TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY COMPLIANCE REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED DE AAR 2 SOUTH WEF ON-SITE SUBSTATION, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM (BESS) AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE, NEAR DE AAR IN THE NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE.
For
Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd
July 2020
Prepared By:
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Limited
Office 607 Cube Workspace Icon Building Cnr Long Street and Hans Strijdom Avenue Cape Town 8001
T +27 (0) 21 412 1529 l E [email protected] W www.arcusconsulting.co.za
Registered in South Africa No. 2015/416206/07
Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 1.1 Background ...... 3 1.2 Scope of Study ...... 3 1.3 Assumptions and Limitations ...... 4
2 METHODOLOGY ...... 4 2.1 Desk-top Study ...... 4 2.2 Site Visit ...... 5
3 RESULTS AND DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...... 5 3.1 Vegetation ...... 5 3.2 Biodiversity Conservation ...... 6 3.3 Biodiversity Planning ...... 6 3.4 Habitats ...... 6 3.5 Plant Species ...... 7 3.6 Vertebrate Species ...... 8 3.6.1 Mammal Species ...... 8 3.6.2 Amphibian Species ...... 8 3.6.3 Reptiles Species ...... 9 3.6.4 Bird Species ...... 9 3.7 Invertebrate Species ...... 10 3.8 Ecosystems ...... 10
4 SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT ...... 11
5 MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 12 5.1 Construction Phase ...... 12 5.1.1 Habitat Destruction and Impacts on Vegetation ...... 12 5.1.2 Impacts on Fauna ...... 12 5.2 Operational Phase ...... 13 5.2.1 Habitat Degradation ...... 13 5.2.2 Impacts on Fauna ...... 13
6 CONCLUSION ...... 14
APPENDICES ...... 15
APPENDIX I: POTENTIAL PLANT SPECIES ON THE PROJECT SITE ...... 15
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page i Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
APPENDIX II: POTENTIAL PROTECTED PLANT SPECIES ON THE PROJECT SITE ...... 19
APPENDIX III: MAMMAL SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE ...... 20
APPENDIX IV: AMPHIBIAN SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE ...... 21
APPENDIX V: REPTILE SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE ...... 22
APPENDIX VI: SABAP2 BIRD SPECIES LIST ...... 22
APPENDIX VII: INVERTEBRATE SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE ...... 25
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page ii Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd (‘Mulilo’) are seeking authorisation for the proposed development of a substation of up to 400 kV and the clearance of <20 hectares (ha) of indigenous vegetation for the construction of the substation, a Battery Energy Storage System (‘BESS’) and ancillary infrastructure near the town of De Aar in the Northern Cape Province. Approximately 8.6 ha of land will be cleared for the proposed development of the on-site substation, BESS and ancillary infrastructure. The substation facility will cover an area of approximately 1.4 ha (approximately 140 m X 100 m) on the same proposed development site as the BESS. The substation is comprised partly of a control room, earthing mats and earthing rods, switching gear, step-up transformers and protection equipment. The substation will have a capacity up to 400 kV, and will include 3 feeder bays and controlled access. Ancillary infrastructure coupled with the on-site substation includes: Internal roads and access roads; Welfare facilities: ablutions, maintenance rooms, security hut etc.; Stormwater infrastructure; Temporary construction areas; and Perimeter fencing. As far as possible, existing gravel access roads will be utilised and where this is not possible, road will be constructed to run in a 2-way direction, approximately 4 to 6 m wide. It is assumed that the same access roads as approved in the DA2S WEF will be utilised for this project. The development site will have one (1) security controlled entry and exit point. The battery technology being considered for the BESS includes Solid-State, Lithium Ion (Li-Ion) batteries. Battery Modules will be housed in containers (similar to shipping containers), and these containers will be delivered pre-assembled. The containers will have approximate dimension ranges of; height 2 m to 5 m, width 1.5 m to 3 m, length 7 m to 20 m. The containers are raised slightly off the ground and may be stacked vertically to a maximum height of 10m. Mulilo anticipate the placement of approximately 450 containers within the remaining 7.2 ha of the proposed development site. Ancillary (or associated) infrastructure for the BESS will include (but not limited to): A battery room; Inverters; Switch gear room; and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) equipment. The objectives of this study were to identify and assess the potential impacts of the proposed development on the ecology and terrestrial biodiversity in the area and to provide recommended mitigation measures for those impacts. Figure 1 (attached) indicates the location of the proposed development footprint associated with the current assessment displayed with contextual features and relevant grid squares used in database queries.
1.2 Scope of Study The scope of the study included the following activities: A desktop study and site screening to broadly describe and characterise the project site in terms of: Vegetation and habitat types; National conservation status of major vegetation types; Red Data (threatened or endangered) species of flora and fauna; and Species of flora and fauna offered legislative protection. A site walk-through and ecological survey to describe the project site at finer detail in terms of:
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 3 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
The status of the vegetation and habitat types; and Potential impacts on biodiversity, habitats, processes and ecosystem functioning. The results of the above were used to identify and assess the potential impacts of the development on the flora, fauna and ecology of the area and provide mitigation measures and recommendations to minimise the identified impacts.
1.3 Assumptions and Limitations The site was only visited once and therefore seasonal variation of biodiversity on the site was not observed. The conditions at the time of the site visit were however excellent as it followed a period of good rainfall in the area. This maximised the chance of detecting many floral and faunal species that might otherwise be dormant or not flowering and given the small size and limited extent of the project area it is unlikely that any significant features (e.g. seasonal wetlands) present on the project site were not observed during the site visit. Therefore the duration and timing of the site visit is not considered to be a major limitation to the results of the assessment. The resolution and reliability of distribution records and available databases is largely dependent on the sampling effort conducted in the area. Private property is often poorly sampled and therefore database queries may not adequately represent the actual flora and fauna present on the site. To reduce the effect of these limitations the database search was expanded beyond the immediate project site to cover a larger area with similar vegetation and habitat types. This complies with the precautionary approach prescribed the National Environmental Management Act, Act No. 107 of 1998 (NEMA).
2 METHODOLOGY Various databases of distribution records were consulted to determine the species of flora and fauna that have a geographical distribution that overlaps with the project site. In addition to the desk-top study a site walkthrough was conducted during summer on 11 February 2020, given the relatively small area identified for development this time was considered sufficient by the specialist to assess the sensitivity of the site. Notable species were considered to be those listed by conservation authorities as being on a ‘Red List’ and at risk of extinction and those listed by National or Regional legislation as being protected. Red List plant species were obtained from the SANBI1 website, it must be noted however that the conservation status listed by SANBI considers only the populations of species within South Africa’s geopolitical borders and does not take into account the global population size for non- endemic species. The regional or national assessment of a species may therefore differ to the global status on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List. National and regional legislation was evaluated to determine which species that may occur on site are protected species. Regional threat status was obtained for mammals2, reptiles3, frogs4, dragonflies5 and butterflies6. The IUCN7 threat status was used for species where no regional assessment was available.
2.1 Desk-top Study The National Web Based Screening Tool was used to generate the potential environmental sensitivity of the site. The outputs were compared with satellite imagery and GIS maps of the project site. Broad vegetation types were mapped using the updated National Vegetation Map 2018 (NVM 2018) database
1 http://redlist.sanbi.org accessed January 20 2020. 2 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. 3 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. 4 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. 5 Samways, M.J. & Simaika, J.P. 2016. Manual of Freshwater Assessment for South Africa: Dragonfly Biotic Index. Suricata 2. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. 6 Mecenero S, Ball JB, Edge DA, Hamer ML, Hening GA, Krüger M, Pringle EL, Terblanche RF & Williams MC (eds). 2013. Conservation assessment of butterflies of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland: Red List and atlas. Saftronics (Pty) Ltd., Johannesburg and Animal Demography Unit, Cape Town. 7 http://iucnredlist.org accessed 24 November 2019. Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 4 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
and the vegetation descriptions were obtained from Mucina & Rutherford (2006)8. A list of plant species previously recorded in the wider area were obtained from the Database of Southern Africa (BODATSA) database on the SANBI website9. An area of roughly 50 km around the project site (centred on - 30.655040, 24.169673) was included in the database query for potential species of concern. Lists of faunal species were collated from multiple databases and sources including the various atlassing projects of the Virtual Museum10 and the GBIF11 network. Road mortality records were obtained from the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT) Wildlife and Roads Project. Bird species data was obtained from: Southern African Bird Atlas Project 2 (SABAP2) obtained from the Avian Demography Unit of the University of Cape Town12. Co-ordinated Avifaunal Road Count (CAR) project13; Co-ordinated Water- bird Count (CWAC) project14; The Important Bird Areas of southern Africa (IBA) project15 and The Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland16. These species lists (Appendix I – VIII) were used to highlight any habitats or taxa that may be particularly sensitive to impacts from the development and indicate any features that could occur on the project site which may require increased attention during the site visit. Freshwater and wetland information was extracted from the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas assessment17. Important catchments and protected expansion areas were extracted from the National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy 2008 (NPAES). Critical Biodiversity Areas were extracted from the SANBI BGIS Database18. These data incorporate biodiversity features (both pattern and process, and covering terrestrial and inland aquatic realms), their condition, current Protected Areas and Conservation Areas, and opportunities and constraints for effective conservation.
2.2 Site Visit The objective of the site visit was to assess the ecological sensitivity of the receiving environment and to verify the site sensitivity identified by the desktop study. Important habitats and potential species present were assessed through a site walk-through. The site visit was conducted on 11 February 2020 and the timing of the site visit coincided with the wet-season to increase the probability of temporary habitats such as seasonal vleis and wetlands being identified. The site visit followed a significant rainfall event which allowed for the assessment of these features.
3 RESULTS AND DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Vegetation Two broad vegetation types8 occur in the broader area, namely Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland (Gh4) and Northern Upper Karoo (NKu3, Figure 2 attached), but only Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland occurs on the project site itself as the project site is confined to a small area on the top of a large tafelberg plateau. Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland covers19 approximately 9 262 km2 and occurs slopes of koppies,
8 Mucina L & Rutherford MC (eds) 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland, in Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria 9 http://newposa.sanbi.org/ accessed January 20 2020. 10 http://vmus.adu.org.za/vm_projects.php [QDS 3024C] accessed January 20 2020. 11 http://gbif.org accessed January 20 2020. 12 http://sabap2.birdmap.africa/ Accessed 18 February 2020. 13 Young DJ, Harrison JA, Navarro RA, Anderson MA, & Colahan BD (Eds). 2003. Big birds on farms: Mazda CAR Report 1993-2001. Avian Demography Unit: Cape Town. [Routes NK131, NK041 and NK352]. 14 Taylor PB, Navarro RA, Wren-Sargent M, Harrison JA & Kieswetter SL. 1999. Coordinated waterbird Counts in South Africa, 1992-1997. Avian Demography Unit, Cape Town. [Site IDs: 30412402, 30552416, 30522438, 30512359 and 30532401]. 15 Marnewick MD, Retief EF, Theron NT, Wright DR, Anderson TA. 2015. Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas of South Africa. Johannesburg: BirdLife South Africa. 16 Taylor MR, Peacock F, and Wanless RM. 2015. Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. 17 Nel JL, Murray KM, Maherry AM, Petersen CP, Roux DJ, Driver A, Hill L, van Deventer H, Funke N, Swartz ER, Smith-Adao LB, Mbona N, Downsborough L & Nienaber S. 2011. Technical Report for the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas project. WRC Report No. K5/1801. 18 Northern Cape Department of Environment and Nature Conservation. 2016 Northern Cape Critical Biodiversity Areas. http://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/658 accessed January 20 2020. 19 Skowno AL, Raimondo DC, Poole CJ, Fizzotti B, & Slingsby JA (eds.). 2019. South African National Biodiversity Assessment 2018 Technical Report Volume 1: Terrestrial Realm. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12143/6370. Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 5 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
butts and tafelbergs of the extensive Eastern Upper Karoo extending from Richmond and Middelburg to the Gariep (Orange) River and comprises a two-layered karroid shrubland. This vegetation type is classified as Least Concern and about 95.7 % of its original extent remains19. This vegetation type is also largely excluded from intensive agricultural activities and the diversity of the shrub component is lower than a similar shrubland unit that occurs on the Drakensberg foothills8 as the density of shrubs generally decreases along a northeast-southwest gradient towards De Aar and the project site. As Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland is widespread and largely untransformed in the area, given the relatively small footprint of the development the overall impacts of the project are likely to be of low significance to this vegetation type.
3.2 Biodiversity Conservation The vegetation type present in the study area and described above is listed as Least Threatened8 and is not listed in the National List of Ecosystems that are Threatened and in Need of Protection (GN 1002 2012) published under the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004, NEMBA) which lists national vegetation types that are afforded protection based on transformation rates. The South African National Biodiversity Assessment 201820 has classified the vegetation type as Least Concern under the newly adopted IUCN Red List of Ecosystems (RLE) criteria. The overall impacts of the development are therefore likely to be of low significance to the biodiversity conservation of the area.
3.3 Biodiversity Planning The Northern Cape Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) Map was published in 201621 and it “updates, revises and replaces all older systematic biodiversity plans and associated products for the province”. The Northern Cape CBA map classifies the natural vegetation of the province according to conservation value in decreasing value, as follows: Protected Areas; Critical Biodiversity Area 1 (Irreplaceable Areas); Critical Biodiversity Area 2 (Important Areas); Ecological Support Areas (ESAs); and Other Natural Areas. No CBAs occur on the project site, however it falls within an ESA mostly due to the presence of the large Important Bird Area (IBA) surrounding De Aar (Figure 3 attached). The development would not compromise the functioning of the ESA in any way given its small footprint area and is unlikely to result in significant disruption of any broad-scale ecological processes if mitigation measures are adhered to. The project site falls within an area identified by the National Parks Area Expansion Strategy (NPAES) as being a priority area for inclusion into future protected areas (Figure 3 attached). As medium to long term lease agreements are in place between land owners and developers it is unlikely that this area will be incorporated into National Parks in the foreseeable future. This, combined with the small footprint area of the project site, makes it unlikely that the proposed development will have a negative impact on biodiversity planning and conservation objectives in the area.
3.4 Habitats The project area is characterised by the presence of boulders and loose rocks with an open canopy of medium to tall woody shrubs above a generally sparse layer of grasses, which can become quite dense following good rainfall periods. The structure provided by woody species such as Searsia, Euclea, and Diospyros bush clumps as well as scattered rocks (Figure 4) offer habitats for a different suite of animal
20 Skowno AL, Poole CJ, Raimondo DC, Sink KJ, Van Deventer H, Van Niekerk L, Harris LR, SmithAda, LB, Tolley KA, Zengeya TA, Foden WB, Midgley GF & Driver A. 2019. National Biodiversity Assessment 2018: The status of South Africa’s ecosystems and biodiversity. Synthesis Report. South African National Biodiversity Institute, an entity of the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries, Pretoria. pp. 1–214. 21 Oosthuysen E, & Holness S. 2016. Northern Cape Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA) Map. Department of Environment and Nature Conservation & Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 6 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
species to those in the surrounding lowland plains. Similarly, an increase in topological complexity introduces variation in slope and aspect and therefore the available microhabitats for different species. Species such as Grey Rhebok (Pelea capreolus, Near Threatened) and Greater Kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) show preference for these areas, and the scattered rocks provide refuge for many of the species outlined in Section 3.6 below. The project site is placed between two drainage lines, which are an important habitat for many animals in such an arid landscape as they are associated with increased vegetation cover which provides refuge, shelter, more persistent palatable vegetation, softer soils for burrows and water when it is available. No seasonally inundated vleis, pans or ephemeral wetlands are present on the project site. The drainage lines surrounding the project boundary are sensitive to impacts (such increased runoff potentially causing erosion or sedimentation) which must be mitigated against. The habitats and microhabitats present on the project site are not unique and are widespread in the area. Therefore, the impact associated with the footprint would be localized and of low significance if mitigation measures are adhered to.
Figure 4: Scattered rocks and boulders provide increased structural complexity and available microhabitats on the project site.
3.5 Plant Species None of the plant species listed on the BODATSA database (Appendix I) for the study area or recorded on site were listed as protected by NEMBA. No protected trees were present on the study site during the ecological survey. The overall plant sensitivity of the project site is low. Fifty-one plant species that were listed on the BODATSA database for the study area and could potentially occur in the study site are protected under the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act (Appendix II). Despite not being threatened, they are protected and any impacts on these species requires a permit from the relevant authorities. The implication is that a comprehensive list of species occurring within the footprint of the proposed infrastructure is required and a permit application submitted for any of those listed as protected. A pre-construction walk-through survey is therefore required once the final layout of the substation, BESS, temporary laydown areas and any novel access roads have been decided in order to obtain the number of applicable plants for which permits are required for their destruction. Such a walk-through is not needed to advise the sensitivity of the site or to assess the impacts, but is merely required as a mitigation in order to ensure legal compliance and to obtain necessary permits.
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 7 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
3.6 Vertebrate Species Vertebrate species (mammals, reptiles, amphibians) with a geographical distribution that includes the project site are listed in Appendix III, IV, V and VI.
3.6.1 Mammal Species While the Critically Endangered Riverine Rabbit (Bunolagus monticularis) may occur in the surrounding lowland plains it is unlikely to occur on the project area itself, which is located on the top of a plateau as the soil layer is shallow and rocky and not conducive to the construction of their burrows. Potential impacts such as mortality due to vehicle collisions may still occur on access roads to the project site and therefore mitigation measures must be adhered to. The area is characterised by rocky outcrops, boulders and bush clumps with scattered rocks on compact, shallow soils making it unfavourable for burrowing animals. Two of the listed species, namely Black- footed Cat (Felis nigripes, Vulnerable) and African Striped Weasel (Poecilogale albinucha, Near Threatened) rely on these types of burrow systems and therefore the project area is unlikely to represent important habitat for these species (because of the site characteristics described above) and no such burrows were observed on the site. Of the remaining mammals listed as threatened or near threatened, White-tailed Rat (Mystromys albicaudatus, Vulnerable), South African Hedgehog (Atelerix frontalis, Near Threatened) and Spectacled Dormouse (Graphiurus ocularis, Near Threatened) could potentially occur on the project site as these species are generally associated with rocky piles, outcrops, crevices and the vegetation between rocks in areas where populations of these species have been recorded. White-tailed Rat is considered to be one of the rarest species in the small mammal community22 and therefore the probability of the species occurring on the project site is low. Similarly, Spectacled Dormouse are also considered uncommon to rare23 and as the project site falls near the northern edge of their range the probability of the species occurring on the project site is medium to low. South African Hedgehog have a higher probability of occurring on the project site as there have been records of the species from the De Aar area11. The larger mammal species that could potentially be found on the project site, such as Southern Mountain Reedbuck (Redunca fulvorufula fulvorufula, Endangered) and Grey Rhebok are highly mobile species that would move away from disturbance and with extensive habitat available in the immediate surrounds would unlikely be negatively affected by the development. As the habitats and microhabitats present on the project site are relatively common, widespread and largely intact in the broader area it is unlikely that any significant negative impacts on listed mammal species will occur as a result of the development, particularly given the small footprint area of the project site.
3.6.2 Amphibian Species The project site does not represent important habitat for amphibians as the area is predominantly rocky with no temporary vleis or wetlands utilised by most species for breeding and little-to-no loose soils suitable for burrow construction. The overall impacts of the development on amphibians are therefore likely to be of low significance.
22 Avenant N, Wilson B, Power RJ, Palmer G, Child MF. 2016. A conservation assessment of Mystromys albicaudatus. In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. 23 Wilson B, MacFadyen D, Palmer G, Child MF. 2016. A conservation assessment of Graphiurus ocularis. In Child MF, Roxburgh L, Do Linh San E, Raimondo D, Davies-Mostert HT, editors. The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho. South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa. Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 8 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
3.6.3 Reptiles Species The Karoo Padloper (Chersobius [Homopus] boulengeri) is listed as Near Threatened in the Regional Red List24. However a more recent assessment25 lists the species of tortoise as Endangered globally as most localities where populations previously occurred no longer harbour viable populations and the species is no longer being found by farmers. The Karoo Padloper is a South African endemic species associated with dolerite ridges and rocky-outcrops in dwarf shrubland containing succulent and grassy elements. Such habitat is present on the project site and the species could potentially occur in the area, albeit with a low probability. Habitat destruction will unlikely be a significant negative impact on this species given the small development footprint in relation to the available habitat in the area. However this species is vulnerable to illegal collection, road-kill fatality and increased predation risk should Pied Crow (Corvus albus) be attracted to the project area due to increased human activity or nesting sites, therefore mitigation measures should be adhered to in order to safeguard this species from negative impact. The overall impacts of the development on reptiles are likely to be of low significance if mitigation measures are adhered to.
3.6.4 Bird Species The entire project site falls within the large Platberg-Karoo Conservancy (ZA028, Figure 5 attached). The conservancy covers the entire districts of De Aar, Philipstown and Hanover in the south-eastern portion of the Northern Cape Province. Although the land in the IBA is primarily used for grazing and agriculture, it includes the suburban towns of De Aar, Philipstown, Petrusville and Hanover. This huge area lies in the plains of the central Great Karoo, forming part of the South African plateau and holds vitally important populations of two globally threatened species, namely Blue Crane (Anthropoides paradiseus, Near Threatened) and Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni), several biome-restricted species and important populations of other arid-zone birds26. Lesser Kestrel have roosts throughout the area including large roosts in De Aar, Hanover and Philipstown and are frequently seen foraging in the conservancy in summer, when close to 10 % of the global population of Lesser Kestrels roost in this IBA. Some of the farm dams in the IBA are important roosts for Blue Crane. The lowland karroid plains are particularly good for Ludwig’s Bustard (Neotis ludwigii, Endangered), Kori Bustard (Ardeotis kori, Near Threatened) and large numbers of Karoo Korhaan (Eupodotis vigorsii, Near Threatened), Karoo Lark (Calendulauda albescens), Karoo Chat (Emarginata schlegelii), Tractrac Chat (Emarginata tractrac), Sickle-winged Chat (Emarginata sinuate), Lark-like Bunting (Emberiza impetuani) and Karoo Long-billed Lark (Certhilauda subcoronata). In the grassier areas Blue Korhaan (Eupodotis caerulescens) are common. Black Harrier (Circus maurus, Endangered) are occasionally seen over the plains, where huge numbers of Blue Crane regularly congregate. Tawny Eagle (Aquila rapax, Endangered) and Martial Eagle (Polemaetus bellicosus, Endangered) breed on the power lines in the IBA. The belts of riverine Vachellia (Acacia) woodland support Namaqua Warbler (Phragmacia substriata), Layard’s Tit-babbler (Sylvia layardi) and Grey Tit (Melaniparus afer). Pale- winged Starling (Onychognathus nabouroup) and African Rock Pipit (Anthus crenatus, Near Threatened) occur in rocky gorges and kloofs. The project site is located on the top of a tafelberg and not in the lowland karroid plains and no large farm dams or riverine systems are present, therefore it does not represent the preferred habitat for many of the important species considered by the IBA, such as cranes, korhaans and bustards. The proposed development would not have a negative impact on Lesser Kestrel, which often roost within towns. Furthermore, the size of the development footprint is negligible in relation to the IBA (<0.001%
24 Boycott RC. 2014. Homopus boulengeri (Duerden, 1906), In Bates MF, Branch WR, Bauer AM, Marais J, Alexander GJ & de Villiers MS (eds.) Atlas and Red List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Suricata 1. Pg. 73. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. 25 Hofmeyr, M.D., Loehr, V.J.T., Baard, E.H.W. & Juvik, J.O. 2018. Chersobius boulengeri. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T170521A115656360. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-2.RLTS.T170521A115656360.en. 26 Marnewick MD, Retief EF, Theron NT, Wright DR, Anderson TA. 2015. Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas of South Africa. Johannesburg: BirdLife South Africa. Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 9 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
of the land area) and would not have any significant negative impact on the functioning and ecological objectives of the IBA. SABAP2 data were examined for the pentads (which are approximately 8 km x 8 km squares) in the study area (Figure 1). A total of 138 species were recorded by SABAP2 in the pentads 3030_2410 (89 species, 3 cards), 3035_2410 (48 species, 1 card), 3030_2415 (140 species, 7 cards) and 3035_2415 (84 species, 3 cards). This includes 10 species classified as Endangered, Near Threatened or Vulnerable and 17 endemic or near-endemic species (Appendix VI). Due to the relatively few SABAP2 surveys conducted in some of the pentads (indicated by the number of cards submitted) several species which are likely to occur in the area have not been recorded by SABAP2, such as Black Stork (Ciconia nigra, Vulnerable), Burchell’s Courser (Cursorius rufus, Vulnerable), Lanner Falcon (Falco biarmicus, Vulnerable), Kori Bustard and White Stork (Ciconia ciconia, protected under the Bonn Convention). The full-protocol SABAP2 data is also missing several endemic or near- endemic species that could occur in the area, such as Black-eared Sparrow-lark (Eremopterix australis), Blue Korhaan, Cape Weaver (Ploceus capensis), Cape White-eye (Zosterops virens), Eastern Long-billed Lark (Certhilauda semitorquata), Karoo Eremomela (Eremomela gregalis), Namaqua Warbler and Southern Double-collared Sunbird (Cinnyris chalybeus). Smaller passerines such as the listed and endemic African Rock Pipit are more likely to be impacted upon through habitat destruction, while ground nesting birds such as the coursers, korhaans and bustards are more likely to be impacted upon through disturbance. While species such as Ludwig’s Bustard are unlikely to utilise the project site for breeding or foraging they are likely to occur along access roads to the facility. Raptors such as Martial Eagle, Secretarybird (Sagittarius serpentarius, Vulnerable) and Verreaux’s Eagle (Aquila verreauxii, Vulnerable) are more also more likely to be impacted upon through disturbance and displacement. A Verreaux’s Eagle nest was located approximately 1.5 km to the southwest of the project site and assumed to be active as a pair of Verreaux’s Eagles was seen perched nearby. The nest is sufficiently far away from the project site that the development is unlikely to pose a significant negative impact on the breeding of the birds. This nest is nevertheless considered to be a sensitive feature and therefore a 300 m high sensitivity (no-go) buffer was placed around it, as well as a larger 500 m buffer which represents a seasonal no-go buffer within which no construction activities (including vehicular traffic) can take place during the breeding season (i.e. May, June, July and August) to reduce the probability of significant disturbance of breeding birds occurring. Electrocutions and collisions with electrical infrastructure within the substation yard by more sensitive Red Data species is unlikely and the overall impacts of the development on birds are therefore likely to be of low significance. Since it is difficult to predict where birds are likely to nest within the facility, site specific mitigation measures will need to be implemented when nests are being constructed and if electrocutions occur. As the project footprint is relative small and surrounded by large areas of natural habitat any disturbance or displacement associated with increased activity or habitat destruction is unlikely to pose a significant negative impact on birds. The overall impacts of the development on birds are therefore likely to be of low significance following the implementation of mitigation measures.
3.7 Invertebrate Species The invertebrate species that could occur on the project site is listed in Appendix VII. While this list cannot be considered to be complete, a single species with a distribution range that potentially overlaps the project site is listed by the IUCN as Vulnerable, namely the Harlequin Sprite (Pseudagrion newtoni). This damselfly is currently known from only a single location in Mpumalanga, the probability for this species to occur on site is very low. Even if this species was to occur on site, the development would unlikely have a significant negative impact as this species has a preference for wetland habitats which do not occur on the project site. The overall impacts of the development on invertebrates are likely to be of low significance.
3.8 Ecosystems The Karoo is an arid ecosystem characterised by low, unpredictable rainfall and episodic drought and driven by ecological processes that operate over extensive areas. The ecosystem encompasses
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 10 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
vegetation types, habitats and the broad floral and faunal communities within an area. The extent, level of fragmentation and biodiversity are important factors in determining the sensitivity of ecosystems. The proposed development footprint is not located near any National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPAs) and no seasonally inundated depressions or wetlands occur on the project site, however project site is placed between two drainage lines. The ephemeral rivers of the Karoo are highly dependent on groundwater discharge and are particularly vulnerable to changes in hydrology. Mitigation measures such as the maximal use of existing access roads and servitudes, as well as erosion control measures will reduce the impact of the development on moisture regimes, erosion, runoff and groundwater recharge rates to an acceptable level. As the vegetation type and habitats on the project site are of low sensitivity, are widespread and largely unfragmented in the broader area and comprise floral and faunal species of low sensitivity, the overall impacts of the development on the ecosystem are likely to be of low significance following the implementation of mitigation measures.
4 SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT An ecological sensitivity map was produced through the integration of the information collected during the site visit with the available biodiversity data. The ecological sensitivity rating of landscape features to the proposed development were categorised as follows: Low – Areas with a low sensitivity where there is likely to be a low impact on terrestrial biodiversity and ecological processes. The impact of development is likely to be local in extent and of low significance with the implementation of mitigation measures. The vast majority of the project site falls within this category.
Medium – Areas with a medium sensitivity where there is likely to be a medium impact on terrestrial biodiversity and ecological processes. The impact of development in these areas is likely to be largely local in extent but of medium significance as there exists a risk of secondary impact such as erosion which could potentially degrade surrounding areas. Development within these areas can proceed provided that appropriate mitigation measures are adhered to. No medium sensitivity areas are present within the project site, however rocky slopes and wash areas associated with drainage lines that occur beyond the project site boundary were categorised as medium sensitivity and mitigation measures would apply to associated infrastructure such as access roads to the site.
High – Areas with a high sensitivity where there is likely to be a high impact on terrestrial biodiversity and ecological processes. The impact of development in these areas is likely to extend beyond the local scale and be of high significance as there exists a direct risk of impact to ecological processes such as erosion or disturbance of sensitive species e.g. Verreaux’s Eagle in the proximity of their nesting site. These areas are essentially no-go areas from a development perspective in terms of the construction of novel infrastructure. Only a very small section considered to be of high sensitivity is present on the extreme south western corner of the project site boundary and is associated with a drainage line. The drainage lines or depressions surrounding the project site have been classified as high sensitivity and apply to associated infrastructure such as access roads to the site. An area surrounding the Verreaux’s Eagle nest is similarly classified as high sensitivity. The ecological sensitivity map of the area around the proposed development is presented in Figure 6 (attached). The overall sensitivity of the site is regarded as low.
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 11 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
5 MITIGATION MEASURES
5.1 Construction Phase
5.1.1 Habitat Destruction and Impacts on Vegetation A preconstruction walk-through of the development footprint is required once the layout is finalised in order to locate and collate a list of species protected by the Northern Cape Conservation Act that may be directly impacted upon in order to comply with permit requirements and conditions; Site clearing must commence only after the walk-through has been conducted and the necessary and applicable permits are obtained; Preconstruction environmental induction must be mandatory for all construction staff on site to ensure that environmental damage is kept to a minimum, including the appropriate storage, handling and disposal of chemicals to reduce pollution, no littering and the correct waste disposal procedures the avoidance of areas outside the construction site and no-go areas and the avoidance of fire hazards etc.; An Environmental Control Officer (ECO) must be appointed to provide oversight of the vegetation clearing activities and ensure compliance with permitting requirements; Vegetation clearing must be kept to a practical minimum; Minimise the development footprint as far as possible and rehabilitate disturbed areas that are not required by the operational phase of the development; Existing servitudes and access roads must be used wherever possible, any new roads or the upgrading of roads should be minimized as far as possible and not be larger than required; All construction vehicles should adhere to clearly defined and demarcated roads, no off- road driving should be allowed; Ensure that sufficient erosion control measures are constructed on all servitudes and access roads in the project area; An environmental management programme (EMPr) must be implemented, and must provide a detailed description of how construction activities must be conducted to reduce unnecessary destruction of habitat.
5.1.2 Impacts on Fauna No activities within 500 m of the identified Verreaux’s Eagle nest (-30.595564, 24.265331) should be permitted during the breeding season (i.e. May, June, July and August); No construction activities or personnel should be permitted to enter the 300 m no-go nest buffer around the identified Verreaux’s Eagle nest at any time; All construction vehicles should adhere to clearly defined and demarcated roads, no off- road driving should be allowed; All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit (30km/h) to reduce noise and avoid collisions with susceptible species; 30 km/h speed limits should apply within the project site and as well as on the private gravel access roads to the site; Night driving must be avoided where possible; Site access should be controlled and no unauthorised persons should be allowed onto the site; All personnel should undergo an initial environmental induction with regards to fauna and in particular awareness about not harming or collecting species such as snakes or tortoises; The illegal collection, hunting or harvesting of animals at the site should be strictly forbidden; No animals such as dogs or cats to be allowed on site other than those of the landowners; Personnel should not be allowed to wander off the construction site; No open fires should be permitted outside of designated areas; Any fauna directly threatened by the construction activities should be removed to a safe location by the ECO or other suitably qualified person; All discarded waste and rubbish (particularly food waste) must be done so in an appropriate manner and removed from site as soon as possible to reduce the attractiveness of the site to opportunistic species such as Pied Crow; Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 12 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
All road-kill carcasses seen on the site and access roads must be reported to the ECO, recorded and disposed of in an appropriate manner as soon as possible to reduce the attractiveness of the site to opportunistic species such as Pied Crow; Any holes dug e.g. for foundations of pylons should not be left open for extended periods of time to prevent entrapment by ground dwelling avifauna or their young and only be dug when required and filled in soon thereafter; The appointed ECO must be trained by an avifaunal specialist to identify the potential priority species as well as the signs that indicate possible breeding by these species; The ECO must make a concerted effort to look out for such breeding activities especially of Red Data species; If any Red Data species are confirmed to be breeding (e.g. if a nest site is found), construction activities within 500 m of the breeding site must cease, and an avifaunal specialist is to be contacted immediately for further assessment of the situation and instruction on how to proceed; All no-go areas such as nest buffers must be demarcated and adhered to.
5.2 Operational Phase
5.2.1 Habitat Degradation Disturbed areas such as road verges, lay-down areas and areas utilised by temporary construction facilities must be rehabilitated and regularly monitored to detect the establishment of alien species and those species should be eradicated before they spread; Regular alien clearing should be conducted, as needed, using the best-practice methods for the species concerned, the use of herbicides should be avoided as far as possible; The use of herbicides (if absolutely required) for the control and eradication of alien grasses should be done in accordance with the alien eradication programme in the EMPr to reduce unintended ecological impacts. Erosion management at the site should take place according to the Erosion Management Plan and Rehabilitation Plan included in the EMPr; All roads and other hardened surfaces should have runoff control features which redirect water flow and dissipate energy in the water stream which may pose an erosion risk; Existing servitudes and access roads must be utilised wherever possible; and Regular monitoring for erosion after construction to ensure that no erosion problems have developed as result of the disturbance.
5.2.2 Impacts on Fauna Site access should be controlled and no unauthorised persons should be allowed onto the site; All personnel should undergo an initial environmental induction with regards to fauna and in particular awareness about not harming, persecuting or collecting species such as snakes or tortoises; Any fauna directly threatened by the operational activities should be removed to a safe location by the ECO or other suitably qualified person; All discarded waste and rubbish (particularly food waste) must be done so in an appropriate manner and removed from site as soon as possible to reduce the attractiveness of the site to opportunistic species such as Pied Crow; All road-kill carcasses seen on the site and access roads must be reported to the ECO, recorded and disposed of in an appropriate manner as soon as possible to reduce the attractiveness of the site to opportunistic species such as Pied Crow; Birds must be dissuaded from nesting within the facility through the use of bird spikes or other suitable deterrents on a case-by-case basis as it is impossible to predict where such nests may be constructed at this stage; Any Pied Crow nests in the process of being constructed must be reported to the ECO, who must determine (in consultation with an avifaunal specialist) the appropriate action required to prevent the nest from being established;
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 13 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Fatalities of fauna must be recorded and reported on to an ecological specialist and the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT) to assess if additional site specific mitigation may be required; The illegal collection, hunting or harvesting of animals at the site should be strictly forbidden; All vehicles should adhere to clearly defined and demarcated roads, no off-road driving should be allowed; Speed limits (30 km/h) on the project site and private access roads should be strictly enforced; The movement of personnel should be restricted to the servitudes and access roads on the project site; No dogs or cats other than those of the landowners should be allowed on site; and No-go areas should be adhered to.
6 CONCLUSION While the proposed development is not within a CBA, the site was identified by the national web-based screening tool as being of very high sensitivity for terrestrial biodiversity due to the presence of an ESA. This ESA has been designated as such because the project site falls within the large Platberg-Karoo Conservancy IBA. The development footprint is relatively small in relation to the IBA and would not have any significant negative impact on the functioning and ecological objectives of the IBA and therefore the ESA. The vegetation type on the project site is largely intact with very little prospect of long-term transformation through agricultural practices, the species and habitats found within it are therefore fairly widespread and not unique to the project site. The sensitivity of the terrestrial biodiversity of the site relating to the proposed development should therefore rather be considered to be low. Based on the assessment, there proposed battery energy storage system development can be authorised.
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 14 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I: POTENTIAL PLANT SPECIES ON THE PROJECT SITE This list was compiled by extracting a list of species from the BODATSA database that have been recorded within an area that includes the study area as well as similar habitats in surrounding areas, as obtained from http://newposa.sanbi.org/ accessed on January 20, 2020.
Family Species Family Species Family Species Ornithoglossum Barleria rigida Colchicaceae Eragrostis bergiana vulgare Acanthaceae Dicliptera Commelina Commelinaceae Eragrostis bicolor clinopodia africana Chasmatophyllum Adromischus Eragrostis maninum caryophyllaceus chloromelas Delosperma sp. Crassulaceae Crassula corallina Eragrostis curvula Galenia Tylecodon Eragrostis pubescens ventricosus homomalla Galenia Eragrostis Cucumis africanus sarcophylla lehmanniana Cucumis Galenia secunda Cucurbitaceae Eragrostis mexicana Aizoaceae heptadactylus Mesembryanthem Cucumis Eragrostis nindensis um coriarium myriocarpus Oscularia Bulbostylis humilis Eragrostis obtusa deltoides Eragrostis Ruschia sp. Cyperaceae Cyperus congestus pilosastate Tetragonia Cyperus Eragrostis
fruticosa marginatus procumbens
Arachniodes Atriplex vestita Dryopteridaceae Eragrostis tef webbiana
Bassia salsoloides Ebenaceae Euclea crispa Eragrostis truncata
Salsola calluna Euphorbia arida Festuca costata
Euphorbia Fingerhuthia Amaranthaceae Salsola dealata Poaceae Euphorbiaceae flanaganii africana Salsola Heteropogon Euphorbia juttae glabrescens contortus Amphithalea Salsola humifusa Hyparrhenia hirta muraltioides Brunsvigia Argyrolobium sp. Leptochloa fusca radulosa Amaryllidaceae Cyrtanthus Calobota Melica decumbens huttonii spinescens Anacardiaceae Searsia ciliata Cullen tomentosum Melinis repens Indigastrum Apiaceae Apium graveolens Oropetium capense niveum Indigofera Asclepias gibba Panicum coloratum alternans Brachystelma Fabaceae Indigofera Panicum impeditum rubellum hedyantha Ceropegia Leobordea Panicum sp. multiflora platycarpa Gomphocarpus Apocynaceae Lessertia annularis Panicum stapfianum fruticosus Microloma Lotononis laxa Pennisetum villosum armatum Pachypodium Lotononis pungens Pentameris airoides succulentum Stapelia Medicago sativa Pentameris setifolia grandiflora
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 15 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Family Species Family Species Family Species Stenostelma Melolobium Puccinellia eustegioides calycinum acroxantha Melolobium Asparagus striatus Puccinellia distans candicans Asparagaceae Asparagus Rhynchosia Setaria suaveolens adenodes lindenbergiana Goniomitrium Bulbine frutescens Funariaceae Sorghum halepense africanum Haworthia bolusii Gentianaceae Sebaea pentandra Sporobolus albicans Haworthiopsis Sporobolus Erodium cicutarium Asphodelaceae tessellata coromandelianus Haworthiopsis Pelargonium Sporobolus tessellata aestivale discosporus Pelargonium Sporobolus Kniphofia ensifolia Geraniaceae althaeoides fimbriatus Asplenium Pelargonium Aspleniaceae Sporobolus ioclados cordatum pseudofumarioides Pelargonium Arctotis leiocarpa Sporobolus sp. tragacanthoides Gisekia Athanasia minuta Gisekiaceae Sporobolus tenellus pharnaceoides Berkheya Grimmiaceae Grimmia pulvinata Stipagrostis ciliata eriobasis
Berkheya Stipagrostis
Daubenya comata pinnatifida namaquensis
Berkheya sp. Dipcadi viride Stipagrostis obtusa Brachylaena Stipagrostis Lachenalia ensifolia glabra uniplumis Chrysocoma Hyacinthaceae Lachenalia sp. Themeda triandra ciliata Ledebouria Tragus Dicoma capensis apertiflora berteronianus Dimorphotheca Ornithogalum Tragus koelerioides cuneata nanodes Dimorphotheca Hypericaceae Hypericum lalandii Tragus racemosus sp.
Dimorphotheca Empodium Urochloa panicoides zeyheri elongatum Asteraceae Hypoxidaceae Eriocephalus Hypoxis rigidula Polygala asbestina ericoides Polygalaceae Polygala Felicia burkei Gladiolus dalenii ephedroides Felicia filifolia Gladiolus ecklonii Polygala hispida Gladiolus Felicia muricata Polygonaceae Rumex lanceolatus permeabilis Gazania Didymodon Moraea falcifolia jurineifolia Iridaceae tophaceopsis Didymodon Gazania krebsiana Moraea pallida tophaceus Didymodon Geigeria filifolia Moraea sp. umbrosus
Syringodea Gymnostomum Geigeria ornativa Pottiaceae concolor aeruginosum Gnaphalium Leonotis ocymifolia Gymnostomum sp. filagopsis Helichrysum Hymenostylium Lamiaceae Salvia verbenaca asperum recurvirostre Helichrysum Pseudocrossidium Stachys cuneata dregeanum crinitum
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 16 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Family Species Family Species Family Species Helichrysum Stachys linearis Tortula atrovirens lineare Helichrysum Campylopus Trichostomum Leucobryaceae lucilioides robillardei brachydontium Helichrysum Cheilanthes Limeaceae Limeum sulcatum micropoides eckloniana Pteridaceae Helichrysum Lobelia flaccida Cheilanthes hirta zeyheri Lobeliaceae Ptychomitrium Hertia kraussii Lobelia thermalis Ptychomitriaceae cucullatifolium Hertia pallens Monopsis scabra Anemone tenuifolia Ranunculus Ifloga glomerata Grewia flava Ranunculaceae multifidus Lepidostephium Ranunculus Hermannia burkei denticulatum trichophyllus Hermannia Leysera tenella Resedaceae Oligomeris dipetala cuneifolia
Hermannia Oedera humilis Rhamnus prinoides erodioides Malvaceae Rhamnaceae Oedera Hermannia Ziziphus mucronata oppositifolia pulchella Osteospermum Hibiscus pusillus Riccia albornata leptolobum Ricciaceae Osteospermum Malva parviflora Riccia nigrella scariosum Osteospermum Radyera urens Rubiaceae Nenax microphylla spinescens Melianthus Sansevieria Othonna pavonia Ruscaceae comosus aethiopica Melianthaceae Pegolettia Melianthus Osyris lanceolata retrofracta dregeanus Santalaceae Pentzia calcarea Disa pulchra Thesium congestum Orthochilus Pentzia elegans Sapindaceae Allophylus decipiens foliosus Orchidaceae Satyrium Aptosimum Pentzia globosa longicauda procumbens Satyrium Aptosimum Pentzia incana membranaceum spinescens Chaenostoma Pentzia lanata Oxalidaceae Oxalis depressa halimifolium
Pentzia Chaenostoma Pterodiscus luridus quinquefida Pedaliaceae rotundifolium Pentzia sp. Sesamum capense Hebenstretia dura Pentzia Jamesbrittenia Peraceae Clutia thunbergii spinescens aurantiaca Phymaspermum Phyllanthus Jamesbrittenia Phyllanthaceae aciculare maderaspatensis filicaulis Scrophulariaceae Phymaspermum Pittosporum Pittosporaceae Limosella africana parvifolium viridiflorum Printzia huttoni Plantaginaceae Plantago major Limosella sp. Pteronia Alloteropsis Manulea fragrans erythrochaeta semialata Aristida Pteronia glauca Nemesia linearis adscensionis Pteronia Poaceae Aristida congesta Nemesia sp. glaucescens Peliostomum Pteronia sordida Aristida congesta leucorrhizum Schistostephium Peliostomum Aristida diffusa flabelliforme origanoides Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 17 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Family Species Family Species Family Species Senecio isatideus Aristida diffusa Selago albida Senecio Aristida vestita Selago geniculata leptophyllus Brachiaria Senecio niveus Selago paniculata eruciformis Heliotropium Cenchrus ciliaris Selago saxatilis ciliatum Heliotropium Zaluzianskya Chloris virgata curassavicum karrooica Boraginaceae Heliotropium Cymbopogon Lycium horridum lineare pospischilii Lithospermum Cynodon Lycium pumilum papillosum incompletus Solanaceae Erucastrum Cynodon polevansii Solanum humile strigosum Brassicaceae Solanum Heliophila minima Digitaria eriantha retroflexum Rorippa fluviatilis Digitaria sp. Tecophilaeaceae Cyanella lutea Lasiosiphon Bryum argenteum Elionurus muticus Thymelaeaceae polycephalus Bryaceae Enneapogon Chascanum Bryum sp. Verbenaceae desvauxii cuneifolium Wahlenbergia Enneapogon Roepera Campanulaceae nodosa scaber lichtensteiniana Dianthus Enneapogon Tetraena micropetalus scoparius Zygophyllaceae microcarpa Caryophyllaceae Spergularia bocconei Eragrostis barrelieri Tribulus terrestris Colchicum Colchicaceae asteroides
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 18 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
APPENDIX II: POTENTIAL PROTECTED PLANT SPECIES ON THE PROJECT SITE Plant species listed by BODATSA database that have been recorded within an area that includes the study area as well as similar habitats in surrounding areas and offered protection by the Northern Cape Conservation Act.
Family Species Family Species Chasmatophyllum maninum Fabaceae Lessertia annularis Delosperma sp. Pelargonium aestivale Galenia pubescens Pelargonium althaeoides Geraniaceae Galenia sarcophylla Pelargonium pseudofumarioides Aizoaceae Galenia secunda Pelargonium tragacanthoides Mesembryanthemum coriarium Daubenya comata Oscularia deltoides Hyacinthaceae Lachenalia ensifolia Ruschia sp. Ornithogalum nanodes Tetragonia fruticosa Gladiolus dalenii Brunsvigia radulosa Gladiolus ecklonii Amaryllidaceae Cyrtanthus huttonii Gladiolus permeabilis Iridaceae Apiaceae Apium graveolens Moraea falcifolia Asclepias gibba Moraea pallida Brachystelma rubellum Syringodea concolor Ceropegia multiflora Disa pulchra Gomphocarpus fruticosus Orthochilus foliosus Apocynaceae Orchidaceae Microloma armatum Satyrium longicauda Pachypodium succulentum Satyrium membranaceum Stapelia grandiflora Oxalidaceae Oxalis depressa Stenostelma eustegioides Jamesbrittenia aurantiaca Caryophyllaceae Dianthus micropetalus Jamesbrittenia filicaulis Scrophulariaceae Adromischus caryophyllaceus Manulea fragrans Crassulaceae Crassula corallina Nemesia linearis Tylecodon ventricosus Tecophilaeaceae Cyanella lutea Euphorbia arida Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia flanaganii Euphorbia juttae
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 19 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
APPENDIX III: MAMMAL SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE
Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Likelihood* Cryptomys Bathyergidae African Mole Rat GBIF LC Low hottentotus Southern Mountain Redunca fulvorufula GBIF EN High Reedbuck Syncerus caffer African Buffalo GBIF LC Low Pelea capreolus Grey Rhebok GBIF NT High Oryx gazella Gemsbok MammalMAP LC Low Raphicerus Steenbok MammalMAP LC High campestris Antidorcas Springbok GBIF LC Low Bovidae marsupialis Tragelaphus Greater Kudu GBIF LC High strepsiceros Sylvicapra grimmia Common Duiker GBIF LC High Alcelaphus Bubal Hartebeest GBIF LC Low buselaphus Damaliscus Bontebok GBIF LC Low pygargus Connochaetes gnou Black Wildebeest GBIF LC Low Otocyon megalotis Bat-eared Fox MammalMAP LC High Canidae Vulpes chama Cape Fox GBIF LC High Chlorocebus Cercopithecidae Vervet Monkey GBIF LC High pygerythrus South African Erinaceidae Atelerix frontalis GBIF NT High Hedgehog Felis nigripes Black-footed Cat MammalMAP, GBIF VU Low Felidae Leptailurus serval Serval GBIF LC High Felis catus Domestic Cat MammalMAP INT High Spectacled Gliridae Graphiurus ocularis GBIF NT Medium Dormouse Cynictis penicillata Yellow Mongoose MammalMAP, GBIF LC High Herpestidae Suricata suricatta Meerkat GBIF LC High Atilax paludinosus Marsh Mongoose GBIF LC Low Hyaenidae Proteles cristata Aardwolf MammalMAP LC High Hystrix Hystricidae Cape Porcupine MammalMAP LC High africaeaustralis Bunolagus Riverine Rabbit GBIF CR Low monticularis Lepus saxatilis Scrub Hare MammalMAP, GBIF LC High Leporidae Lepus capensis Cape Hare GBIF LC High Pronolagus Hewitt's Red Rock GBIF LC High saundersiae Hare Elephantulus Cape Elephant GBIF LC High edwardii Shrew Elephantulus Eastern Rock GBIF LC High myurus Elephant Shrew Macroscelididae Macroscelides Round-Eared GBIF LC High proboscideus Elephant Shrew Elephantulus Western Rock GBIF LC High rupestris Elephant Shrew Otomys auratus Vlei Rat GBIF NT Low Otomys sloggetti Sloggett's Vlei Rat GBIF LC Low Tete Veld Aethomys ineptus GBIF LC Low Muridae Aethomys Otomys karoensis Robert's Vlei Rat GBIF LC Low Desmodillus Cape Short Eared GBIF LC High auricularis Gerbil
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 20 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Liklihood Micaelamys granti Grant’s Micaelamys GBIF LC High Gerbilliscus brantsii Highveld Gerbil GBIF LC Low Parotomys Littledale's GBIF NT Low littledalei Whistling Rat Rattus rattus Black Rat GBIF INT High Gerbilliscus Bushveld Gerbil GBIF LC Low leucogaster Otomys unisulcatus Bush Vlei Rat GBIF LC High Hydrictis Spotted Necked GBIF NT Low maculicollis Otter Aonyx capensis Cape Clawless Otter GBIF NT Low Mustelidae Ictonyx striatus Striped Polecat MammalMAP, GBIF LC High Poecilogale African Striped GBIF NT Low albinucha Weasel Mystromys White Tailed Rat GBIF VU Low albicaudatus Nesomyidae Saccostomus Pouched Mouse GBIF LC High campestris Egyptian Slit Faced Nycteridae Nycteris thebaica GBIF LC High Bat Orycteropodidae Orycteropus afer Aardvark Site-walkthrough** LC High Pedetidae Pedetes capensis Springhare GBIF LC Low Straw Coloured Eidolon helvum GBIF LC Low Fruit Bat Pteropodidae Rousettus Egyptian Fruit Bat GBIF LC Low aegyptiacus Rhinolophus Darling's Horseshoe Rhinolophidae GBIF LC High darlingi Bat South African Sciuridae Xerus inauris GBIF, MammalMAP LC High Ground Squirrel Soricidae Suncus varilla Lesser Dwarf Shrew GBIF LC High Phacochoerus Suidae Common Warthog GBIF, MammalMAP LC High africanus Neoromicia Zulu Serotine GBIF LC High zuluensis Vespertilionidae Eptesicus Long-tailed GBIF LC High hottentotus Serotine
*Likelihood to occur at least occasionally on the project site. **While no direct observation of this species was made, unmistakable tracks and burrows were observed in the broader area.
APPENDIX IV: AMPHIBIAN SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Brevicepitidae Breviceps adspersus Bushveld Rain Frog FrogMAP, GBIF LC Poyntonophrynus Southern Pygmy Toad FrogMAP LC vertebralis Vandijkophrynus Karoo Toad FrogMAP, GBIF LC Bufonidae gariepensis Amietophrynus Marbled Toad GBIF LC gutturalis Amietophrynus rangeri Raucous Toad GBIF LC Hyperoliidae Kassina senegalensis Bubbling Kassina FrogMAP, GBIF LC Pipidae Xenopus laevis African Clawed Frog GBIF LC Amietia fuscigula Cape River Frog FrogMAP LC Cacosternum boettgeri Common Caco FrogMAP, GBIF LC Pyxicephalus Giant Bull Frog FrogMAP NT Pyxicephalidae adspersus Tomopterna tandyi Tandy's Sand Frog FrogMAP, GBIF LC Strongylopus grayii Gray's Grass Frog GBIF LC Tomopterna cryptotis Striped Pyxie GBIF LC
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 21 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
APPENDIX V: REPTILE SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Agama aculeata Common Ground Agama ReptileMAP LC Agamidae aculeata Agama atra Southern Rock Agama GBIF LC ReptileMAP, Cordylidae Karusasaurus polyzonus Karoo Girdled Lizard LC GBIF Elapidae Aspidelaps lubricus Cape Coral Snake GBIF LC Chondrodactylus Bibron's Thick-toed Gecko GBIF LC bibronii Gekkonidae Pachydactylus Common Banded Gecko GBIF LC mariquensis Pedioplanis ReptileMAP, Namaqua Sand Lizard LC Lacertidae namaquensis GBIF Nucras holubi Holub's Sandveld Lizard GBIF LC Lycophidion capense Cape Wolf Snake ReptileMAP LC capense Psammophylax Rhombic Skaapsteker GBIF LC Lamprophiidae rhombeatus Psammophis trinasalis Fork-marked Sand Snake GBIF LC Lamprophis aurora Aurora House Snake GBIF LC Duberria lutrix Common Slug-Eater GBIF LC Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa subrufa Marsh Terrapin GBIF LC Trachylepis sulcata Western Rock Skink Observed LC Scincidae Acontias gracilicauda Thin-tailed Legless Skink GBIF LC Homopus boulengeri Karoo Padloper GBIF NT (EN*) Psammobates tentorius Tent Tortoise GBIF LC Homopus areolatus Parrot-Beaked Tortoise GBIF LC GBIF, Testudinidae Stigmochelys pardalis Leopard Tortoise LC ReptileMAP Homopus femoralis Greater Padloper GBIF LC Psammobates Serrated Tortoise GBIF NE oculiferus Varanus albigularis ReptileMAP, Varanidae Rock Monitor LC albigularis GBIF
APPENDIX VI: SABAP2 BIRD SPECIES LIST
Pentad
Endemic or Species Red Data Near- endemic
3030_2410 3035_2410 3030_2415 3035_2415 Reporting Rate Avocet, Pied 33 0 29 0 Barbet, Acacia Pied 67 100 71 100 Barbet, Crested 0 0 71 33 Batis, Pririt 33 0 29 67 Bee-eater, European 33 0 14 0 Bishop, Southern Red 33 100 0 33 Bokmakierie 67 100 100 100 Bulbul, African Red-eyed 67 100 100 100 Bunting, Cape 33 0 100 100 Bunting, Lark-like 0 100 86 67 Bustard, Ludwig’s EN 0 0 71 0 Buzzard, Common (Steppe ) 0 0 14 33
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 22 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Pentad
Endemic or Species Red Data Near- endemic
3030_2410 3035_2410 3030_2415 3035_2415 Reporting Rate Buzzard, Jackal * 33 0 57 67 Canary, Black-headed * 0 0 57 0 Canary, Black-throated 33 0 57 33 Canary, White-throated 0 0 86 100 Canary, Yellow 33 0 29 67 Chat, Ant-eating 33 0 71 100 Chat, Familiar 33 0 100 100 Chat, Karoo 0 100 0 0 Chat, Sickle-winged * 33 0 100 33 Chat, Tractrac 0 0 14 0 Cisticola, Desert 33 100 86 67 Cisticola, Grey-backed 100 0 100 100 Cisticola, Zitting 0 100 0 33 Coot, Red-knobbed 0 0 14 0 Cormorant, White-breasted 0 0 14 0 Courser, Double-banded NT 0 0 14 0 Crane, Blue NT 0 0 29 0 Crombec, Long-billed 33 0 43 33 Crow, Cape 33 0 0 33 Crow, Pied 33 100 86 100 Cuckoo, Diederik 0 100 29 33 Dove, Cape Turtle 67 100 100 100 Dove, Laughing 33 100 100 67 Dove, Namaqua 33 100 14 33 Dove, Red-eyed 0 0 71 33 Drongo, Fork-tailed 0 0 14 0 Duck, African Black 0 0 14 0 Duck, Yellow-billed 0 0 14 0 Eagle, Black-chested Snake 0 0 14 0 Eagle, Booted 33 0 0 0 Eagle, Martial EN 33 0 43 0 Eagle, Tawny EN 33 0 14 0 Eagle, Verreauxs' VU 67 0 14 33 Eremomela, Yellow-bellied 0 0 86 0 Fiscal, Common 0 0 100 100 Flamingo, Greater NT 0 0 14 0 Flycatcher, Chat 67 0 86 0 Flycatcher, Fairy * 67 0 57 67 Flycatcher, Fiscal * 33 0 57 100 Francolin, Grey-winged * 33 0 86 67 Goose, Egyptian 0 100 86 0 Goose, Spur-winged 0 0 43 0 Goshawk, Pale Chanting 100 100 100 67 Greenshank, Common 0 0 14 0 Guineafowl, Helmeted 0 0 86 100 Honeyguide, Lesser 0 0 14 0 Hoopoe, African 33 0 71 0 Ibis, African Sacred 0 100 0 0 Ibis, Hadeda 0 100 71 67 Kestrel, Greater 0 0 14 0 Kestrel, Lesser 67 100 14 0 Kestrel, Rock 33 0 57 33 Korhaan, Karoo NT 0 0 57 67 Korhaan, Northern Black 100 100 71 100
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 23 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Pentad
Endemic or Species Red Data Near- endemic
3030_2410 3035_2410 3030_2415 3035_2415 Reporting Rate Lapwing, Blacksmith 33 100 71 0 Lapwing, Crowned 0 0 14 0 Lark, Eastern Clapper 67 100 100 100 Lark, Grey-backed Sparrow 33 100 14 0 Lark, Karoo * 33 0 14 0 Lark, Karoo Long-billed 67 100 100 100 Lark, Large-billed * 33 0 100 67 Lark, Melodious * 0 0 14 33 Lark, Red-capped 0 0 29 0 Lark, Sabota 0 100 71 100 Lark, Spike-heeled 67 100 86 100 Martin, Brown-throated 0 0 14 0 Martin, Rock 33 100 86 100 Mousebird, Red-faced 0 0 57 67 Mousebird, White-backed 33 100 100 100 Neddicky 0 0 29 33 Nightjar, Rufous-cheeked 0 0 14 33 Owl, Spotted Eagle- 0 0 71 67 Penduline-tit, Cape 0 0 29 0 Pigeon, Speckled 33 0 100 67 Pipit, African 67 100 29 100 Pipit, African Rock NT * 67 0 86 100 Pipit, Long-billed (Nicholson’s) 33 0 86 67 Plover, Kittlitz’s 0 0 14 0 Plover, Three-banded 0 0 71 0 Prinia, Black-chested 0 0 29 33 Prinia, Karoo * 67 0 57 67 Quail, Common 0 0 14 0 Quelea, Red-billed 0 0 14 0 Raven, White-necked 33 0 57 67 Robin, Karoo Scrub 100 100 86 100 Robin-chat, Cape 33 100 86 100 Sandgrouse, Namaqua 33 0 29 33 Secretarybird VU 0 0 43 0 Shelduck, South African 67 0 71 0 Sparrow, Cape 67 100 86 100 Sparrow, House 0 0 100 0 Sparrow, Southern Grey-headed 33 100 57 0 Sparrowhawk, Rufous-breasted 0 0 0 33 Starling, Cape Glossy 0 0 71 33 Starling, Pale-winged 67 100 86 100 Starling, Pied * 67 100 86 33 Starling, Red-winged 0 0 14 0 Starling, Wattled 0 0 14 0 Stilt, Black-winged 33 0 29 0 Sunbird, Dusky 33 0 14 100 Sunbird, Malachite 0 0 14 0 Swallow, Barn 67 100 29 33 Swallow, Greater Striped 67 100 57 67 Swallow, South African Cliff * 33 0 0 0 Swallow, White-throated 0 100 14 0 Swift, Alpine 33 0 14 67 Swift, Common 0 0 29 33 Swift, Little 33 100 71 33
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 24 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation
Pentad
Endemic or Species Red Data Near- endemic
3030_2410 3035_2410 3030_2415 3035_2415 Reporting Rate Swift, White-rumped 33 0 14 33 Teal, Cape 0 0 43 0 Teal, Red-billed 0 0 14 0 Thick-knee, Spotted 33 0 71 33 Thrush, Karoo * 33 100 100 67 Thrush, Short-toed Rock 33 0 43 33 Tit, Grey * 33 0 57 67 Tit-Babbler, Chestnut-vented 67 100 71 100 Tit-Babbler, Layard’s * 67 0 86 100 Wagtail, Cape 67 100 71 100 Warbler, African Reed 0 100 0 0 Warbler, Cinnamon-breasted * 0 0 14 0 Warbler, Rufous-eared 67 100 86 100 Weaver, Southern Masked 67 100 100 100 Wheatear, Capped 33 0 0 0 Wheatear, Mountain 67 100 100 100 White-eye, Orange River 33 0 86 100 Whydah, Pin-tailed 0 100 14 0
APPENDIX VII: INVERTEBRATE SPECIES WITH DISTRIBUTION RANGES THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT SITE Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Anax imperator Blue Emperor OdonataMAP LC Zosteraeschna Friendly Hawker GBIF LC Aeshnidae minuscula Pinheyschna Stream Hawker GBIF LC subpupillata Apidae Amegilla atrocincta GBIF NE Common Garden Argiope australis GBIF NE Orbweb Spinner Araneidae Tropical Tent-web Cyrtophora citricola GBIF NE Spider Granulated Thick-tailed Parabuthus granulatus GBIF NE Buthidae Scorpion Uroplectes carinatus GBIF NE Carabidae Anthia thoracica Gewone Oogpister GBIF NE Pseudagrion newtoni Harlequin Sprite GBIF VU Africallagma glaucum Swamp Bluet OdonataMAP LC Africallagma Sapphire Bluet GBIF LC Coenagrionidae sapphirinum Pseudagrion caffrum Springwater Sprite GBIF LC Pseudagrion vaalense Vaal Sprite GBIF LC Pseudagrion citricola Yellow-Faced Sprite GBIF LC Crambidae Loxostege frustalis LepiMAP, GBIF NE Ctenizidae Stasimopus unispinosus GBIF NE Cyrtaucheniidae Ancylotrypa pusilla GBIF NE Daesiidae Biton schreineri GBIF NE Eupterotidae Rhabdosia vaninia LepiMAP NE Drassodes tesselatus GBIF NE Theuma schreineri GBIF NE Gnaphosidae Zelotes fuligineus GBIF NE Zelotes invidus GBIF NE
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 25 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Notogomphus Yellowjack Longlegs GBIF LC Gomphidae praetorius Ceratogomphus pictus Common Thorntail GBIF LC Spialia sataspes Boland sandman LepiMAP LC Spialia agylla Grassveld Sandman GBIF LC Metisella malgacha Grassveld Sylph GBIF LC Kedestes lepenula Chequered Ranger GBIF LC Kedestes barberae Freckled Ranger GBIF LC Gomalia elma Green-marbled Skipper GBIF LC Hesperiidae Eretis umbra Small Marbled Elf GBIF LC Spialia spio Mountain Sandman GBIF LC Spialia nanus Dwarf Sandman GBIF LC Spialia mafa Mafa Sandman GBIF LC Spialia diomus Common Sandman GBIF LC Spialia asterodia Star Sandman GBIF LC Galeosoma schreineri GBIF NE Idiopidae Gorgyrella schreineri GBIF NE Crocothemis erythraea Broad Scarlet OdonataMAP LC Sympetrum Red-veined Darter or OdonataMAP LC Libellulidae fonscolombii Nomad Trithemis arteriosa Red-veined Dropwing OdonataMAP LC Acisoma panorpoides Grizzled Pintail GBIF LC Rhaeboctesis Liocranidae GBIF NE transvaalensis Argyraspodes Warrior silver-spotted LepiMAP, GBIF LC argyraspis copper Chrysoritis chrysaor Burnished opal LepiMAP, GBIF LC Tylopaedia sardonyx King Copper GBIF LC McMaster's Silver- Trimenia macmasteri GBIF LC spotted Copper Large Silver-spotted Trimenia argyroplaga GBIF LC Copper Thestor protumnus Boland Skolly GBIF LC Thestor basutus Basuto Skolly GBIF LC Oraidium barberae Dwarf Blue GBIF LC Lycaena clarki Eastern Sorrel Copper GBIF LC Short-toothed Zebra Leptotes brevidentatus GBIF LC Blue Lepidochrysops patricia GBIF LC Lepidochrysops ortygia Koppie Blue GBIF LC Lepidochrysops letsea Free State Blue GBIF LC Iolaus bowkeri GBIF LC Lycaenidae Harpendyreus tsomo Tsomo Mountain Blue GBIF LC Harpendyreus notoba Salvia Mountain Blue GBIF LC Eicochrysops messapus Cupreos Blue GBIF LC Deudorix antalus Brown Playboy GBIF LC Crudaria leroma Silver-spotted Grey GBIF LC Chrysoritis turneri Turner's Opal GBIF LC Chrysoritis chrysantas Karoo Copper GBIF LC Brephidium metophis Tinktinkie Blue GBIF LC Black-Bordered Babul Azanus moriqua GBIF LC Blue Anthene contrastata GBIF LC Anthene butleri Pale Hairtail GBIF LC Aloeides vansoni Van Son's Copper GBIF LC Aloeides pierus Dull Copper GBIF LC Aloeides pallida Giant Copper GBIF LC Aloeides molomo Molomo Copper GBIF LC Aloeides macmasteri McMaster's Copper GBIF LC Aloeides gowani Gowan's Copper GBIF LC Aloeides damarensis Damara Copper GBIF LC
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 26 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Aloeides aranda Aranda Copper GBIF LC Actizera lucida Rayed Blue GBIF LC Azanus jesous Topaz-Spotted Blue GBIF LC Zizula hylax Tiny Grass Blue GBIF LC Azanus ubaldus The Bright Babul Blue GBIF LC The Black-Striped Anthene amarah GBIF LC Hairtail Lampides boeticus Pea Blue GBIF LC Leptotes pirithous Lang's Short-Tailed Blue GBIF LC Chilades trochylus Grass Jewel GBIF LC Zizeeria knysna Dark Grass Blue GBIF LC Evippomma GBIF NE squamulatum Lycosidae Geolycosa subvittata GBIF NE Lycosa schreineri GBIF NE Pardosa schreineri GBIF NE Meloidae Hycleus transvaalicus GBIF NE Junonia hierta cebrene Yellow pansy LepiMAP, GBIF LC Stygionympha Robertson's hillside LepiMAP, GBIF LC robertsoni brown Stygionympha irrorata Karoo Hillside Brown GBIF LC Acraea stenobea Suffused Acraea GBIF LC Wandering Donkey Nymphalidae Acraea neobule GBIF LC Acraea Vanessa cardui Painted Lady GBIF LC Hypolimnas misippus Common Diadem GBIF LC Danaus chrysippus African Monarch GBIF LC Junonia oenone Dark Blue Pansy GBIF LC Ypthima asterope African Ringlet GBIF LC Papilionidae Papilio demodocus Citrus Swallowtail GBIF LC Pontia helice helice Common meadow white LepiMAP, GBIF LC Pinacopteryx eriphia Zebra White GBIF LC Colotis agoye Speckled Sulphur Tip GBIF LC Colotis euippe Smoky Orange Tip GBIF LC Eurema brigitta No-Brand Grass Yellow GBIF LC Pieridae Colotis evenina Common Orange Tip GBIF LC Brown-Veined Caper Belenois aurota GBIF LC White Colotis eris Banded Gold Tip GBIF LC Catopsilia florella African Emigrant GBIF LC Colias electo African Clouded Yellow GBIF LC Common Milkweed Pyrgomorphidae Phymateus morbillosus GBIF NE Locust Opistophthalmus GBIF, NE Scorpionidae austerus ScorpionMAP Opistophthalmus pictus GBIF NE Ariadna karrooica GBIF NE Segestriidae Ariadna scabripes GBIF NE Solpuga chelicornis GBIF NE Solpugidae Zeria venator GBIF NE Solpuga villosa GBIF NE Hippotion rosae GBIF NE Agrius convolvuli Convolvulus Hawk GBIF NE Acherontia atropos Death's Head Moth GBIF NE Daphnis nerii Oleander Hawkmoth GBIF NE Sphingidae Silver-Striped Hawk- Hippotion celerio GBIF NE Moth Hyles livornica Striped Hawk-Moth GBIF NE Afroclanis calcareus GBIF NE Basiothia charis GBIF NE
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 27 Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Family Scientific Name Common Name Data Source Status Brown Striped Basiothia schenki GBIF NE Hawkmoth Batocnema africanus GBIF NE Rufoclanis numosae Wavy Polyptychus GBIF NE Sphingonaepiopsis GBIF NE ansorgei Sphingonaepiopsis nana GBIF NE Temnora murina GBIF NE Temnora namaqua GBIF NE Temnora pseudopylas GBIF NE Temnora pylades GBIF NE Temnora pylas GBIF NE Theretra cajus GBIF NE Theretra capensis GBIF NE Theretra orpheus GBIF NE Hippotion roseipennis GBIF NE Hoplistopus butti GBIF NE Hoplistopus penricei GBIF NE Lophostethus dumolinii Arrow Sphinx GBIF NE Macropoliana natalensis GBIF NE Microsphinx pumilum GBIF NE Odontosida magnificum GBIF NE Odontosida pusillus GBIF NE Phylloxiphia punctum GBIF NE Polyptychus grayii GBIF NE Praedora leucophaea GBIF NE Pseudoclanis molitor GBIF NE Pseudoclanis postica Mulberry Hawkmoth GBIF NE Rhodafra opheltes GBIF NE Synlestidae Chlorolestes fasciatus Mountain Malachite GBIF LC Theraphosidae Harpactira namaquensis Bronze Baboon Spider SpiderMAP NE Theridiidae Latrodectus karrooensis Karroo Button Spider GBIF NE
Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd July 2020 Page 28 24°4'E 24°6'E 2685000 24°8'E 24°10'E 24°12'E 24°14'E 270000024°16'E 24°18'E 24°20'E 24°22'E 24°24'E 24°26'E 24°28'E2725000 24°30'E 24°32'E
3024BC 3025_2400 3024AD 30°28'S 3025_2405 3025_2410 3025_2415 3025_2425 30°28'S 3024AC 3025_2420 3025_2430 -3565000 -3565000
DA2S Project Site 30°30'S 30°30'S Quarter Degree Squares Pentads -3570000 -3570000 30°32'S 30°32'S 3030_2400 3030_2405 3030_2410 3030_2415 3030_2420 3030_2425 3030_2430 -3575000 -3575000 30°34'S 30°34'S 30°36'S 30°36'S
3024CA 3035_2400 3035_2405 3035_2410 3035_2415 3024CB 3035_2425 3024DA 3035_2420 3035_2430 30°38'S 30°38'S 30°40'S 30°40'S
De Aar 30°42'S 30°42'S 3040_2400 3040_2405 3040_2410 3040_2415 3040_2420 3040_2425 3040_2430 30°44'S 30°44'S
1:180 000Scale @ A3
-3600000 -3600000 #NORTH 0 3.5 7km
Produced By: Ref: 3945-REP-039
30°46'S 3024DC 30°46'S Checked By: AB Date: 2020/08/20 3024CD 3045_2400 3045_2405 3024CC 3045_2410 3045_2415 3045_2425 3045_2420 3045_2430 Site Location -3605000 -3605000 Figure 1 30°48'S 30°48'S
De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Terrestrial Biodiversity Specialist Assessment Report 24°4'E 24°6'E 2685000 24°8'E 24°10'E 24°12'E 24°14'E 270000024°16'E 24°18'E 24°20'E 24°22'E 24°24'E 24°26'E 24°28'E2725000 24°30'E 24°32'E C:\Users\OwenD\Documents\OwenDavies\Owen Davies\GIS\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna.aprx\3945-Fig1-SiteLocation 24°15'10"E 24°15'20"E 24°15'30"E 24°15'40"E 24°15'50"E 24°16'E 24°16'10"E 24°16'20"E 24°16'30"E 24°16'40"E 24°16'50"E 24°17'E 24°17'10"E 24°17'20"E 24°17'30"E 24°17'40"E 24°17'50"E 24°18'E 24°18'10"E 24°18'20"E 30°34'10"S 30°34'10"S 30°34'20"S 30°34'20"S -3577500 -3577500 DA2S Project Site
30°34'30"S 30°34'30"S NFEPA Wetlands Drainage Lines Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland 30°34'40"S 30°34'40"S Northern Upper Karoo 30°34'50"S 30°34'50"S 30°35'S 30°35'S 30°35'10"S 30°35'10"S 30°35'20"S 30°35'20"S 30°35'30"S 30°35'30"S 30°35'40"S 30°35'40"S 30°35'50"S 30°35'50"S 30°36'S 30°36'S
1:20 000 Scale @ A3
#NORTH 0 0.35 0.7km 30°36'10"S 30°36'10"S
Produced By: OD Ref: 3945-REP-040
Checked By: AB Date: 2020/08/20 30°36'20"S 30°36'20"S Vegetation Types Figure 2 30°36'30"S 30°36'30"S De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Terrestrial Biodiversity Specialist Assessment Report 24°15'10"E 24°15'20"E 24°15'30"E 24°15'40"E 24°15'50"E 24°16'E 24°16'10"E 24°16'20"E 24°16'30"E 24°16'40"E 24°16'50"E 24°17'E 24°17'10"E 24°17'20"E 24°17'30"E 24°17'40"E 24°17'50"E 24°18'E 24°18'10"E 24°18'20"E
C:\Users\OwenD\Documents\OwenDavies\Owen Davies\GIS\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna.aprx\3945-Fig2-VegetationTypes 24°14'30"E 2699000 24°15'E 2700000 24°15'30"E 2701000 24°16'E 270200024°16'30"E 24°17'E 24°17'30"E 24°18'E 24°18'30"E 24°19'E 30°33'30"S 30°33'30"S -3576000 -3576000
30°34'S 30°34'S DA2S Project Site NPAES Focus Area
-3577000 -3577000 Ecological Support Area 30°34'30"S 30°34'30"S -3578000 -3578000 30°35'S 30°35'S -3579000 -3579000 30°35'30"S 30°35'30"S 30°36'S 30°36'S
1:30 000 Scale @ A3 30°36'30"S 30°36'30"S
#NORTH 0 0.55 1.1km
Produced By: OD Ref: 3945-REP-042
Checked By: AB Date: 2020/08/20
Conservation Areas Figure 3 30°37'S 30°37'S
De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Terrestrial Biodiversity Specialist Assessment Report 24°14'30"E 2699000 24°15'E 2700000 24°15'30"E 2701000 24°16'E 270200024°16'30"E 24°17'E 24°17'30"E 24°18'E 24°18'30"E 24°19'E C:\Users\OwenD\Documents\OwenDavies\Owen Davies\GIS\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna.aprx\3945-Fig3-ConservationAreas 23°E 23°10'E 23°20'E 23°30'E 23°40'E 23°50'E 24°E 2680000 24°10'E 2700000 24°20'E 272000024°30'E 24°40'E 24°50'E 25°E 25°10'E 25°20'E 25°30'E 29°40'S 29°40'S
29°50'S 29°50'S DA2S Project Site Important Bird Areas 30°S 30°S 30°10'S 30°10'S 30°20'S 30°20'S -3560000 -3560000 30°30'S 30°30'S -3580000 -3580000 30°40'S 30°40'S -3600000 -3600000 30°50'S 30°50'S -3620000 -3620000 31°S 31°S -3640000 -3640000 31°10'S 31°10'S 1:1 000 000Scale @ A3
#NORTH 0 20 40km
Produced By: OD Ref: 3945-REP-041 31°20'S 31°20'S Checked By: AB Date: 2020/08/20
Extent of the Platberg-Karoo Conservancy IBA
31°30'S 31°30'S Figure 5
De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Terrestrial Biodiversity Specialist Assessment Report 23°E 23°10'E 23°20'E 23°30'E 23°40'E 23°50'E 24°E 2680000 24°10'E 2700000 24°20'E 272000024°30'E 24°40'E 24°50'E 25°E 25°10'E 25°20'E 25°30'E C:\Users\OwenD\Documents\OwenDavies\Owen Davies\GIS\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna.aprx\3945-Fig5-IBAExtent 24°15'40"E 24°15'45"E 24°15'50"E 24°15'55"E 24°16'E 24°16'5"E 24°16'10"E 24°16'15"E 24°16'20"E 24°16'25"E 24°16'30"E 24°16'35"E 24°16'40"E 24°16'45"E 24°16'50"E 24°16'55"E 24°17'E 24°17'5"E 24°17'10"E 24°17'15"E 30°35'S 30°35'S 30°35'5"S 30°35'5"S
Study Area DA2S Project Site
30°35'10"S 30°35'10"S High Sensitivity (No Go)
-3579200 -3579200 Medium Sensitivity Low Sensitivity 30°35'15"S 30°35'15"S 500 m Seasonal Nest Buffer 30°35'20"S 30°35'20"S 30°35'25"S 30°35'25"S 30°35'30"S 30°35'30"S 30°35'35"S 30°35'35"S 30°35'40"S 30°35'40"S 30°35'45"S 30°35'45"S 30°35'50"S 30°35'50"S 30°35'55"S 30°35'55"S 1:10 000 Scale @ A3
#NORTH 0 0.15 0.3km
30°36'S 30°36'S Produced By: OD Ref: 3945-GIS-038
Checked By: AB Date: 2020/08/20 -3581000 -3581000
Ecological Sensitivity 30°36'5"S 30°36'5"S Figure 6
De Aar 2 South WEF Substation Terrestrial Biodiversity Specialist Assessment 30°36'10"S 30°36'10"S Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Report 24°15'40"E 24°15'45"E 24°15'50"E 24°15'55"E 24°16'E 24°16'5"E 24°16'10"E 24°16'15"E 24°16'20"E 24°16'25"E 24°16'30"E 24°16'35"E 24°16'40"E 24°16'45"E 24°16'50"E 24°16'55"E 24°17'E 24°17'5"E 24°17'10"E 24°17'15"E
C:\Users\OwenD\Documents\OwenDavies\Owen Davies\GIS\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna\3457_De_Aar_BESS_Avifauna.aprx\3457-GIS-004 environmental affairs -jg- Deparlnent l,i"il Envrronmental Affairs .Qd, REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
DETAILS OF THE SPECIALIST, DECLARATION OF INTEREST AND UNDERTAKING UNDER OATH
File Reference Number: NEAS Reference Number: Date Received:
Application for authorisation in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, Act No. 107 of 1998, as amended and the Environmental lmpact Assessment (ElA) Regulations, 2014, as amended (the Regulations)
PROJECT TITLE DE 2 GRID CAPE
Kindly note the following:
1. This form must always be used for applications that must be subjected to Basic Assessment or Scoping & Environmental lmpact Reporting where this Department is the Competent Authority. 2. This form is cunent as of 01 September 2018. lt is the responsibility of the Applicant I Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) to ascertain whether subsequent versions of the form have been published or produced by the Competent Authority. The latest available Depa mental templates are available at httpsJ/www.environment.gov.zaldocuments/forms. 3. A copy of this form containing original signatures must be appended to all Drafr and Final Reports submitted to the department for consideralion. 4. All documentation delivered to the physical address contained in this form must be delivered during the official Departmental Officer Hours which is visible on the Departmental gate- 5. All EIA related documents (includes application forms, reports or any EIA related submissions) that are faxed; emailed; delivered to Security or placed in the Departmental Tender Box will not be accepted, only hardcopy submissions are accepted.
Departmental Details Postaladdress: Department of Environmental Affairs Attention: Chief Director: lntegrated Environmental Authorisations Private Bag X,147 Pretoria 0001
Physical address: Department of Environmental Affairs Attention: Chief Director: lntegrated Environmental Authorisatjons Environment House 473 Steve Biko Road Arcadia
Queries must be directed to the Directorate: Coordination, Strategic Planning and Support at: Email:
1.
Details of Specialist, Declaration and Undertaking Under oaih Page 1 of 3 SPECIALIST INFORMATION
Specialist Company Name: ARCUS CONSULTANCY SERVICES SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) tTD B-BBEE Contribution level (indicate 1to 4 Percentage 100 8 or non-compliant) Procurement recoonition Specialist name: OWEN RHYS DAVIES Specialist Qualif cations: PHD ZOOLOGY(ORNITHOLOGY) Professional SACNASP REG NO, 117555 aff liation/registration: Physical address: OFFICE 607 CUBE WORKSPACE ICON BUILDING CNR HANS STRIJDOIV AVE CPT Postaladdress: AS ABOVE Postal code: 8001 Cell: +27725580080 Telephone: +27214121529 Fax: E-mail: OWEND@ARCUSCONSULTING,CO,ZA
DECLARATION BY THE SPECIALIST UNDERTAKING UNDER OATH/ AFFIRMATION l, i '4,.j ili,\11 i1,\!1(-''; , declare that- ^ l, ir.i:i'; ill ':5-,Jar:rr-5 , swear under oath / I act as the independent specialist in this application; affirm that all ihe information submitted or to be submitted for the I perform to the in an objective will the work relating applicalion purposes ofthis application is true and conect. manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant; I declare that there are no circumslances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work; I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, induding knowledge of the Act, Regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity; I will clmply with the Act, Regulations and all other applicable Name of Company 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 infomation in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken wlth respect to the application by the Signature ofthe Commissioner of Oaths competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the compeient authority; Jo?t, 'ct(' al all the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and Date coffect; and I realise that a false declaration is an ofience in tems of regulation 48 and is punishable in terms of section 24F of the Act.
Name of Company:
Details of Specialist, oeclaration and Undertaking Under oath Page 2 of 3
Mr Jamie Pote Biodiversity - Ecology - GIS - Environmental Address: 408 Lelane, 14 Cathcart Rd, Humewood, Port Elizabeth, 6001 Cell: (+27) 76 888 9890, Email: [email protected]
07/07/2020 Attention: Ms Ashleigh Blackwell Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd Office 607 Cube Workspace Cnr Long Street and Hans Strijdom Ave Cape Town, 8001
REVIEW OF MULILO - DE AAR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM (BESS) BIODIVERSITY COMPLIANCE REPORT
BACKGROUND Mulilo De Aar 2 South (Pty) Ltd (‘Mulilo’) are seeking approval for a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) and its associated infrastructure near De Aar in the Northern Cape Province. Jamie Pote has been appointed by Arcus to conduct an independent review of the Terrestrial Biodiversity Compliance Report compiled by Arcus Consultancy Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd.
TERMS OF REFERENCE The ecological specialist review of the Mulilo De Aar BESS Ecology Compliance Report includes the following:
1) Confirmation of independence (attached as Annexure A) 2) A CV clearly showing the expertise of the peer reviewer (attached as Annexure A) 3) Acceptability of the terms of reference of the specialist studies 4) The suitability of the different assessment methodology used for data gathering and analysis 5) Evaluate the validity of the findings (review data evidence) 6) Discuss the suitability of the mitigation measures and recommendations 7) Identify any short comings and mitigation measures to address the mitigation measures 8) Evaluate the appropriateness of the reference literature and data 9) Indicate whether a site inspection was carried out as part of the peer review 10) Indicate whether the article is professionally written and easy to understand
INDEPENDENT REVIEW Terms of Reference of Report The specialist scope of study is adequate and acceptable and includes a desktops component (vegetation types and status and red listed & protected flora & fauna) and site verification to confirm status. A single site visit would be deemed adequate in this case, as no significant red flags are raised in the preliminary site screening.
Assessment Methodology Acceptability The assessment methodology utilised is appropriate and includes consultation of standard databases, distribution records and other literature sources for red listed species, as well as records of potential regional protected species and regional threat status. Data sources are comprehensive and include the standard available sources and covered an appropriate area (approximately 50 km surrounding site). The National Web Based Screening Tool was furthermore utilised to identify potential biodiversity related sensitivities.
Furthermore, the site visit was conducted during the wet-season and followed a significant rainfall event which would allow for better opportunity to identify and assess potential wetland or other aquatic features where present.
Validity of Findings The terrestrial biodiversity report has identified the following:
1) Two vegetation units are present in the area – Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland and Northern Upper Karoo, with Besemkaree Koppies Shrubland being on the project site and having a Least Threatened (NEMBA) or Least Concern (IUCN) conservation status. 2) The Northern Cape Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) informs that no CBAs occur on the project site, however it falls within an ESA mostly due to the presence of the large Important Bird Area (IBA) surrounding De Aar. The report correctly concludes that the proposed BESS would not compromise the functioning of the ESA due to its small footprint and unlikely to disrupt broad scale ecological processes. 3) The site falls within an area identified in the National Parks Area Expansion Strategy (NPAES). It is concluded that the small footprint is unlikely to have a negative impact on Biodiversity Planning. 4) The writer records that the site is comprised of habitat (boulders and loose rocks with open canopy, sparse grass cover) and microhabitats (because of increased topographical complexity) that would be suitable to a range of faunal species. It is correctly concluded that the habitat is widespread in the area and not unique to the site. 5) The report confirms that the writer did not record the presence of any NEMBA listed flora species on the site during site visit, however a number of species protected in terms of the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act, which would require a permit and it is recommended that a final walk-through survey and flora relocation be conducted before commencement in order to obtain final counts for permit application requirements. 6) The report correctly concluded that although within the distribution range of the Critically Endangered Riverine Rabbit (Bunolagus monticularis), it is unlikely to be present in the project site itself, being on top of a shallow soiled plateau. It was correctly recommended that mitigation measures be implemented to minimise mortality on access roads, which could traverse potential Riverine Rabbit habitat. Regarding other mammal species, it is concluded that burrowing species are unlikely to be present in the rocky habitat and other threatened or near threatened species are generally mobile and transient species that are unlikely to be significantly impacted. The habitat provided by the site is generally also widespread. 7) The write correctly concludes that the significance of impacts to amphibian species is likely to be low. 8) It is noted that there is a low probability that the Karoo Padloper (Chersobius [Homopus] boulengeri) could be present within the site and surrounding area, as the habitat is suitable. Localised habitat loss is however unlikely to be significant due to small footprint, but it is correctly recommended that and measures be implemented to mitigate mortalities. These should include measures relating to vehicles on access roads, but should include measures implemented during site clearing, as tortoises are generally not able to move away from construction vehicles. 9) The site falls within the Platberg-Karoo Conservancy Important Bird Area (IBA) which covers a large area and is considered to be vitally important habitat for two globally threatened bird species, namely Blue Crane (Anthropoides paradiseus, Near Threatened) and Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni), as well as several biome-restricted species and important populations of other arid-zone birds. The writer elucidates that habitat for the important bird species considered for the IBA generally includes the lowland karroid plains and riverine systems rather than the tafelberg rocky habitat. Furthermore, the site represents less that 0.001 % of the land area of the IBA. Other species typical of the area may experience localised disturbance and displacement from potential foraging and nesting habitat. The site outside of a nearby known Verreaux’s Eagle nesting site designated no go buffer. The report also concludes that electrocutions and collisions with electrical infrastructure within the substation yard is unlikely. The overall impact on birds is considered to be low and the writer correctly recommends that site specific implementation measures will need to be implemented on a case by case basis, should nesting or electrocutions occur during the lifespan of the project. 10) The only invertebrate species recorded in databases is the damselfly (Pseudagrion newtoni), which is recorded from an area in Mpumalanga. The writer correctly concludes that the probability of this
2 species being present is low, as it is outside of its known distribution arrange and there is also no wetland habitat on the site. 11) The report concludes that the site is not located near any National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA’s) and no seasonally inundated depressions or wetlands occur on the project site, however project site is placed between two drainage lines. The writer correctly recommends that measures are implemented to safeguard the ephemeral watercourses from effects of unmanaged stormwater runoff and erosion. It further correctly notes that the site is situated within a vegetation type and habitat that is widespread and not having any elevated protection status. 12) The site Sensitivity Assessment has been conducted and considers the wider surrounding area rather than just the project site. The assessment identifies area surrounding the site that are considered to be of might or moderate sensitivity by considers the site to be low sensitivity (areas with a low sensitivity where there is likely to be a low impact on terrestrial biodiversity and ecological processes). The author correctly noted that the extreme south-western corner of the site touches on an area considered to have an elevated sensitivity.
Mitigation and Recommendations Suitability The mitigation measures contained within the report are appropriate to the type of project and the associated ecological and biodiversity risks and include the following key aspects:
1) Pre-construction walkdown to locate and identify protected species. 2) Site clearance may commence only after permit applications have been obtained. 3) Appropriate environmental awareness must be mandatory for all staff. 4) ECO must be appointed to monitor construction. 5) Site clearing must be contained to required footprint, vehicles must not deviate from roads and erosion protection measures to be adequate. 6) EMPr must be implemented. 7) Faunal consideration must include observing Verreaux’s Eagle nest buffer, speed reduction on roads, avoid night driving, access control, no hunting or collection to be permitted, no dogs or cats to be permitted on site, any fauna to be safely removed from site, open excavations to not be left for extended time periods, monitor and respond to for possible avifaunal risks and No Go areas to be adhered to and clearly delineated where appropriate. 8) Operation mitigation measures correctly further stipulate measures to minimise further additional disturbance and management of the site and immediate surrounds, including erosion measures and management of alien species and weeds, which are usually problematic during and after any construction activity and can become problematic if not addressed efficiently. Additional faunal measures appropriately address procedures for correct operational monitoring and dealing with specific risk, such as implementing nesting deterrents where necessary on a case by case basis.
Short comings of mitigation measures Mitigation measures are appropriate and generally address the requirements of the type of project and biodiversity risk profile adequately. As an additional measure, it is recommended that the pre-construction site preparation include fauna and flora relocation if deemed necessary during the walkdown by a qualified specialist. The rocky outcrops and areas found on site can provide habitat to a range of fauna (reptile) and flora species, that although may have widespread distributions, should be considered for relocation rather than destruction. The species typical of the area and listed as protected in Appendix III of the report belong to groups of succulent and geophytic species (Aizoaceae, Amaryllidaceae, Apocynaceae, Crassulaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Hyacinthaceae, Iridaceae and Orchidaceae) that are highly conducive to successful relocation. These groups of plants are known within in the South African context to be erratically and seasonally visible and can often be missed during specific seasons or site visits, and a physical search and rescue process will adequately minimise the risk associated with this uncertainty.
3 It is thus recommended that in addition to the findings of the author, specific conditions should include a site walkdown, permit application and flora and fauna relocation strategy during pre-construction. The general approach would be to relocate any rescued flora and fauna into surrounding areas of similar habitat, and furthermore, rescued plants can be replanted into areas nearby that may be degraded or in need of rehabilitation.
Appropriateness of Reference Literature and Data Referenced literature, databases and other sources is adequately comprehensive for the requirements.
Site Inspection A site inspection was not carried out for the purposes of the independent review.
Acceptability of Report and General Comment The writer has given due and careful consideration to all the biodiversity components and processes of a relatively complex site of this nature in a comprehensive manner. The author concludes that although the site was identified in the web-based screening tool as having an elevated sensitivity, this sensitivity is related to the site falling within the extensive Platberg-Karoo Conservancy IBA and due to the small size of the site and limited risk of the proposed BESS to the specific species and processes that trigger the sensitivity, it should be considered to be of low biodiversity risk. The report correctly concludes that the impacts of the proposed BESS to biodiversity would be of a low and acceptable level with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures.
The content, findings and recommendations of the report are deemed appropriate, sufficiently detailed and I confirm that concur with the overall biodiversity compliance assessment mitigation measures, recommendation and overall conclusions.
Yours Sincerely
….……………………………………. Mr Jamie Pote BSc (Hons) Pr. Sci. Nat (115233)
Report Ref: De Aar BESS Ecology Compliance Report Review - Jamie Pote (20200707).docx
4 ANNEXURE A: CURRICULUM VITAE, SACNASP REGISTRATION AND DECLARATION
* Comprehensive list of projects conducted is available on request.
5
6
I, Mr Jamie Pote declare that
• I act as the independent specialist in this application. • I have performed 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. • 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: o any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority. o the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority. • all the information furnished by me in this form are true and correct. • I realise that a false declaration is an offence and is punishable in terms of section 24F of the Act.
….……………………………………. Signature of the specialist: Mr Jamie Pote BSc (Hons) Pr. Sci. Nat (115233)
7 DETAILS OF THE SPECIALIST, DECLARATION OF INTEREST AND UNDERTAKING UNDER OATH
(For official use only) File Reference Number: NEAS Reference Number: DEA/EIA/ Date Received:
Application for authorisation in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, Act No. 107 of 1998, as amended and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, 2014, as amended (the Regulations)
PROJECT TITLE DA2S WEF BESS AND SUBSTATION
Kindly note the following:
1. This form must always be used for applications that must be subjected to Basic Assessment or Scoping & Environmental Impact Reporting where this Department is the Competent Authority. 2. This form is current as of 01 September 2018. It is the responsibility of the Applicant / Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) to ascertain whether subsequent versions of the form have been published or produced by the Competent Authority. The latest available Departmental templates are available at https://www.environment.gov.za/documents/forms. 3. A copy of this form containing original signatures must be appended to all Draft and Final Reports submitted to the department for consideration. 4. All documentation delivered to the physical address contained in this form must be delivered during the official Departmental Officer Hours which is visible on the Departmental gate. 5. All EIA related documents (includes application forms, reports or any EIA related submissions) that are faxed; emailed; delivered to Security or placed in the Departmental Tender Box will not be accepted, only hardcopy submissions are accepted.
Departmental Details Postal address: Department of Environmental Affairs Attention: Chief Director: Integrated Environmental Authorisations Private Bag X447 Pretoria 0001
Physical address: Department of Environmental Affairs Attention: Chief Director: Integrated Environmental Authorisations Environment House 473 Steve Biko Road Arcadia
Queries must be directed to the Directorate: Coordination, Strategic Planning and Support at: Email: [email protected]
Details of Specialist, Declaration and Undertaking Under Oath Page 1 of 3 1. SPECIALIST INFORMATION
Specialist Company Name: N/A B-BBEE Contribution level (indicate 1 Percentage to 8 or non-compliant) 4 (EME) Procurement 100 % (EME) recognition Specialist name: Mr Jamie Pote Specialist Qualifications: BSc (Hons) Professional SACNASP affiliation/registration: Physical address: 408 Lelane, 14 Cathcart Rd, Humewood,Port Elizabeth, 6001 Postal address: Postnet Suite 57, Private Bag X13130, Humewood, Port Elizabeth, 6013 Postal code: 6001 Cell: (+27) 076 888 9890 Telephone: Fax: E-mail: [email protected]
2. DECLARATION BY THE SPECIALIST
I, Mr Jamie Pote ______, declare that –
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 form are true and correct; and I realise that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 48 and is punishable in terms of section 24F of the Act.
Signature of the Specialist
N/A Name of Company:
11 July 2020 Date
Details of Specialist, Declaration and Undertaking Under Oath Page 2 of 3 3. lJNOERTAKlNG υΝΟΕΑ ΟΑΤΗΙ AFFlRMATlON
ΡΙς . under oath Ι α'(ίπη that ΘΙ the information submitted ΟΙ to be for the purposes o! this applicatjon is tTW and corred
Signature o' the Specialtst
Name
S•gnature ο' the Commlss•oner 01 Oaths
-07-
οι %eadist. Ρη.30Ι3