, 8 amphibian species are endemic to the KZN (IUCN, 2020) and one endemic and one near endemic species have a distribution range near enough to the study area.

Table 3-1: Amphibians Endemic and Near-Endemic to the KZN (IUCN, 2020). Species Status Habitat Distribution name

Wager's Stream LC Forest, grassland and Frog wetland habitat.

Strongylopus This species appears to wageri be quite sensitive to habitat degradation. It breeds in quiet pools in clear streams.

(IUCN SSC ASG, 2013)

EOO +/- 6,800 km2 AOO 10% of EOO Rhythmic Caco LC Grassland and wetland.

Cacosternum (IUCN SSC ASG, 2013) rhythmum

EOO: +/- 40,268 km2 AOO: +/- 418 558 km2

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 15

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3.4.2 Reptiles

Of the 87 reptile species that occur in KZN, 60 species have a distribution that coincides with the project area (Appendix 3) (IUCN, 2020; Branch, 1998; Bates et al., 2014).

Of these, 9 species have been recorded in databases within a 30km2 radius of the project area (ADU, 2020):

• Southern Tree Agama • Rhombic Night Adder • Distant's Ground Agama • South African Slug-eater • Common Girdled Lizard • Western Natal Green Snake • Common Crag Lizard • Mole Snake • Speckled Rock Skink

A Rinkhals was seen in the study area in the previous study (CES, 2015).

The following were recorded as present by Mr R Stannard in the previous Ecological Assessment (CES, 2015): Bibron’s Blind Snake, Common Brown Water Snake, Dusky bellied Water Snake, Brown House Snake, Mole Snake, Rhombic Skaapsteker, Spotted Bush Snake, Green Water Snake, Rinkhals, Puff Adder and Rhombic Night Adder. In addition, both Rock Monitor and Water Monitor have also been observed.

An Olive Grass Snake (Psammophis mossambicus) was recorded during the site visit on the 16 October 2020.

Plate 3-4: Olive Grass Snake (Psammophis mossambicus) recorded in the BESS site.

The KZN supports 12 threatened or near threatened reptile species (IUCN, 2020). None of these have a distribution that includes the study area.

In total, 17 endemic reptile species occur in the KZN (IUCN, 2020) and one endemic and one near endemic species have a distribution range near to the study area.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 16

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

3.4.3 Mammals

The KZN is home to 212 mammal species, 72 of which have a distribution which includes the study area (IUCN, 2020) (Appendix 4).

Of these 9 species have been recorded in databases within a 30km2 radius of the project area (ADU, 2020):

• Caracal • Nyala • Black-footed Cat • Common Wildebeest • Serval • Natal Mastomys • Leopard • Chacma Baboon • Aardwolf

Cape Porcupine, Yellow Mongoose and Meerkat have all been recorded in the Utrecht area (iNaturalist, 2020).

The following were recorded as present by Mr R Stannard in the previous Ecological Assessment (CES, 2015) in the northern most farm of the WEF. It is unlikely that the full list of species mentioned below inhabit the BESS site due to the absence of associated habitat, but they are worth mentioning: • Savanna (Chacma) Baboon and Vervet Monkey, • Scrub Hare, Natal Red Rock Rabbit and Smith’s Red Rock Rabbit, • Porcupine, Four-striped Grass Mouse, House Mouse, House Rat, Angoni Vlei Rat and Vlei Rat • Cape Clawless Otter, Spotted-necked Otter, • Aardvark, Dassie, Bushbig, • Large Spotted Genet, • Slender Mongoose, Water Mongoose, White-tailed Mongoose and Yellow Mongoose, • Cape Fox, Black-backed Jackal, Aardwolf, Serval, Leopard, and Honey Badger, • Mountain Reedbuck, Eland, Blesbok, Impala, Hartebeest, Black wildebeest, Zebra, Springbok and Common Reedbuck.

The site is currently used for livestock farming and horses and cows are present in the study area.

The KZN supports 21 threatened and 15 near-threatened mammal species (IUCN, 2020; Child et al., 2016). Six (6) threatened species and eleven near-threatened species have a distribution that includes the study area. No large game occurs on the property i.e. Rhino and Buffalo.

Black-footed Cat (VU), Leopard (VU) and Serval (NT) were recorded within 30km2 of the study area (ADU, 2020) and are expected to occur within the study area. Based on habitat availability the Mountain Reedbuck (VU) and Temminck's Pangolin (VU) may occur in the study area. Mountain Reedbuck are grazers that inhabit rocky ridges and hillsides in high- altitude grasslands (1,500-5,000m) near water (IUCN SCC, 2017) and appropriate habitat occurs onsite. Temminck's Pangolin occurs in floodplain grassland, rocky slopes savannas, woodlands and sandveld habitat with dense or above-ground debris for shelter and require sufficient ant and termite population to feed on (Pietersen, et al., 2019). White tailed mice occur in shrubland grassland areas and one of their major requirements is black loam with good vegetation cover (Coetzee and Monadjem, 2008).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 17

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Table 3-2: Threatened Mammal Species with a distribution that includes the project area Recorded Likelihood Conservation within of Common name Species name status 30km2 of occurring (EWT, 2016) the study onsite area Threatened Black Rhino Diceros bicornis CR None Mountain Reedbuck Redunca fulvorufula EN Probable Black-footed Cat Felis nigripes VU X Probable Leopard Panthera pardus VU X Probable Unlikely – unsuitable Temminck's Pangolin Smutsia temminckii VU habitat Unlikely – unsuitable White Tailed Mouse Mystromys albicaudatus VU habitat Near Threatened Plains Zebra Equus quagga NT None Grey Rhebok Pelea capreolus NT Probable African Buffalo Syncerus caffer NT None Unlikely – unsuitable African Clawless Otter Aonyx capensis NT habitat Unlikely – unsuitable Spotted-necked Otter Hydrictis maculicollis NT habitat Serval Leptailurus serval NT X Probable Brown Hyaena Parahyaena brunnea NT Possible African Straw-coloured Fruit-bat Eidolon helvum NT Probable Large-eared Free-tailed Bat Otomops martiensseni NT Probable Laminate Vlei Rat Otomys laminatus NT Probable White Rhino Ceratotherium simum NT None

Five (5) endemic mammal species occur in the KZN of which one has a distribution which includes the study area, namely the Cape Mole Rat (Table 4.4). Due to unsuitable soil conditions (shallow soils with exposed rock), this species is unlikely to occur at the BESS site.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 18

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Table 3-3: Endemic Mammals with a distribution that includes the study area Common Status Habitat Distribution name “The subpopulation in KwaZulu-Natal Province occurs within mesic grasslands on sandy or clay soils, particularly in the midlands (for example, Impendle and Nottingham Cape Mole Road). Overall, the most Rat LC commonly preferred soil types (Georychus are derived from sandstone, capensis) limestone, shale and quartzite which comprise the sandy loam, clay and alluvium soils that are inhabited.” Maree et al., 2017.

3.4.4 Birds

Approximately 415 bird species have a distribution range that includes the project area and the Utrecht Magisterial District, KZN Province (IUCN, 2020; Lepage, 2020).

The bird monitoring conducted for the Waaihoek Wind Energy Facility (Rooyen & Froneman, 2014) recorded 87 bird species in the study area. The species list is presented in Appendix 5.

The project area falls within the distribution ranges of 25 threatened and 16 near-threatened species (Table 3.4). Of the threatened species two are critically endangered, eight are endangered and 12 are vulnerable. Two endangered, nine vulnerable and three near- threatened species were recorded in the study area (Rooyen & Froneman, 2014) (Table 3.4).

The White-winged Flufftail is listed as critically endangered and has a distribution that includes the study area. This species only has approximately 50-249 individuals and is considered nomadic, inhabiting SA from November to March. It inhabits moist to flooded peat-based habitats (1,100-1,900 m asl) where vegetation is dense and dominated by sedges (BirdLife International, 2018). This habitat is absent from the site.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 19

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 3-7: Distribution of White-winged Flufftail in relation to the study area – blue star (BirdLife International. 2018.).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 20

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Approximately 197 South African endemic bird species have a distribution which includes the study area. Of these one is of note, namely Rudd’s Lark (EN) (Table 4.4). Approximately 1700- 3300 individuals remain. This bird species inhabits grasslands with short to medium grass cover and tolerates grazing.

Figure 3-8: Distribution of Rudd’s Lark in relation to the study area - blue star (Birdlife Int, 2017).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 21

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Table 3-4: Bird SCC with a distribution range that includes the project area Recorded in the study area Common name Scientific name Status Endemic (Rooyen & Froneman, 2014) Threatened White-backed Vulture Gyps africanus Critically Endangered White-winged Flufftail Sarothrura ayresi Critically Endangered Endemic Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus Endangered Black Harrier Circus maurus Endangered x Botha's Lark Spizocorys fringillaris Endangered Endemic Cape Griffon Gyps coprotheres Endangered Grey Crowned-Crane Balearica regulorum Endangered x Lappet-faced Vulture Torgos tracheliotos Endangered Rudd's Lark Heteromirafra ruddi Endangered Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis Endangered Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus Vulnerable x Blue Crane Anthropoides paradiseus Vulnerable x Bush Blackcap Sylvia nigricapillus Vulnerable Black Stork Ciconia nigra Vulnerable x Maccoa Duck Oxyura maccoa Vulnerable Martial Eagle Polemaetus bellicosus Vulnerable x Montane Blue Swallow Hirundo atrocaerulea Vulnerable Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius Vulnerable x Slaty Egret Egretta vinaceigula Vulnerable Southern Bald Ibis Geronticus calvus Vulnerable Endemic x Southern Ground-Hornbill Bucorvus leadbeateri Vulnerable x Tawny Eagle Aquila rapax Vulnerable Wattled Crane Bugeranus carunculatus Vulnerable Yellow-breasted Pipit Hemimacronyx chloris Vulnerable Endemic x Denham's Bustard Neotis denhami Vulnerable x Near Threatened Bearded Vulture Gypaetus barbatus Near-threatened Blue Bustard Eupodotis caerulescens Near-threatened Endemic Crowned Eagle Stephanoaetus coronatus Near-threatened Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea Near-threatened Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus Near-threatened x Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquata Near-threatened Forest Buzzard Buteo trizonatus Near-threatened Endemic Ground Woodpecker Geocolaptes olivaceus Near-threatened Endemic Red Knot Calidris canutus Near-threatened Red-footed Falcon Falco vespertinus Near-threatened x Sentinel Rock-Thrush Monticola explorator Near-threatened Yellow-tufted Pipit Anthus crenatus Near-threatened Endemic African Pied Starling Lamprotornis bicolor Least Concern Endemic Cape Rock-Thrush Monticola rupestris Least Concern Endemic Forest Canary Crithagra scotops Least Concern Endemic Grey-winged Francolin Scleroptila afra Least Concern Endemic x

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 22

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

4 SITE SENSITIVITY

4.1 CRITICAL BIODIVERSITY AREAS

Although there are Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) to the south east and south west of the site, the proposed project site does not occur within any CBAs or Ecological Support Areas (ESAs) identified by the 2014 Kwa-Zulu Natal Biodiversity Spatial Plan. No project activities will impact on either CBAs or ESAs (Figure 4.1).

Figure 4-1: Map showing the proposed project site in relation to Critical Biodiversity Areas, Ecological Support Areas and surrounding protected areas.

4.2 ECOSYSTEM THREAT STATUS

The proposed BESS site and reservoir occurs adjacent to a small patch of Low Escarpment Mistbelt Forest to the north-west. This is a protected ecosystem, with a threat level status of Least Concern (Figure 4.2).

These forest patches are typically dominated by Podocarpus spp and Dombeya spp or by Xymalos monospora, Greyia sutherlandii, Canthium mundianum and Acacia caffra.

This forest type occurs in widely scattered isolated patches located in the Low Drakensberg Escarpment. The National Forest Inventory has not mapped forest in the proposed Waaihoek

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 23

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

WEF project area, however, it is likely that vestigial patches of forest or forest elements, especially on the escarpment slopes do occur. The SANBI vegetation map specifically refined for KwaZulu-Natal identifies two patches of KwaZulu-Natal Mistbelt, one of which occurs adjacent to the proposed BESS site.

Northern KwaZulu-Natal Mistbelt forests are the poorest in terms of species richness of all the mistbelt types. The soils are typically shallow and since the forests are limited to small patches, are more prone to impacts of veld fires, as edge effects relative to the total area are more pronounced.

It is recommended that this forest patch together with a 50m buffer is designated as a no-go area.

Figure 4-2: Ecosystem Threat Status of the proposed project site

4.3 DEFF SCREENING REPORT SENSITIVITIES

The DEFF screening report identified the Animal Species Theme as being high based on the presence of certain species (mostly birds). The Terrestrial Biodiversity Theme was identified as Very High due to its placement within a SWSA and Freshwater ecosystem priority area quaternary catchment. The reasons for this are aquatic in nature and have therefore been addressed in the Aquatic Specialist’s report and are not dealt with further in this ecological assessment.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 24

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

4.4 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The sensitivity map was developed using available spatial planning tools as well as by identifying areas of high, medium and low sensitivity based on the site survey.

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

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

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

4.5 SITE SENSITIVITY

The two seeps located within the proposed reservoir site are classified as areas of high sensitivity due to the ecological processes these systems provide (Figure 4.3). The patch of Southern Mistbelt Forest, located to the northwest has also been assigned a high sensitivity. A 50m buffer should be placed around the forest patch and a 20m buffer around the seeps and these should be considered no-go areas. Other areas of high sensitivity illustrated in Figure 4.3 include areas with a high number of protected species associated with deeper soils and an area on the south-west slope where there are a high number of Aloes, associated with the Vulnerable KZN Moist Grassland. These areas must be avoided, and no infrastructure should occur here.

The remaining area has been classified as an area of moderate sensitivity due to it being fairly intact, but widely distributed with a conservation status of Least Threatened.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 25

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Figure 4-3: Sensitivity map showing areas of high and moderate sensitivity.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 26

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

5 ALTERNATIVE SITES

The current study involves the assessment of a large area (over 100ha) for the development of infrastructure which only requires up to 3ha of land. The approach taken in this assessment, therefore, was to eliminate areas of higher sensitivity and indicate these as No-Go areas. The remainder of the site, which has been assessed as moderate in its sensitivity, is suitable for the development, provided that appropriate mitigation measures are applied. From an ecological perspective, the following three alternative areas (each approximately 5ha) are preferred:

Figure 5-1: Preferred sites from an ecological perspective.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 27

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

6 IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT

6.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE

Impact 1: Loss of Wakkerstroom Montane Grassland

Cause and comment: The clearing of land for the construction of the BESS and the reservoir will result in the loss of 2-3ha of Wakkerstroom Montane Grassland. The project will definitely result in the permanent loss of this vegetation type, however, given that the loss will be limited to between 2 and 3ha, it is unlikely to impact on the extent and long term conservation of this vegetation type, which is listed as Least Threatened. The overall significance of the project activities at this site, provided the recommended mitigation measures are implemented, would be moderate negative. No-go (status quo) impact Given that this area appears to be used for grazing, if the project were to not go ahead, the site would probably continue to be grazed. If not managed properly the continued grazing could result in the degradation of the site. The overall significance for the no-go alternative would thus be low negative.

Mitigation Measures: • No removal of vegetation is to take place within 20m of the seeps or within 50m of Low Escarpment Mistbelt Forest to the north-west, except for the control of alien vegetation. • Construction vehicles and machinery must not encroach into identified ‘no-go’ areas or areas outside the project footprint. • Activities within 500m of a wetland must obtain the necessary Water Use License prior to the commencement of such activities. • Topsoil (20 cm, where possible) must be collected and stored in an area of low sensitivity and used to rehabilitate impacted areas that are no longer required during the operational phase (e.g. laydown areas). • Only indigenous species must be used for rehabilitation. • Lay down areas must not be located within any watercourses or drainage lines. • Employees must be prohibited from making open fires during the construction phase. • An alien invasive management plan for the site must be created. • An in-situ search and rescue plan must be developed and implemented for succulents and geophytes that will be impacted by the construction of the project site.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 1: Loss of Wakkerstroom Montane Grassland Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without MODERATE Permanent Localised Moderate Definite Mitigation NEGATIVE

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 28

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be MODERATE Reversible Achievable Mitigation lost NEGATIVE No-Go LOW Long Term Localised Slight May Occur Alternative NEGATIVE

Impact 2: Loss of Plant Species of Special Concern

Cause and comment: The permanent localised loss of eight or more plant species of special concern may occur. The severity of the impact will be of moderate significance given the wide distribution of the species and because all are listed as Least Concern on the South African Red Data List indicating that their populations are stable. The overall significance of the impact can be reduced to low negative if the infrastructure avoids areas of high sensitivity (Figure 3.

No-go (status quo) impact If the project should not go ahead, it is likely that these species will continue growing undisturbed. The overall significance of the impact associated with the no-go alternative is therefore negligible.

Mitigation Measures:

In addition to the mitigation measures listed for impact 1, the following must be undertaken: • Avoid locating infrastructure in areas identified as high sensitivity as this is where the highest number of Species of Special Concern occur • Prohibit all employees and contractors from harvesting plants; • Demarcate areas for use during construction and ensure that the construction activities remain within the designated area; • Where possible, ensure demarcated construction area avoids populations of SCC. • Acquire permits for the removal of all Schedule 4 species. • Ensure that no activities occur within areas designated as no-go areas, particularly within drainage lines and watercourses.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 2: Loss of SCC Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without MODERATE Permanent Localised Moderate May Occur Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go Not Applicable Alternative

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 29

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Impact 3: Loss of extent of faunal habitat for Species of Conservation Concern (fauna)

Cause and comment: The project area intersects the distribution of five mammal and 22 bird SCC. • The mammal SCC include the Mountain Reedbuck (EN), Black-footed Cat (VU), Leopard (V), Temminck's Pangolin (VU) and White-Tailed Mouse (VU). Endemic Cape Mole Rat (KC). • The bird SCC include 22 threatened (2 CE, 8 EN, 12 VU) and the endemic Rudd’s Lark (EN) species.

All species are of conservation concern have a broader range than the project site. Although they may occur on site, they are not restricted to the site, and unlikely to be directly compromised by the development. The development is small in extent and has a short construction period, thus disruption is considered minimal.

No-go (status quo) impact If the project should not go ahead, it is likely that these species will continue undisturbed. The overall significance of the impact associated with the no-go alternative is therefore negligible.

Mitigation Measures:

In addition to the mitigation measures listed for impact 1, the following must be undertaken: • Prevent staff from persecuting any faunal species during the construction phase, include clause in all contracts; • Demarcate areas for use during construction and ensure that the construction activities remain within the designated area; • Ensure that no activities occur within areas designated as no-go areas. • Removal of natural vegetation must be restricted to a minimum. • Vegetation must be rehabilitated to its former state where possible after construction. • Construction of new roads should only be considered if existing roads cannot be upgraded. • Access to the remainder of the site should be strictly controlled to prevent unnecessary disturbance of priority species. • No night lighting should be used during construction and operation. If required, these must be downlights which must be kept to a minimum in respect to number and wattage.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 3: Loss of extent of faunal habitat for SCC Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without MODERATE Permanent Localised Moderate Definite Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 30

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

No-Go Not Applicable Alternative

Impact 4: Disruption of Ecosystem Function and Process

Cause and comment: Fragmentation is one of the most important impacts on vegetation as it creates breaks in previously continuous vegetation, causing a reduction in the gene pool and a decrease in species richness and diversity. It also impacts on fauna as it separates habitats and necessitates fauna having to move across exposed areas like roads to get to another section of their habitat or territory. This impact occurs when more and more areas are cleared, resulting in the isolation of functional ecosystems, which reduces biodiversity and reduces movement due to the break in ecological corridors.

There is currently limited fragmentation within or around the site although this will increase once construction of the wind turbines begins. Since the footprint associated with the infrastructure is relatively small, the break in habitat caused by the construction of the infrastructure will be of low significance. However, the cumulative impact when the WEF and substation are considered will be of moderate significance (refer to cumulative impacts for this assessment).

No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, there will be no fragmentation and the associated impacts will thus be negligible.

Mitigation Measures:

In addition to the mitigation measures listed for impact 1 and 2, the following must be undertaken: • Rehabilitate laydown areas; and • Use existing access roads and upgrade these where necessary.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 4: Disruption of Ecosystem Function and Process Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without LOW Permanent Localised Slight Probable Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go Not Applicable Alternative

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 31

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Impact 5: Impacts of Increased Noise on Surrounding Faunal Populations

Cause and comment: During the construction phase, construction activities will lead to the increase in ambient noise levels in the project area. This could disturb surrounding faunal populations causing them to move away from the project area. The impact will be localised and slight with an overall significance of Low Negative. No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, there will be no increase in noise levels and therefore the no-go alternative will be negligible.

Mitigation Measures:

In addition to the mitigation measures listed for impact 1 and 2, the following must be undertaken: • Ensure machinery and plant is in good working order. The appropriate silencers should be fitted on equipment if required.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 5: Impacts of Noise on Surrounding Faunal Populations Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without LOW Temporary Localised Moderate Probable Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go Not Applicable Alternative

Impact 6: Establishment of Alien Plant Species

Cause and comment: During the construction phase the clearing of indigenous vegetation creates ‘open’ habitats which could favour the establishment of undesirable alien plant species in areas that are typically very difficult to eradicate and could pose a threat to surrounding ecosystems. Consequently, the lack of an effective alien vegetation management plan could lead to a large- scale alien plant invasion.

No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, the current infestation of the area will continue. The significance of this impact will be Low Negative

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 32

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Mitigation Measures:

• An Alien Vegetation Management Plan must be developed and implemented to prevent the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species during all phases of development. • Any alien vegetation which establishes during the construction phase must be removed from site and disposed of accordingly. • Continuous monitoring for alien plant seedlings must take place throughout the construction phase.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 6: Establishment of Alien Plant Species Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without HIGH Permanent Study Area Severe Definite Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go LOW Long Term Localised Slight May Occur Alternative NEGATIVE

6.2 OPERATION PHASE

Impact 7: Infestation of Alien Plant Species

Cause and comment: During the operational phase, alien species may continue to spread and become established if an alien invasive management plan was not implemented at the start of the construction phase. The unchecked infestation of undesirable species could result in the displacement of indigenous species and possibly cause local extinctions, if mitigation measures are not implemented. The impact is therefore considered as high significance.

No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, the current infestation of the area will continue. The significance of this impact will be Low Negative

Mitigation Measures:

• An Alien Vegetation Management Plan must be developed and implemented to prevent the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species during all phases of development. • Any alien vegetation which establishes during the construction phase must be removed from site and disposed of accordingly.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 33

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

• Continuous monitoring for alien plant seedlings must take place throughout the construction phase.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 7: Infestation of Alien Plant Species Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without HIGH Permanent Study Area Severe Definite Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go LOW Long Term Localised Slight May Occur Alternative NEGATIVE

Impact 8: The Impact of the BESS and Reservoir on Ecological Drivers Cause and Comment

Grasslands are dependent on fire to maintain their biodiversity patterns and ecological processes (SANBI, 2013). The benefits of fire within these ecosystems includes stimulating new growth and therefore enhancing productivity, removing dead plant material and letting in more light for new growth, releasing nutrients and organic material back into the soil and limiting the establishment of woody plant species (SANBI, 2013).

Understandably it would not be safe to burn areas directly adjacent to the BESS. This will result in the accumulation of dead and moribund material that will inhibit the growth of some species and may favour the establishment of woody species resulting in a shift in species composition and community structure. However, the footprint of the BESS is fairly small, and it is possible to use alternative management strategies such as grazing or mowing to simulate fire. Without mitigation measures, the impact is likely to be moderate.

No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, the fire regime is unlikely to be impacted and the associated impacts will thus be negligible.

Mitigation Measures • Design and create firebreaks to protect BESS and reservoir infrastructure. • Implement measures that will simulate fire such as mowing the area adjacent to the BESS to reduce the fuel load. • Firebreaks must be burned in the appropriate season with the notification and permission of the local Fire Protection Association. The WEF must be a member of the regional/local FPA and comply with all the legal requirements of the Veld and Fire Act (as amended) • Do not use herbicides or hoeing when creating firebreaks as this will kill plant species and is likely to lead to erosion. Instead use mowing or brush-cutting.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 34

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

• Keep grasslands free of invasive species by implementing an Alien Vegetation Management Plan. • Limit bush encroachment.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 8: The Impact of the BESS and Reservoir on Ecological Drivers Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without MODERATE Permanent Localised Moderate Definite Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go Negligible Alternative

6.3 DECOMMISSIONING PHASE

Impact 9: Loss of Indigenous Vegetation Cause and Comment Some indigenous vegetation is likely to have re-established in areas that were used for construction activities but not required during the operation of the facility (e.g. laydown areas). The decommissioning of the proposed project may result in the loss of this recently established vegetation. No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, the vegetation will not be impacted, and the associated impacts will thus be negligible.

Mitigation Measures

• A comprehensive Rehabilitation Plan must be compiled for implementation during and after the decommissioning of the proposed project; • Decommissioning activities must not encroach on the surrounding intact vegetation, seep or forest patch; • Only indigenous plant species, characteristic of Wakkerstroom Moist Grassland, must be used for rehabilitation purposes; • Employees must be prohibited from making fires and harvesting plants; • Any alien vegetation which establishes during the decommissioning phase should be removed from site and disposed of at a registered waste disposal site. Continuous monitoring for seedlings should take place throughout the decommissioning phase; • As far as practically possible, existing access roads should be utilised; and • An alien vegetation management plan should be compiled (for implementation during the decommissioning phase).

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 35

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 9: Loss of Indigenous Vegetation Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without MODERATE Permanent Localised Moderate Probable Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go LOW Long Term Localised Slight May Occur Alternative NEGATIVE

Impact 10: Establishment of Alien Plant Species Cause and Comment During the decommissioning phase, failure to remove and manage alien vegetation during decommissioning could result in the permanent establishment of alien vegetation in the study area. The poor rehabilitation of disturbed areas could lead to the permanent degradation of ecosystems as well as allow invasion by alien plant species. No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, there is a risk that alien invasive species will establish. This is of low significance.

Mitigation Measures

• The Alien Vegetation Management Plan must be implemented to prevent the establishment and prevent the spread of undesirable alien plant species during the decommissioning phase; and • Monitoring of the establishment of alien seedlings should continue throughout the decommissioning phase. Any alien seedlings should be removed and disposed of at a registered landfill.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 9: Establishment of Alien Plant Species Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without MODERATE Permanent Study Area Moderate Probable Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 36

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go LOW Long Term Localised Slight May Occur Alternative NEGATIVE

Impact 11: Impacts of Noise on surrounding Faunal Populations

Cause and comment: Decommissioning activities will lead to the increase in ambient noise levels in the project area. This could disturb surrounding faunal populations. No-go (status quo) impact Under the no-go alternative, there will be no increase in noise levels and therefore the no-go alternative will be negligible.

Mitigation Measures:

In addition to the mitigation measures listed for impact 1 and 2, the following must be undertaken: • Ensure machinery and plant is in good working order. The appropriate silencers should be fitted on equipment if required.

Significance Assessment: IMPACT 10: Impacts of Noise on surrounding Faunal Populations Nature Direct & Indirect Type Negative Effect Overall Impact Temporal Likelihood Spatial Scale Severity of Impact Significance Scale Without LOW Short Term Localised Moderate Probable Mitigation NEGATIVE Irreplaceable Mitigation Overall Impact Reversibility Loss Potential Significance With Resource will be Easily LOW Reversible Mitigation lost Achievable NEGATIVE No-Go Not Applicable Alternative

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 37

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

6.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Cumulative impacts are defined as those “that result from the incremental impact, on areas or resources used or directly impacted by the project, from other existing, planned or reasonably defined developments at the time the risks and impact identification process is conducted.”

To assess the cumulative impacts that the BESS and reservoir will have on the terrestrial ecology of the Waaihoek site, it is necessary to assess this at a broader level by looking at other developments in the area such as the WEF itself and the sub-station.

The cumulative impacts associated with the project will include the following:

• Loss of vegetation communities at a regional scale will be exacerbated; • Invasion of alien plant species will be exacerbated possibly to the point of displacing indigenous vegetation. • Habitat fragmentation and disruption of ecosystem function and process will be exacerbated.

The cumulative impact associated with the construction of the BESS and reservoir, which together will have a footprint of less than 3ha, is likely to be of low significance if the infrastructure avoids areas of high sensitivity. To limit the impact, it is important that an Alien Invasive Management and Monitoring Plan is implemented, and that existing roads and powerline cables are used where feasible.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 38

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

7 IMPACT STATEMENT, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 CONCLUSIONS

The project infrastructure will result in the loss of up to 3 ha of natural vegetation which was classified as Least Threatened and of moderate sensitivity.

Eleven ecological impacts were identified for the project site: two were rated as high, six as moderate and three as low (Figure 6-1). If mitigation measures are implemented these impacts will be reduced to one moderate and ten low impacts. The two impacts rated as high relate to the risks associated with the spread of alien invasive plants. Therefore, the development and implementation of the recommended Alien Vegetation Management Plan is an important mitigation tool.

Unmitigated Impacts Mitigated Impacts

0

2 1 3

6 10

High Moderate Low

Figure 7-1: Pie charts summarising the number of high, moderate and low impacts before and after mitigation.

7.2 CONDITIONS OF EMPR, EA AND MONITORING

It is recommended that the following conditions are included in the Final EMPr as well as the conditions of the Environmental Authorisation (EA), if granted:

• All necessary permitting and authorisations must be obtained prior to the commencement of any construction activities; • A suitably qualified ECO must be appointed prior to the commencement of the construction phase; • A comprehensive Search and Rescue for fauna and flora should be conducted prior to vegetation clearance;

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 39

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

• All SCC must be relocated to nearest appropriate habitat; • An Erosion Management Plan must be developed prior to the commencement of construction activities in order to mitigate the unnecessary loss of topsoil and runoff; • An Alien Vegetation Management plan should be compiled (for implementation during the phases that follow the Planning and Design Phase); • A comprehensive Rehabilitation Plan should be compiled and implemented. Only indigenous plant species typical of the local vegetation should be used for rehabilitation purposes.

7.3 ECOLOGICAL STATEMENT AND OPINION OF THE SPECIALIST

It is recommended that the footprint of the proposed development avoids the two seeps identified in the aquatic report. As far as practical possible, rocky outcrops and exposed rock at the edge of the plateau should also be avoided as these areas provide niche habitats for plant and animal species.

Where the destruction of SCC cannot be avoided, plant permits must be obtained, and an in- situ search and rescue program implemented for species that can successfully be relocated. The search and rescue must include both fauna and flora.

Furthermore, the development footprint of the proposed BESS and reservoir must be demarcated to prevent any encroachment of construction or operational activities into surrounding natural areas, particularly the patch of Low Escarpment Mistbelt Forest. Minor location deviations from the proposed works is deemed acceptable but the footprint may not be made larger.

The proposed Waaihoek BESS and reservoir is NOT considered to be fatally flawed.

The no-go option refers to the proposed development not taking place. This option will have a moderately positive outcome for the indigenous vegetation and surrounding natural environment relative to the proposed development, but the benefits associated with the construction of the project will be lost.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 40

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

8 REFERENCE LIST

Coastal & Environmental Services, August 2014: Proposed Waaihoek Wind Energy Facility, Ecological Report, CES, East London

Coastal & Environmental Services, July 2014: Waaihoek Wind Energy Facility, Utrecht, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Wetland Specialist Report, CES, East London.

Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife (2014), Amajuba Biodiversity Sector Plan, V1.0, Unpublished Report of Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, Biodiversity Conservation Planning Division, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, P. O. Box 13053, Cascades, Pietermaritzburg.

Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. (eds) 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

SANBI. 2013. Grasslands Ecosystem Guidelines: landscape interpretation for planners and managers. Compiled by Cadman, M.,de Villiers, C., Lechmere-Oertel, R. and D. McCulloch. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. 139 pages.

Atlas and Red List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. 2014. Edited by Michael F. Bates, William R. Branch, Aaron M. Bauer, Marius Burger, Johan Marais, Graham J. Alexander & Marienne S. de Villiers. SANBI, Pretoria.

BirdLife International. 2018. Sarothrura ayresi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T22692245A130479784. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018- 2.RLTS.T22692245A130479784.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

BirdLife International. 2017. Heteromirafra ruddi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22717153A118917907. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017- 3.RLTS.T22717153A118917907.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. 2016. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa.

FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). FrogMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=FrogMAP on 2020-10-27

FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). ReptileMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=ReptileMAP on 2020-10-27

FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (2020). MammalMAP Virtual Museum. Accessed at http://vmus.adu.org.za/?vm=MammalMAP on 2020-10-27

Hofmeyr, M.D. & Boycott, R.C. 2018. Kinixys natalensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T11004A115685642. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018- 2.RLTS.T11004A115685642.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

iNaturalist, 2020. Utrecht Mammals. Accessed from inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=48468&taxon_id=40151 accessed on 29.10.2020.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 41

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group. 2017. Redunca fulvorufula. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T19391A50193881. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017- 2.RLTS.T19391A50193881.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group. 2013. Strongylopus wageri. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013: e.T58773A18405228. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013- 2.RLTS.T58773A18405228.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group & South African Frog Re-assessment Group (SA- FRoG). 2017. Cacosternum rhythmum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T76317544A76317880. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017- 2.RLTS.T76317544A76317880.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

Maree, S., Visser, J., Bennett, N.C. & Jarvis, J. 2017. Georychus capensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T9077A110019425. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017- 2.RLTS.T9077A110019425.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

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. Pietersen, D., Jansen, R. & Connelly, E. 2019. Smutsia temminckii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019: e.T12765A123585768. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019- 3.RLTS.T12765A123585768.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020. Taylor, P. & Baxter, R. 2019. Otomys laminatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019: e.T15655A22397007. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019- 1.RLTS.T15655A22397007.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

Taylor, A., Cowell, C. & Drouilly, M. 2017. Pelea capreolus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T16484A50192715. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017- 2.RLTS.T16484A50192715.en. Downloaded on 29 October 2020.

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 42

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED FROM THE WAAIHOEK WEF PROJECT AREA.

Table A.1 Plant species observed at the BESS site. Species of Special Concern are species that are protected plant species according to KZN Nature Conservation legislation and the Threatened and Protected Species (TOPS) list. Family Species Common name Threat status Protection status Natal Primrose Least Acanthaceae Thunbergia atriplicifolia Concern Amaryllidaceae Brunsvigia radulosa Candelabra Least * Concern Cyrtanthus tuckii Green-tipped fire Least * lily Concern Scadoxus multiflorus subs Fire-ball lily Least * multiflorus Concern Anacardiaceae Searsia pallens Ribbed Kunibush Least Concern Searsia tomentosa Bicoloured current Least Concern Apocynaceae Raphionacme hirsuta False gentian Least Concern Araliaceae Cussonia paniculata Mountain Cabbage Least Concern Asclepiadaceae Xysmalobium cf Milkbush Least undulatum Concern Asphodelaceae Aloe marlothii Mountain or Flat- Least * flowered aloe Concern Asteraceae Berkheya cf setifera Buffalo tongue Least thistle Concern Gerbera sp (purple) - Unknown Gazania krebsiana Common gazania Least Concern Haplocarpha sp - Unknown Purple asteraceae - Unknown Colchicaceae Colchicum sp - Unknown Commelinaceae Cyanotis speciosa Powder puff Least Concern Ebenaceae Euclea crispa Blue-leaved Guarri Least Concern Euphorbiaceae Acalypha penduncularis - Least Concern Euphorbia pulvinata Pincushion cactus Least Concern Fabaceae Argyrolobium Velvet Yellow bush Least tomentosum Concern Erythrina zeyheri Plough-breaker Least Concern Geraniaceae Pelargonium luridum Stork’s bill Least pelargonium Concern

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 43

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Hyacynthaceae Ledebouria revoluta - Least concern Merwilla plumbea Blue squill Near Threatened Hypoxidaceae Hypoxis cf angustifolia Yellow star Least Concern Hypoxis argentea Small silver star Least Concern Hypoxis multiceps - Least Concern Iridaceae Species 1 - Unknown * Species 2 - Unknown * Moraea elliotii Blue Tulp Least * Concern Lamiaceae Ocimum obovatum Cat’s whiskers Least Concern Rosaceae Leucosidea sericea Cheche bush Least Concern Thymelaeaceae Lasiosiphon caffra Gifbossie Least Concern

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 44

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF AMPHIBIAN SPECIES.

QDS: 2730CB, 2730 CD Family Scientific name Common name Red list category # of Last # of QDSs records recorded Brevicepitidae Breviceps adspersus Bushveld Rain Frog Least Concern 1 1 1999/11/20 Brevicepitidae Breviceps mossambicus Mozambique Rain Frog Least Concern 1 1 1999/11/20 Brevicepitidae Breviceps verrucosus Plaintive Rain Frog Least Concern Bufonidae Schismaderma carens Red Toad Least Concern Bufonidae Sclerophrys capensis Raucous Toad Least Concern 1 1 2001/01/20 Least Concern (IUCN, Bufonidae Sclerophrys gutturalis Guttural Toad 2 5 2001/01/20 2016) Vandikophrynus Bufonidae Least Concern gariepensis Karoo Toad Heleophrynidae Hadromophryne natalensis Natal Ghost Frog Least Concern Least Concern (IUCN ver Hyperoliidae Hyperolius marmoratus Painted Reed Frog 1 1 2001/01/20 3.1, 2013) Hyperoliidae Hyperolius pusillus Water Lily Frog Least Concern Hyperoliidae Hyperolius semidiscus Yellowstriped Reed Frog Least Concern 1 1 2001/01/20 Hyperoliidae Kassina senegalensis Bubbling Kassina Least Concern 1 3 1999/11/20 Hyperoliidae Semnodactylus wealii Rattling Frog Least Concern 1 1 1999/11/20

Phrynobatrachidae Phrynobatrachus natalensis Natal Dwarf Puddle Frog Least Concern Pipidae Xenopus laevis Common Platanna Least Concern 2 5 2001/01/20 Ptychadenidae Ptchadena anchietae Plain Grass Frog Least Concern Ptychadenidae Ptychadena oxyrhynchus Sharp-nosed Frog Least Concern Ptychadenidae Ptychadena porosissima Striped Grass Frog Least Concern 1 1 2001/01/20 Pyxicephalidae Amietia delalandii Delalande's River Frog Least Concern (2017) 2 3 2001/01/20

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 45

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Pyxicephalidae Amietia fuscigula Cape River Frog Least Concern (2017) 2 2 2001/01/20 Pyxicephalidae Amietia poyntoni Poynton's River Frog Least Concern Pyxicephalidae Cacosternum boettgeri Common Caco Least Concern (2013) 1 1 1998/01/26 Pyxicephalidae Cacosternum nanum Bronze Caco Least Concern (2013) 1 1 2001/01/20 Pyxicephalidae Cacosternum parvum Mountain Caco Least Concern Pyxicephalidae Cacosternum rhythmum Rhythmic caco Least Concern Pyxicephalidae Strongylopus fasciatus Striped Stream Frog Least Concern 1 1 Pyxicephalidae Strongylopus grayii Clicking Stream Frog Least Concern 1 1 1999/11/20 Pyxicephalidae Strongylopus wageri Wager's Stream Frog Least Concern Pyxicephalidae Tomopterna cryptotis Tremelo Sand Frog Least Concern 1 1 2001/01/20 Pyxicephalidae Tomopterna natalensis Natal Sand Frog Least Concern 2 3 2001/01/20 Pyxicephalidae Tomopterna tandyi Tandy's Sand Frog Least Concern 2001-01-

20* 23 33 1999-11-

20**

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 46

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

APPENDIX 3: LIST OF REPTILE SPECIES.

QDS: 2730CB, 2730 CD Scientific name Common name Red list category # of # of Last recorded QDSs records Lizards Acanthocercus atricollis Southern Tree Agama Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 1 2013/01/10 Acontias gracilucauda Thin-tailed Legless Skink Least Concern Agama aculeata distanti Distant's Ground Agama Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 1 2013/01/10 Chamaeleo dilepis Common African Flapnecked Chameleon Least Concern Cordylus melanotus Drakensberg Crag Lizard Cordylus vittifer Common Girdled Lizard Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 1 2013/01/10 Gerrhosaurus flavigularis Yellow-throated Plated Lizard Lygodactylus occellatus Spotted Dwarf Gecko Least Concern Nucras lalandii Delalande's Sandveld Lizard Least Concern Pachydactylus maculatus Spotted Gecko Least Concern Pachydactylus vansoni Van Son's Gecko Least Concern Pedioplanis burchelli Burchell's Sand Lizard Least Concern Pseudocordylus melanotus Common Crag Lizard Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 2 2013/01/10 melanotus Tetradactylus africanus Eastern Long-tailed Seps Least Concern Trachylepis homalocephala Red-sided Skink Least Concern Trachylepis punctatissima Speckled Rock Skink Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 2 2013/01/10 Trachylepis capensis Cape Skink Least Concern Trachylepis varia Variable Skink Least Concern Trachylepis striata Striped Skink Least Concern Varanus albigularis Rock Monitor Least Concern

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 47

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Varanus niloticus Water Monitor Least Concern Snakes Afrotyphlops bibronii Bibron's Blind Snake Least Concern Amplorhinus multimaculatus Many-spotted Snake Least Concern Aparallactus capensis Black-headed Centipedeeater Least Concern Atractaspis bibronii Bibron's Burrowing Asp Least Concern Bitis arientans Puff Adder Least Concern Causus rhombeatus Rhombic Night Adder Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 1 2013/10/24 Crotaphopeltis hotamboeia Red-lipped Snake Least Concern Dasypeltis inornata Southern Brown Egg-Eater Least Concern Dasypeltis scabra Rhombic Egg Eater Least Concern Dendroaspis polylepis Blak Mamba Least Concern Dispholidus typus Boomslang Least Concern Duberria lutrix lutrix South African Slug-eater Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 1 1999/11/30 Elapsoidea sundevallii Sundevall’s Garter Snake Least Concern Hemachatus haemachatus Rinkhals Least Concern Homoroselaps dorsalis Striped Harlequin Snake Least Concern Homoroselaps lacteus Spotted Harlequin Snake Least Concern Lamprophis aurora Aurora Snake Least Concern Boaedon capensis Southern Brown House Snake Least Concern Lamprophis fuscus Yellow-bellied Snake Least Concern Lamprophis guttatus Spotted House Snake Least Concern Leptotyphlops conjunctus Cape Thread Snake Least Concern Leptotyphlops scutifrons Peter’s Thread Snake Least Concern Lycodonomorphus inornatus Olive Ground Snake Least Concern Lycodonomorphus laevissimus Dusky-bellied Water Snake Least Concern Lycodonomorphous rufulus Common Brown Water Snake Least Concern Lycophidion capense Cape Wolf Snake Least Concern

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 48

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Philothamnus hoplogaster Green Water Snake Least Concern Philothamnus occidentalis Western Natal Green Snake Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 1 2013/10/24 Philothamnus semivariegatus Spotted Bush Snake Least Concern Prosymna ambigua Least Concern Psammophis crucifer Montane Grass Snake Least Concern Psammophylax rhombeatus Rhombic Skaapsteker Least Concern Pseudaspis cana Mole Snake Least Concern (SARCA 2014) 1 1 1997/10/23 Python natalansis Southern African Python Thelotornis capensis Southern Twig Snake Least Concern Terrapin and Tortoises Pelomedusa galeata South African Helmeted Terrapin Least Concern Pelomedusa subrufa Marsh Terrapin Least Concern Stigmochelys pardalis Leopard Tortoise Least Concern Kinixys natalensis KwaZulu-Natal Hinged-back Tortoise Vulnerable 2013-01-10* 9 11 2013-01-10**

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 49

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

APPENDIX 4: LIST OF MAMMAL SPECIES.

Red list QDS: 2730CB, 2730 CD Scientific name Common name # of # of category Last recorded QDSs records Cetartiodactyla Alcelaphus buselaphus Hartebeest LC Antidorcas marsupialis Springbok LC Connochaetes taurinus Common Wildebeest LC 1 1 2002/12/19 Equus quagga Plains Zebra NT Oreotragus oreotragus Klipspringer LC Ourebia ourebi Oribi LC Pelea capreolus Grey Rhebok NT Phacochoerus africanus Common Warthog LC Philantomba monticola Blue Duiker LC Potamochoerus larvatus Bushpig LC Redunca fulvorufula Mountain Reedbuck EN Sylvicapra grimmia Common Duiker LC Syncerus caffer African Buffalo NT Tragelaphus angasii Nyala LC 1 1 2017/08/24 Tragelaphus oryx Common Eland LC Tragelaphus scriptus Bushbuck LC Carnivorea Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter NT Atilax paludinosus Marsh Mongoose LC Herpertes sanguineus Slender Mongoose LC Atilax paludinosus Water Mongoose LC Ichneimia albicauda White-tailed Mongoose LC Cynictis penicillata Yellow Mongoose LC Canis mesomelas Black-backed Jackal LC Caracal caracal Caracal LC 1 2

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 50

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Felis nigripes Black-footed Cat VU 1 1 2006/05/07 Felis silvestris Wild Cat LC Genetta maculata Large Spotted Genet, LC Hydrictis maculicollis Spotted-necked Otter NT Leptailurus serval Serval NT 1 1 Mellivora capensis Honey Badger LC Panthera pardus Leopard VU 1 13 2012/12/31 Parahyaena brunnea Brown Hyaena NT Poecilogale albinucha African Striped Weasel LC Proteles cristata Aardwolf LC 1 1 1986/09/03 Vulpes chama Cape Fox LC Primate Chlorocebus pygerythrus Vervet Monkey LC Otolemur crassicaudatus Thick-tailed Greater Galago LC Papio ursinus Chacma Baboon LC 2 285 Lagomorha Lepus victoriae African Savanna Hare LC Pronolagus saundersiae Hewitt's Red Rock Hare LC Procavia capensis Rock Hyrax LC Chiroptera Chaerephon pumilus Little Free-tailed Bat LC Eidolon helvum African Straw-coloured Fruit-bat NT Mus musculus House Mouse LC Myosorex varius Forest Shrew LC Myotis welwitschii Welwisch's Bat LC Neoromicia capensis Cape Bat LC Otomops martiensseni Large-eared Free-tailed Bat NT Pipistrellus hesperidus African pipistrelle LC Rhinolophus darlingi Darling's Horseshoe Bat LC Rhinolophus simulator Bushveld Horseshoe Bat LC Rhinolophus swinnyi Swinny's Horseshoe Bat LC Rodentia

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 51

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Dendromus melanotis Grey Climbing Mouse LC Gerbilliscus brantsii Highveld Gerbil LC Hystrix africaeaustralis Cape Porcupine LC Lemniscomys rosalia Single Striped Grass Mouse LC Mastomys natalensis Natal Mastomys LC 1 1 1999/11/14 Mus minutoides African Pygmy Mouse LC Otomys laminatus Laminate Vlei Rat NT Otomys sloggetti Sloggett's Vlei Rat LC Rhabdomys dilectus Mesic Four-striped Grass Rat LC Saccostomus campestris South African Pouched Mouse LC Steatomys pratensis Fat Mouse LC Thryonomys swinderianus Greater Cane Rat LC Eulipotyphla Crocidura maquassiensis Makwassie musk shrew LC Crocidura mariquensis Swomp musk shrew LC Suncus varilla Lesser Dwarf Shrew LC

Perissodactyla Ceratotherium simum White Rhino NT Diceros bicornis Black Rhino CR

Pholidota Smutsia temminckii Temminck's Pangolin VU Tubilidentata Orycteropus afer Aardvark LC Hyracoidea Procavia capensis Rock Hyrax LC Total 10 306 1999-11-14*

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 52

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

APPENDIX 5: LIST OF BIRD SPECIES.

Consolidated list of species recorded at the Waaihoek sites Facility (Rooyen & Froneman, 2014)

Priority Species Common Name Scientific Name Turbine Control VP Incidentals African Harrier-Hawk Polyboroides typus 1 1 1 Amur Falcon Falco amurensis 1 1 1 1 Black Stork Ciconia nigra 1 Black-shouldered Kite Elanus caeruleus 1 1 1 Black-winged Lapwing Vanellus melanopterus 1 1 1 1 Blue Crane Anthropoides paradiseus 1 1 1 1 Buff-streaked Chat Oenanthe bifasciata 1 1 Denham's Bustard Neotis denhami 1 1 1 1 Grey Crowned Crane Balearica regulorum 1 1 1 Grey-winged Francolin Scleroptila africanus 1 Jackal Buzzard Buteo rufofuscus 1 1 1 1 Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus 1 1 Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus 1 Rufous-chested Sparrowhawk Accipiter rufiventris 1 1 Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius 1 1 1 1 Southern Bald Ibis Geronticus calvus 1 1 1 1 Steppe Buzzard Buteo vulpinus 1 1 1 1 White Stork Ciconia ciconia 1 1 1 1 White-bellied Korhaan Eupodotis senegalensis 1 1 1 1 Black Sparrowhawk Accipiter melanoleucus 1 Red-footed Falcon Falco vespertinus 1 Southern Ground-hornbill Bucorvus leadbeateri 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 53

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Spotted Eagle-Owl Bubo africanus 1 Total: 17 13 13 19

Non-Priority Species Common Name Scientific Name Turbine Control African Black Duck Anas sparsa 1 African Hoopoe Upupa africana 1 1 African Pipit Anthus cinnamomeus 1 1 African Quailfinch Ortygospiza atricollis 1 1 African Stonechat Saxicola torquatus 1 1 Anteating Chat Myrmecocichla formicivora 1 1 Banded Martin Riparia cincta 1 1 Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica 1 1 Black-collared Barbet Lybius torquatus 1 Black-headed Heron Ardea melanocephala 1 Black-headed Oriole Oriolus larvatus 1 1 Bokmakierie Telophorus zeylonus 1 1 Cape Bunting Emberiza capensis 1 Cape Canary Serinus canicollis 1 1 Cape Crow Corvus capensis 1 1 Cape Grassbird Sphenoeacus afer 1 Cape Longclaw Macronyx capensis 1 1 Cape Robin-Chat Cossypha caffra 1 Cape Turtle-Dove Streptopelia capicola 1 1 Cape Wagtail Motacilla capensis 1 1 Cape Weaver Ploceus capensis 1 Cape White-eye Zosterops capensis 1 Cloud Cisticola Cisticola textrix 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 54

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Common Fiscal Lanius collaris 1 Common Quail Coturnix coturnix 1 Crowned Lapwing Vanellus coronatus 1 Dark-capped Bulbul Pycnonotus tricolor 1 Drakensberg Prinia Prinia hypoxantha 1 1 Eastern Long-billed Lark Certhilauda semitorquata 1 Egyptian Goose Alopochen aegyptiaca 1 1 Fork-tailed Drongo Dicrurus adsimilis 1 1 Greater Honeyguide Indicator indicator 1 Greater Striped Swallow Hirundo cucullata 1 1 Hadeda Ibis Bostrychia hagedash 1 1 Levaillant's Cisticola Cisticola tinniens 1 Long-billed Pipit Anthus similis 1 1 Long-tailed Widowbird Euplectes progne 1 1 Malachite Sunbird Nectarinia famosa 1 Mountain Wheatear Oenanthe monticola 1 Pale-crowned Cisticola Cisticola cinnamomeus 1 1 Pied Crow Corvus albus 1 Pied Starling Spreo bicolor 1 Plain-backed Pipit Anthus leucophrys 1 1 Red-capped Lark Calandrella cinerea 1 Red-chested Cuckoo Cuculus solitarius 1 Red-eyed Dove Streptopelia semitorquata 1 Red-faced Mousebird Urocolius indicus 1 Red-throated Wryneck Jynx ruficollis 1 Rock Kestrel Falco rupicolus 1 Rock Martin Hirundo fuligula 1 1 Rufous-naped Lark Mirafra africana 1 1 South African Cliff-Swallow Hirundo spilodera 1

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 55

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

Southern Boubou Laniarius ferrugineus 1 1 Southern Double-collared Sunbird Cinnyris chalybeus 1 Speckled Pigeon Columba guinea 1 Spike-heeled Lark Chersomanes albofasciata 1 1 Spur-winged Goose Plectropterus gambensis Streaky-headed Seedeater Crithagra gularis 1 Swainson's Spurfowl Pternistis swainsonii 1 Temminck's Courser Cursorius temminckii 1 Wailing Cisticola Cisticola lais 1 Wing-snapping Cisticola Cisticola ayresii 1 1 Yellow-billed Duck Anas undulata 1 Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis 1 1 Total: 56 36 Grand Total 73 49

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 56

Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report

APPENDIX 6: SPECIALIST CVS AND DECLARATIONS

CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services Mainstream Renewable Power 57

TARRYN MARTIN Curriculum Vitae

CONTACT DETAILS

Name of Company CES – Environmental and Social Advisory Services Designation Cape Town Branch Profession Principal Environmental Consultant, Botanical Specialist and Branch Manager

Years with firm Eight (8) years E-mail [email protected] Office number +27 (0)21 045 0900

Nationality South African Professional Body SACNASP: South African Council for Natural Scientific Profession: Professional Natural Scientist (400018/14) SAAB: Member of the South African Association of Botanists IAIASa: Member of the International Association for Impact Assessments South Africa Member of Golden Key International Honour Society

Key areas of expertise • Biodiversity Surveys and Impact Assessments • Environmental Impact Assessments • Critical Habitat Assessments • Biodiversity Management and Monitoring Plans

PROFILE

Ms Tarryn Martin

Tarryn holds a BSc (Botany and Zoology), a BSc (Hons) in African Vertebrate Biodiversity and an MSc with distinction in Botany from Rhodes University. Tarryn’s Master’s thesis examined the impact of fire on the recovery of C3 and C4 Panicoid and non-Panicoid grasses within the context of climate change for which she won the Junior Captain Scott-Medal (Plant Science) for producing the top MSc of 2010 from the South African Academy of Science and Art as well as an Award for Outstanding Academic Achievement in Range and Forage Science from the Grassland Society of Southern Africa. Tarryn specialises in conducting vegetation assessments in South Africa, Mozambique and other African countries. These assessments are often to IFC standards, specifically Performance Standard 6. Tarryn has also undertaken critical habitat assessments for areas requiring biodiversity offsets. Other botanical related work includes, developing biodiversity management and monitoring plans to IFC standards and alien management plans.

Coastal & Environmental Services 2020 Page 1 of 6

TARRYN MARTIN Curriculum Vitae

EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE Environmental Consultant and Botanical Specialist, EOH Coastal and Environmental Services May 2012-Present • Botanical and ecological assessments for local and international EIAs in Southern Africa • Identifying and mapping vegetation communities and sensitive areas • Designing and implementing biodiversity management and monitoring plans • Designing rehabilitation and biodiversity offset plans • Designing alien management plans • Critical Habitat Assessments • Large ESIA studies • Managing budgets • Cape Town branch manager • Coordinating specialists and site visits Accounts Manager, Green Route DMC October 2011- January 2012 • Project and staff co-ordination • Managing large budgets for incentive and conference groups travelling to southern Africa • Creating tailor-made programs for clients • Negotiating rates with vendors and assisting with the ground management of inbound groups to ensure client satisfaction. Camp Administrator and Project Co-ordinator, Windsor Mountain International Summer Camp, USA April 2011 - September 2012 • Co-ordinated staff and camper travel arrangements • Coordinated main camp events • Assisted with marketing the camp to prospective families. Freelance Project Manager, Green Route DMC November 2010 - April 2011 • Project and staff co-ordination • Managing large budgets for incentive and conference groups travelling to southern Africa • Creating tailor-made programs for clients • Negotiating rates with vendors and assisting with the ground management of inbound groups to ensure client satisfaction.

Camp Counselor, Windsor Mountain Summer Camp, USA June 2010 - October 2010

Coastal & Environmental Services 2020 Page 2 of 6

TARRYN MARTIN Curriculum Vitae

NERC Research Assistant, Botany Department, Rhodes University, Grahamstown in collaboration with Sheffield University, Sheffield, England April 2009 - May 2010 • Set up and maintained experiments within a common garden plot experiment • collected, collated and entered data • Assisted with the analysis of the data and writing of journal articles Head Demonstrator, Botany Department, Rhodes University March 2007 - October 2008 Operations Assistant, Green Route DMC September 2005 - February 2007 • Project and staff co-ordination • Managing large budgets for incentive and conference groups travelling to southern Africa • Creating tailor-made programs for clients • Negotiating rates with vendors and assisting with the ground management of inbound groups to ensure client satisfaction

PUBLICATIONS 1. Ripley, B.; Visser, V.; Christin, PA.; Archibald, S.; Martin, T and Osborne, C. Fire ecology of C3 and C4 grasses depends on evolutionary history and frequency of burning but not photosynthetic type. Ecology. 96 (10): 2679-2691. 2015 2. Taylor, S.; Ripley, B.S.; Martin, T.; De Wet, L-A.; Woodward, F.I.; Osborne, C.P. Physiological advantages of C4 grasses in the field: a comparative experiment demonstrating the importance of drought. Global Change Biology. 20 (6): 1992-2003. 2014 3. Ripley, B; Donald, G; Osborne, C; Abraham, T and Martin, T. Experimental investigation of fire ecology in the C3 and C4 subspecies of Alloteropsis semialata. Journal of Ecology. 98 (5): 1196 - 1203. 2010 4. South African Association of Botanists (SAAB) conference, Grahamstown. Title: Responses of C3 and C4 Panicoid and non- Panicoid grasses to fire. January 2010 5. South African Association of Botanists (SAAB) conference, Drakensberg. Title: Photosynthetic and Evolutionary determinants of the response of selected C3 and C4 (NADP-ME) grasses to fire. January 2008

COURSES 1. Rhodes University and CES, Grahamstown EIA Short Course 2012 2. Fynbos identification course, Kirstenbosch, 2015.

Coastal & Environmental Services 2020 Page 3 of 6

TARRYN MARTIN Curriculum Vitae

3. Photography Short Course, Cape Town School of Photography, 2015. 4. Using Organized Reasoning to Improve Environmental Impact Assessment, 2018, International IAIA conference, Durban

CONSULTING International Projects EXPERIENCE 1. 2020: Critical Habitat Assessment for a graphite mine in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique. This assessment was to IFC standards. 2. 2020: Analysed the botanical dataset for Lurio Green Resources and provided comment on the findings and gaps. 3. 2020: Biodiversity Management Plan and Monitoring Plan for mine at Pilivilli in Nampula Province, Mozambique. This assessment was to IFC standards. 4. 2019: Botanical Assessment for a cocoa plantation, Tanzania. This assessment was to IFC standards. 5. 2019: Critical Habitat Assessment, Biodiversity Management Plan and Ecosystem Services Assessment for JCM Solar Farm in Cameroon. This assessment was to IFC standards. 6. 2019: Undertook the Kenmare Road and Infrastructure Botanical Baseline Survey and Impact Assessment for an infrastructure corridor that will link the existing mine at Moma to the new proposed mine at Pillivilli in Nampula Province, Mozambique. This assessment was to IFC standards. 7. 2012 – Present: Kenmare Terrestrial Monitoring Program Project Manager and Specialist Survey, Nampula Province, Mozambique. 8. 2018: Conducted a field survey and wrote a botanical report to IFC standards for the proposed Balama Graphite Mine Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) in Cabo Delgado Province, Mozambique. 9. 2018: Co-authored the critical habitat assessment chapter for the proposed Kenmare Pilivilli Heavy Minerals Mine. 10. 2018: Authored the Conservation Efforts chapter for the Kenmare Pilivilli Heavy Minerals Mine. 11. 2017-2018: Co-authored and analysed data for the Kenmare Bioregional Survey of Icuria dunensis (species trigger for critical habitat) in Nampula Province, Mozambique. This was for a mining project that needed to be IFC compliant. 12. 2017: Conducted a field survey and wrote a botanical report to IFC standards for the proposed Ancuabe Graphite Mine Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) in Cabo Delgado Province, Mozambique. 13. 2017-2018: Managed the Suni Resources Montepuez Graphite Mine Environmental Impact Assessment. This included the management of ten specialists, the co-ordination of their field surveys, regular client liaison and the writing of the Environmental Impact Assessment Report which summarised the specialists findings, assessed the impacts of the proposed mine on the environment and provided mitigation measures to reduce the impact.

Coastal & Environmental Services 2020 Page 4 of 6

TARRYN MARTIN Curriculum Vitae

I was also the lead botanist for this baseline survey and impact assessment and undertook the required field work and analysed the data and wrote the report. 14. 2017: Undertook the botanical baseline survey and impact assessment for the proposed Kenmare Pilivili Heavy Mineral Mine in Nampula Province, Mozambique. This was to IFC Standards. 15. 2017: Ecological Survey for the Megaruma Mining Limitada Ruby Mine Exploration License, Cabo Delgado, Mozambique. 16. 2016: Undertook the botanical baseline survey and impact assessment, wrote an alien invasive management plan and co- authored the biodeiveristy monitoring plan for this farm. The project was located in Zambezia Province, Mozambique. 17. 2015-2016: Conducted the Triton Minerals Nicanda Hills Graphite Mine Botanical Survey and Impact Assessment. Was also the project manager and specialist co-ordinator for this project. The project was located in Cabo Delgado Province, Mozambique. 18. 2015: Was part of the team that undertook a Critical Habitat Assessment for the Nhangonzo Coastal Stream site at Inhassora in Mozambique that Sasol intend to establish drill pads at. This project needed to meet the IFC standards. 19. 2014: Lurio Green Resources Wood Chip Mill and Medium Density Fibre-board Plant, Project Manager and Ecological Specialist, Nampula Province, Mozambique. 2014-2015. 20. 2013-2014: LHDA Botanical Survey, Baseline and Impact assessment, Lesotho. 21. 2014: Biotherm Solar Voltaic Ecological Assessment, Zambia. 22. 2013-2014: Lurio Green Resources Plantation Botanical Assessment, Vegetation and Sensitivity Mapping, Specialist Co-ordination, Nampula Province, Mozambique. 23. 2013: Syrah Resources Botanical Baseline Survey and Ecological Assessment., Cabo Delgado Mozambique. 24. 2013-2014: Baobab Mining Ecological Baseline Survey and Impact Assessment, Tete, Mozambique.

South African Projects 25. 2019: Ecological Assessment for a wind farm EIA, Kleinzee, Northern Cape 26. 2019: Ecological Assessment for construction of satellite antennae, Matjiesfontein, Western Cape 27. 2019: Ecological Assessment for two housing developments in Zeerust, North West Province 28. 2019: Botanical Assessment in Retreat, Cape Town for the DRDLR land claim. 29. 2019: Cape Agulhas Municipality Botanical Assessment for the expansion of industrial zone, Western Cape, South Africa, 2019. 30. 2018: Ecological Assessment for the construction of a farm dam in Greyton, Western Cape. 31. 2018: Conducted the Ecological Survey for a housing development in Noordhoek, Cape Town

Coastal & Environmental Services 2020 Page 5 of 6

TARRYN MARTIN Curriculum Vitae

32. 2018: Conducted the field survey and developed an alien invasive management plan for the Swartland Municipality, Western Cape. 33. 2017: Undertook the field survey and co-authored a coastal dune study that assesses the impacts associated with the proposed rezoning and subdivision of Farm Bookram No. 30 to develop a resort. 34. 2017: Project managed and co-authored a risk assessment for the use of Marram Grass to stabilise dunes in the City of Cape Town. 35. 2015-2016: iGas Saldanha to Ankerlig Biodiversity Assessment Project Manager, Saldanha. 36. 2015: Innowind Ukomoleza Wind Energy Facility Alien Invasive Management Plan, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. 37. 2015: Savannah Nxuba Wind Energy Facility Powerline Ecological Assessment, ground truthing and permit applications, Eastern Cape South Africa. 38. 2014: Cob Bay botanical groundtruthing assessment, Eastern Cape, South Africa. 39. 2013-2016: Dassiesridge Wind Energy Facility Project Manager, Eastern Cape, South Africa. 40. 2013: Harvestvale botanical groundtruthing assessment, Eastern Cape, South Africa. 41. 2012: Tsitsikamma Wind Energy Facility Community Power Line Ecological Assessment, Eastern Cape, South Africa. 42. 2012: Golden Valley Wind Energy Facility Power Line Ecological Assessment, Eastern Cape, South Africa. 43. 2012: Middleton Wind Energy Facility Ecological Assessment and Project Management, Eastern Cape, South Africa. 44. 2012: Mossel Bay Power Line Ecological Assessment, Western Cape, South Africa. 45. 2012: Groundtruthing the turbine sites for the Waainek Wind Energy Facility, Eastern Cape, South Africa. 46. 2012: Toliara Mineral Sands Rehabilitation and Offset Strategy Report, Madagascar.

CERTIFICATION

I, the undersigned, certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, this CV correctly describes me, my qualifications, and my experience. I understand that any wilful misstatement described herein may lead to my disqualification or dismissal, if engaged.

Tarryn Martin Date: 9 November 2020

Coastal & Environmental Services 2020 Page 6 of 6

Ms Amber Jackson Curriculum Vitae

CONTACT DETAILS

Name of Company CES – Environmental and Social Advisory Services Designation Cape Town Branch Position Principal Environmental Consultant/ Faunal Specialist Years with firm Since September 2011 E-mail [email protected] Office number +27 (0)21 045 0900 Nationality South African Professional Body SACNASP: South African Council for Natural Scientific Profession: Professional Natural Scientist (100125/12) International Association of Impact Assessment (IAIAsa) (5812) Herpetological Association of Southern Africa

Key areas of expertise ➢ Environmental and Social Risk Management ➢ Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessments ➢ Faunal Impact Assessments

PROFILE

Ms Amber Jackson

Amber holds a Masters in Environmental Management from the University of Cape Town and has a background in both Social and Ecological work. Her undergraduate degrees focused on Ecology, Conservation and Environment with particular reference to landscape effects on Herpetofauna, while her masters focused on the environmental management of social and ecological systems. With a dissertation in food security that investigated the complex food system of informal and formal distribution markets. At CES, Amber has been responsible for the management of projects and specialist teams, the preparation and monitoring of project budgets in excess of $500 000. She has managed Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessments for projects in the renewable, housing, agri-forestry and mining sectors in Mozambique and South Africa to national and international lenders standards including the AfDB, EIB, FSC and IFC. Amber specializes in faunal assessments and has conducted a number of these in the both South Africa and Mozambique to international standards, the majority were assisted by and to Prof Bill Branch. She has recently concluded an Environmental and Social Rik management course with the IFC held in Johannesburg over 2018.

Page 1 of 4

AMBER JACKSON Curriculum Vitae

EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE Environmental Consultant, CES 2011 – Present • Project Management, including budgets, deliverables and timelines. • Environmental Impact Assessments and Basic Assessments project • Environmental Control Officer • Faunal Impact Assessment • Public/client/authority liaison • Mentoring and training of junior staff

ACADEMIC • 2011 M. Phil Environmental Management (University of Cape Town) QUALIFICATIONS • 2008BSc (Hons) Ecology, Environment and Conservation (University of the Witwatersrand) • 2007BSc ‘Ecology, Environment and Conservation’ and Zoology (WITS)

CONTINUING Herpetological Association of Southern Africa Conference- Cape St Frances PROFESSIONAL September 2019 DEVELOPMENT International Finance Corporation Environmental and Social Risk Management (ESRM) Program January – November 2018 IAIA WC EMP Implementation Workshop 27 February 2018 IAIAsa National Annual Conference Goudini Spa, Rawsonville. August 2017 Biodiversity & Business Indaba, NBBN Theme: Moving Forward Together (Partnerships & Collaborations) April 2017 Snake Awareness, Identification and Handling course, Cape Reptile Institute (CRI) November 2016 Coaching Skills programme, Kim Coach November 2016 Western Cape Biodiversity Information Event, IAIAsa Theme: Biodiversity offsets & the launch of a Biodiversity Information Tool May 2016 Photography Short Course Cape Town School of Photography, 2015. Mainstreaming Biodiversity into Business: WHAT, WHY, WHEN and HOW Hosted by Dr Marie Parramon Gurney on behalf of the NBBN at the Rhodes Business School, June 2014 IAIAsa National Annual Conference Thaba’Nchu Sun, Bloemfontein September 2013 St Johns Life first aid course July 2012

Page 2 of 4

AMBER JACKSON Curriculum Vitae

CONSULTING EXPERIENCE Environmental and Social Risk Assessment and Management: • Crooks Brothers Post EIA Work- Environmental and Social EMPr, Policies, E&S Management Plans and Monitoring Programmes • Blouberg Development Initiative- E&S Risk Assessment • Port St Johns Second Beach Coastal Infrastructure Project - E&S Risk Assessment • Bankable Feasibility Study of Simandou Infrastructure Project – Port and Railway Summary of critical habitat, biodiversity offset plan and monitoring and evaluation plan.

Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) to Lender Standards: • Triton Ancuabe Graphite Mine (ESHIA), Mozambique. IFC Standards. • Lurio Green Resources Forestry Projects ESIA project upgrade to Lender standards including IFC, EIB, FSC and AfDB. • Niassa Green Resources Forestry Projects ESIA to Lender standards including IFC, EIB, FSC and AfDB. • Green Resources Woodchip and MDF plant (EPDA).

Faunal Impact Assessments: • Kenmare Faunal Biodiversity Management Plan, Mozambique. • Kenmare Faunal Monitoring Pogramme (year 1)- Baseline, Mozambique. • Kenmare addendum ESIA Faunal Impact Assessment, Mozambique. • Kenmare infrastructure corridor ESIA Faunal Impact Assessment, Mozambique. • Olam Cocoa Plantation Faunal Impact Assessment, Tanzania. • Boulders Powerline BA Faunal desktop impact assessment, WC, SA. • JCM Solar Voltaic project Faunal desktop critical habitat assessment, Cameroon. • Ramotshere housing development BA Faunal desktop impact assessment, NW, SA. • Cape Agulhas Municipality Industrial development faunal impact assessment, WC, SA. • SANSA Solar PV BA Faunal desktop impact assessment, WC, SA. • Wisson Coal to Urea Faunal desktop assessment, Mpumalanga. • Assessment Boschendal Estate Faunal Opportunities and Constraints, WC, SA. • Ganspan-Pan Wetland Reserve Recreational and Tourist Development Avifaunal Impact Assessment, NC, SA. • Suni Resources Balama Graphite Mine Project (ESIA), Mozambique. • City of Johannesburg Municipal Reserve Proclamation for Linksfield Ridge and Northcliff Hill, South Africa. • Battery Minerals Montepuez Graphite Mine Project (ESIA), Mozambique. • Triton Minerals Nicanda Hills Graphite Mine Project (ESIA), Mozambique. • Sasol Biodiversity Assessment • Augrabies falls hydro-electric project Hydro-SA (ESIA) • Lesotho Highlands Water Project (ESIA), Lesotho. • Lurio Green Resources Forestry Projects (ESIA), Mozambique. • Malawi Monazite mine Projects (ESIA) EMP ecological management contribution

Page 3 of 4

AMBER JACKSON Curriculum Vitae

Coastal Development: • Port St Johns Second Beach Coastal Infrastructure Project (EIA), South Africa. • PGS Seismic Project (ESIA), Mozambique. • Woodbridge Island Revetment checklist.

Renewable Energy: • G7 Brandvalley Wind Energy Project (EIA) • G7 Rietkloof Wind Energy Project (EIA) • G7 Brandvalley Powerlines (BA) • G7 Rietkloof Powerlines (BA) • Boschendal wine estate Hydro-electric schemes (BA, 24G and WULA) • Mossel Bay Wind Energy Project (EIA) • Mossel Bay Powerline (BA) 132kV interconnection • Inyanda Farm Wind Energy (EIA) • Middleton Wind Energy (EIA) • Peddie Wind Energy (EIA) • Cookhouse Wind Energy Project (EIA) • Haverfontein Wind Energy Project (EIA) • Plan 8 Wind Energy Project (EIA) • Brakkefontein Wind Energy Project (EIA) • Grassridge Wind Energy Project (EIA) (Coega) • St Lucia Wind Energy Project (EIA)

Estate Projects: • Belmont Valley Golf Course and Makana Residential Estate (EIA) • Belton Farm Eco Estate (BA). • Ramotshere housing development (BA).

Palm Oil Projects: • Liberia Palm bay & Butow (ESIA)

Construction audits and Environmental Control Officer (Construction): • ACSA ECO CT (Lead ECO) • Enel Paleisheuwel Solar farm (Lead ECO) • NRA Caledon road upgrade ECO • Solar Capital DeAar Solar farm annual audits • Eskom Pinotage substation WUL offset compliance

CERTIFICATION

I, the undersigned, certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, this CV correctly describes me, my qualifications, and my experience. I understand that any wilful misstatement described herein may lead to my disqualification or dismissal, if engaged.

AMBER LEAH JACKSON 02 March 2020

Page 4 of 4