Matatiele Road Desktop
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PALAEONTOLOGICAL DESKTOP ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED ROAD UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT MATATIELE TO STRYDFONTEIN, MATATIELE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY, ALFRED NZO DISTRICT MUNICIPALTY, EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE For: HIA CONSULTANTS DATE: 28 May 2016 By Gideon Groenewald 078 713 6377 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Gideon Groenewald was appointed by PGS Heritage and Grave Relocation Consultants to undertake a Desktop Survey, assessing the potential Palaeontological Impact of the proposed Road Upgrade Development Matatiele to Strydfontein, Matatiele Local Municipality, Alfred Nzo District Municipalty, Eastern Cape Province. This report forms part of the Basic Environmental Impact Assessment and complies with the requirements of the South African National Heritage Resource Act No 25 of 1999. In accordance with Section 38 (Heritage Resources Management), a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is required to assess any potential impacts to palaeontological heritage within the development footprint of the development. The potential Palaeontological Impact of the proposed Road Upgrade Development Matatiele To Strydfontein, Matatiele Local Municipality, Alfred Nzo District Municipalty, Eastern Cape Province is Moderate to Very High, with small section allocated a Very Low Palaeontological sensitivity, based on the fact that most of the route is underlain by Triassic aged rocks of the Tarkastad Subgroup and Jurassic aged dolerite of the Karoo Supergroup as well as Tertiary aged sediments associated with terrestrial deposits associated with wetlands in the study area. The very high fossiliferous potential of the Tarkastad Subgroup, Beaufort Group of the Karoo Supergroup warrants an allocation of a Very High palaeontological sensitivity to the areas underlain by the rocks of this Subgroup. A Moderate Palaeontological sensitivity is allocated to Tertiary aged sediments in this region. Dolerite areas are allocated Very Low Palaeontological sensitivity. If extensive excavation of topsoil and removal of more than 1.5m of soil cover is planned in this region, all the areas of activity will be allocated a Very High Palaeontological Sensitivity as these rocks can contain very significant remains of plants and animals that will contribute significantly to our understanding of the palaeo-environments in this part of the Karoo Basin. Recommendations: 1. The EAP as well as the ECO for this project must be made aware of the fact that the Beaufort Group sediments contains very highly significant fossil remains, albeit mostly exposed during infrastructure development. Several types of fossils have been recorded from this Group in the Karoo Basin of South Africa, with special mention of the Tarkastad Subgroup. Similar fossil richness might be observed in Tertiary aged sediments at Matatiele. 2. In areas that are allocated a Very High and Moderate Palaeontological sensitivity and specifically where deep excavation into bedrock is envisaged (following the geotechnical investigation), or where fossils are recorded during the geotechnical investigations, a qualified palaeontologist must be appointed to assess and record fossils at specific footprints of infrastructure developments (Phase 1 PIA) preferably during initial excavations for the development. 3. These recommendations must form part of the EMP of the project. ii TABLE OF CONTENT 2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1 2.1. Background ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.2. Aims and Methodology ........................................................................................................... 1 2.3. Scope and Limitations of the Desktop Study .......................................................................... 3 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................... 4 4. GEOLOGY ......................................................................................................................................... 4 4.1. Karoo Supergroup ................................................................................................................... 5 4.1.1. Beaufort Group, Tarkastad Subgroup (Trt) ..................................................................... 5 4.1.2. Dolerite (Jd) ..................................................................................................................... 5 4.2. Tertiary to Recent Alluvium .................................................................................................... 5 5. PALAEONTOLOGY OF THE AREA ..................................................................................................... 5 5.1. Karoo Supergroup ................................................................................................................... 5 5.1.1. Beaufort Group, Tarkastad Subgroup (Trt) ..................................................................... 5 5.2. Dolerite ................................................................................................................................... 6 5.3. Tertiary to Recent Alluvium .................................................................................................... 6 6. PALAEONTOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY .................................................................................................. 7 7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 8 8. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 9 9. QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF THE AUTHOR .................................................................. 10 10. DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE ........................................................................................... 10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Locality of study area ............................................................................................................. 4 Figure 3.1 Geology of the M56. Mainly underlain by rocks of the Tarkastad Subgroup and Alluvium .. 4 Figure 5.1 Palaeosensitivity of the road upgrading of the R56 ............................................................... 7 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Palaeontological Sensitivity Classes and Colour Codes ........................................................ 2 iii 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1. Background Gideon Groenewald was appointed by PGS Heritage and Grave Relocation Consultants to undertake a Desktop Survey, assessing the potential Palaeontological Impact of the proposed Road Upgrade Development Matatiele to Strydfontein, Matatiele Local Municipality, Alfred Nzo District Municipalty, Eastern Cape Province. This report forms part of the Basic Environmental Impact Assessment and complies with the requirements of the South African National Heritage Resource Act No 25 of 1999. In accordance with Section 38 (Heritage Resources Management), a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is required to assess any potential impacts to palaeontological heritage within the development footprint of the development. Categories of heritage resources recognised as part of the National Estate in Section 3 of the Heritage Resources Act, and which therefore fall under its protection, include: • geological sites of scientific or cultural importance; • objects recovered from the soil or waters of South Africa, including archaeological and palaeontological objects and material, meteorites and rare geological specimens; • objects with the potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of South Africa’s natural or cultural heritage. 2.2. Aims and Methodology Following the “SAHRA APM Guidelines: Minimum Standards for the Archaeological & Palaeontological Components of Impact Assessment Reports” the aims of the palaeontological impact assessment are: • to identify exposed and subsurface rock formations that are considered to be palaeontologically significant; • to assess the level of palaeontological significance of these formations; • to comment on the impact of the development on these exposed and/or potential fossil resources and • to make recommendations as to how the developer should conserve or mitigate damage to these resources. In preparing a palaeontological desktop study the potential fossiliferous rock units (groups, formations etc.) represented within the study area are determined from geological maps. The known fossil heritage within each rock unit is inventoried from the published scientific literature and previous palaeontological impact studies in the same region. The likely impact of the proposed development on local fossil heritage is determined on the basis of the palaeontological sensitivity of the rock units concerned and the nature and scale of the development itself, most notably the extent of fresh bedrock excavation envisaged. The different sensitivity classes used are explained in Table 1.1 below. 1 Table 2.1 Palaeontological Sensitivity Classes and Colour Codes PALAEONTOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE/VULNERABILITY OF ROCK UNITS The following colour scheme is proposed for the indication of palaeontological sensitivity classes. This classification of sensitivity is adapted from that of Almond et al (2008, 2009) (Groenewald etal.,2014). Very High Palaeontological sensitivity/vulnerability. Development will most likely have a very significant impact on the