PO Box 148 7220 Ph: 028 3848048 Fax: 028 3848100 cell: 082 4111008 email: [email protected]

BOTANICAL ASSESSMENT OF PORTION 18, FARM 238 STORMSVLEI, .

Client: Mr Paul Slabbert PHS Consulting, Version 4 02 April 2019

2

1. Declaration of Independence I, Sean David John Privett, declare myself to be independent in the specialist botanical assessment for this application and that all opinions and recommendations expressed are my own. Sean Privett Abridged CV Surname: Privett First Names: Sean David John Privett Date of Birth: 19 November 1970 Formal Qualifications: MSc – Botany (UCT). Conservation Director at Grootbos Nature Reserve (www.grootbos.com) from 1997 to present, Director of Grootbos Foundation, Trustee of Flower Valley Conservation Trust, Trustee Overberg Lowlands Conservation Trust, Chairman Walker Bay Fynbos Conservancy (www.fynbos.co.za) and Cape conservation specialist for Fauna and Flora International. A range of conservation and social development projects with a focus on fynbos conservation. Owner of Fynbos Ecoscapes cc since 1995, which focuses on botanical assessments, conservation management planning, fynbos landscaping, restoration and an indigenous plant nursery. Author of various scientific and popular publications including Field guide to Grootbos Nature Reserve and the Walker Bay region (2010).

Botanical Consultancies. 2018 Botanical report for proposed extension to sand mine on Sand Down 220/3, Gansbaai, Western Cape. 2018 Botanical report for infrastructure development on portion 3 of Farm 215, Baardskeedersbos, Western Cape. 2018 Rehabilitation plan for Buffeljachs abalone farm. 2016 Botanical assessment of proposed sand mine on Farm 733/2, Klipheuwel, Western Cape. 2016 Botanical assessment of proposed calcrete mine on Farm 1043 (REM), Saldanha, Western Cape. 2016 Rapid botanical assessment of Erf 321, Stanford, Western Cape. Duncan Heard Environmental Consulting, Hermanus. 2016 Botanical assessment of five proposed new dwelling sites on Farm 215/1, Baardskeedersbos, Western Cape. 2016 Botanical assessment of proposed extension area for Stanford Stone quarry, on Erf 1070, Stanford, Western Cape. Fynbos Ecoscapes report for Site Plan Consulting, Strand. 2015 Botanical assessment for the proposed housing development on the farm Fransche Kraal 708/29, Gansbaai, Western Cape. 2015 Botanical assessment for proposed further sand mining and rehabilitation on Brakke Fontein 32 portion 8 (remainder), Atlantis, Western Cape. 2015 Botanical assessment of Moddergat Sand Mine rehabilitation. On farm 499/8 Remainder, Worcester District, Western Cape. 2015 Search and Rescue Philippi sand mine, farm 9216, Philippi, City of Cape Town Municipality. 2014 Botanical assessment of stone mine on remainder farm 312, , Western Cape. 2014 Botanical assessment for proposed sand mine on Farm 30 Remainder and Farm 31 Remainder, Atlantis, Western Cape. 2010 Baseline botanical assessment for Wydgelegen and Cupidoskraal, Municipality 2010 Conservation management plan and botanical report for Wildekrans Estate, Farm 820, Botriver, W. Cape. 2009 Construction of dam on farm Kleine Ezeljacht 53 (, Caledon district): impact on vegetation.

2 3

2009 Botanical assessment for proposed Erin Estate development on portion 3 of the farm 781, Botriver, W.Cape. 2009 Botanical assessment of Uilenvlei Private Nature Reserve, Uilenkraalsmond. 2009 Desktop botanical summary for proposed Abagold Seaweed Farm development. 2008 Botanical assessment for proposed development of a portion of the farm 654/18, Stanford, Western Cape. 2008 Botanical assessment for Birkenhead smallholdings, Danger Point Peninsula, Gansbaai. 2008 Fire management plan for Romansbaai, portions 2, 17 & 18 of the farm Klipfontein, Gansbaai. 2008 Desktop botanical summary for proposed storm drainage pipeline. 2007 Botanical assessment and restoration plan of proposed new north bank expansion of Witfontein quarry, George, Western Cape Province. 2007 Botanical study of proposed development of the van Dyksbaai allotment area, comprising 8 erven numbered 1222 to 1229, subdivisions of erf 1214, , Western Cape 2007 Botanical assessment of proposed Kleinberg residential development, (Erf 459), , W. Cape 2007 Botanical assessment of proposed tourism development on Jubileeskraal, (246), Swellendam, W. Cape 2006 Baseline sensitivity study of proposed borrow pit sites for the resurfacing of the r1521, Stilbaai, W. Cape. 2006 Livelihoods out of the ashes – an opportunities analysis following the 2006 Overberg fires. Report for Fauna and Flora International, Cambridge. 2006 Vegetation survey and preliminary conservation management plan for remaining natural vegetation at Robert Stanford Estate (farm 646), Stanford, Western Cape. 2006 Baseline sensitivity study of proposed sand mine on portion 3 of farm sand down estate no 220, Bredasdorp. 2006 Botanical assessment of proposed development at Compagnes Drift, Botriver, Western Cape 2006 Botanical sensitivity study of proposed construction sites for in stream dams on the farm Paardenberg river no. 663, Caledon, Western Cape. 2006 Vegetation study of area proposed for cultivation of virgin soil on farm 223/2 & 227/1, , W. Cape. 2005 Botanical assessment of Middelberg Farm, Stanford. 2005 Botanical assessment of Uilkraals River Sanctuary, Uilenkraalsmond. 2005 Botanical assessment of the farm Heidehof, Pearly Beach. 2002 Vegetation survey of the proposed site for the family camp and associated facilities at Wortelgat. 2001 Botanical Survey of Erven 34, 515 and Arniston Downs 260, Waenhuiskrans, Bredasdorp District. 2000 Privett, S.D.J. Botanical survey of a portion of the farm Blue Horizons in the Uilenkraalsmond district. 1999 Privett, S.D.J. Botanical survey of a portion of the farm Springfontein in the Uilenkraalsmond district. 1997 Privett, S.D.J. Impact assessment and rehabilitation plan for the proposed film set on Geelbekskraal, .

Relevant Publications 2010 Privett, S.D.J. and Lutzeyer H.H.M. (2010). Field Guide to the Flora of Grootbos Nature Reserve and the Walker Bay region.Grootbos Nature Reserve Gansbaai. 2010 Gaertner, M. Richardson, D. M. and Privett S.D.J. Alteration of ecosystem processes by invasive plants: implications for restoration of fynbos in the Agulhas Plain, South Africa. Applied Soil Ecology.

3 4

2009 Cowling R.M., Knight A.T., Privett S.D.J and Sharma G. Invest in opportunity, not inventory in Hotspots. Conservation Biology. 2009 Joubert, L., Esler, K.J., and Privett, S.D.J. The effect of ploughing and augmenting natural vegetation with commercial fynbos species on the biodiversity of Overberg Sandstone fynbos on the Agulhas Plain, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot. 75(3):526-531. 2009 Thuiller W., Slingsby J., Privett S.D.J., Cowling R.M. Stochastic Species Turnover and Stable Coexistence in a Species-Rich, Fire-Prone Plant Community. PLoS ONE 2(9): e938.doc 0.1371/journal.ponk.000938. 2008 Mergili, M. and Privett, S.D.J. Vegetation and vegetation-environment relationships at Grootbos Nature Reserve, Western Cape, South Africa. Bothalia 38,1: 89 – 102. 2008 Privett S.D.J, & Cowling R.M. Sustainable livelihoods from fynbos. In press Fynbos management book. Fynbos Forum. 2004 Green Futures – building sustainable, nature-based livelihoods. Urban Green File 9(4), pp 4. 2004 Anonymous. An introduction to sustainable harvesting of some commercially utilised indigenous plant species in the Cape Floristic region. Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. (contributor) 2003 Privett, S.D.J. The fynbos Garden of Eden. Veld and Flora. 89(2), 53 – 55. 2003 Privett, S.D.J., Cowling, R.M. and Juritz, J.. Biological and rarity attributes of extinction prone species in species rich, fire prone fynbos vegetation. Journal of Vegetation Science. 2003 Privett, S.D.J. Flower Valley, a good news conservation story. Kew magazine. 2003 Privett, S.D.J. A preliminary study on the status of sustainable harvesting of fynbos flowers on the Flower Valley supply network, Agulhas Plain, South Africa. unpublished report, Fauna and Flora International, Cambridge. 2002 Privett, S.D.J. A Cape flora specialist at Eden. Eden Friends magazine Winter 2002 2002 Privett, S.D.J., Heydenrych, B.J. and Cowling, R.M. Putting biodiversity to business on the Agulhas Plain, a case of collaborative conservation management on the Agulhas Plain. In: Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Development. (Ed. Shirley Cowling). 101 – 116. The World Bank Environment department. 2002 Privett, S.D.J. Putting Biodiversity to business on the Agulhas Plain. Veld and Flora article. 2001 Privett, S.D.J., Cowling, R.M. and Taylor, H.C. (2001). Thirty years of change in the fynbos vegetation of the Cape of Good Hope Nature Reserve, South Africa. Bothalia 31, 99-115. 1998 Privett, S.D.J. Determinants of Pattern in Fynbos. M.Sc. thesis. Botany Department, University of Cape Town.

4 5 2. INTRODUCTION AND STUDY AREA This specialist botanical assessment was commissioned to assist in the decision making process for the proposed development and extensions to the chicken rearing plant on portion 18 of Farm 238 Stormsvlei, Western Cape. The proposal relates to expanding and developing the existing chicken rearing facilities on the property. The proposal involves the construction of two new rearing pens of 1280 m2 each, the extension of three existing rearing pens by 21 m each, the extension of four double laying pens by 21 m each, the construction of one new laying pen of 2560 m2 and the construction of a new farm shed of 800 m2. There will also be additional clearing around each unit for biosecurity measures, and it is estimated that total clearance for new areas (without roads) will be approximately 2 hectares (see Figure 3 below).

The study site lies directly to the north of the Sonderend River just outside the town of Stormsvlei on the R317 to Robertson. Farm 238/18 is 211hectare in extent and has an altitude range of 100 to 180m asl. The site is surrounded by privately owned properties. No declared private mountain catchment areas border the site. The floodplain area of the Sonderend River forms the southern boundary of the site.

The study area had previously been surveyed for the initial environmental assessment process by Johns (2011). This study outlined the overall botanical significance of the site and highlighted the high priority conservation areas on the farm that were to be excluded from any development. This study demarcated an area for development that had previously been impacted by agricultural activities. Following this environmental permission was granted for the development of the chicken rearing facilities within this previously disturbed area. It is within this area that expansion of the facilities is being planned and this botanical survey focused only on the proposed new development footprints within the ‘development zone’.

I visited the site in January 2018. I have a good knowledge of the vegetation in this area, having undertaken plant surveys in the vicinity in the past. It must however be noted that any plant survey of this nature provides only a short opportunity to observe plants in flower and dormant species, or those without flowers, can prove difficult to identify. It is therefore possible that some indigenous species present on the site may have been missed during this survey. Continual sampling over all seasons and including early post-fire succession, neither of which was possible during this study, is the only way of determining the true botanical diversity of a fynbos site such as this (Privett and Lutzeyer 2010). However one of the primary assumptions of this study is that the area being examined was old agricultural lands and as such has a low likelihood of housing plant species of conservation concern. I am confident that sufficient botanical information could be gathered during the site visits to make accurate conclusions regarding the conservation value of the site. Although not all species recorded, it is likely that a sufficiently accurate picture of the plant diversity and disturbance levels were obtained. This is partly a result of using a habitat based approach, where habitats (type, condition, irreplaceability) rather than species are used to inform decision making. Another assumption of this planning process is that the natural vegetation is acting as a surrogate for a whole host of other animal species (insect, spiders, molluscs, birds, mammals, etc.), none of which have been surveyed as part of this overall study, and thus the best way to conserve the rich small animal community is to conserve the natural vegetation that supports them and to ensure connectivity and corridors wherever possible. While the study provides an overview of the natural vegetation and its current condition and conservation status of the property, it is in no way a comprehensive botanical survey of the property. The focus of this study was to survey the proposed expansion footprints on the property.

3. TERMS OF REFERENCE

The Western Cape Government Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEADP - letter dated 20 November 2017) noted that the site comprises Central Ruens Shale renosterveld which is critically endangered and that the site constitutes a Critical Biodiversity Area with some smaller portions categorized as Ecological Support Area. Furthermore they note that the Riviersonderend River, situated to the south of the site, is classified as a National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area.

DEADP requested that: 5

6  Additional botanical specialist input must be obtained to confirm if the findings of the previous botanical assessment report (Johns 2011) are still valid and relevant to the new proposal.  It is also necessary for the botanical specialist to pay particular attention to the new or expanded development footprints, as proposed, and provide an assessment thereof and recommend mitigation measures, where necessary.

The terms of reference for this study were therefore as follows:  Describe the vegetation on the farm, and note the presence or likelihood of locally endemic or rare species (species of conservation concern).  Assess the proposed expansion plan in relation to the original botanical study undertaken in 2011 with particular focus on the new and expanded development footprints.  Provide recommendations regarding the suitability of the areas for infrastructure development, and suggest mitigation measures that could reduce identified impacts.

Figure 1. Locality of Portion 18 of Farm 238, Stormsvlei, north of the village of Stormsvlei, Western Cape.

4. THE VEGETATION

The natural vegetation on site was described by Johns (2011). It is classified as Central Reuns Shale Renosterveld on an underlying Bokkeveld Shale geology (Mucina and Rutherford 2006). This vegetation type occurs across the central Overberg between and Stormsvlei. It is situated in an area between the Eastern and Western Reuns Shale Renosterveld. A thin band of mountainous Northern Sonderend Sandstone Fynbos with further Breede Shale Renosterveld vegetation occurs to the north.

Central Reuns Shale Renosterveld is categorized as Critically Endangered in terms of the National List of Threatened Ecosystems (Anonymous 2009). The target conservation of 27% cannot be met since 87% of the area has already been transformed by cultivation and agricultural activities. The vegetation type is only found in fragments throughout its range mainly on the steeper sides of hills, where clearing for agriculture is difficult. Small patches are conserved in the Agulhas National Park (Mucina and Rutherford 2006). As such all remaining natural vegetation within this ecosystem type is to be regarded as having very high conservation value. The site occurs on the eastern edge of the Central Reuns Shale Renosterveld area and has ecotonal characteristics with Western Reuns Shale 6

7 Renosterveld (including the presence of Aloe ferox). There are also fynbos elements including Restionaceae (eg. Ischyrolepis capensis) and Proteaceae (eg. Serruria acrocarpa and Protea repens). Johns (2011) determined that the condition of the vegetation on the farm ranged from totally transformed to areas that are in a good botanical condition. She divided the property along an existing fence line (34o 04’ 36.1” S: 20o 06’ 08.2” E to 34o 04’ 25.3” S: 20O 06’ 18.4” E). The western section of the site comprising some 45 hectares (excluding the floodplain) she referred to as section A (see Figure 2 below), which had been heavily disturbed by previous agricultural activities Owing to the disturbed nature of this area and resultant low species diversity the vegetation was classified as having Low botanical sensitivity and Low conservation value.

Figure 2. Aerial photo of Farm 238/18 showing section A (yellow polygon) which was categorised as having low conservation value and section B (green polygon) having high conservation value (source Johns 2011).

Following my site visit and survey of the proposed development footprints I can concur that this area (section A) was heavily impacted in the past by agricultural activity and has low conservation value.

7

8

5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT The proposed development plan is provided in Figure 3 below. It includes the construction of two new rearing pens totalling 1280 m2, the extension of two existing rearing pens totalling 280m2, the extension of four existing double laying pens totalling 560 m2, the construction of a new double laying pen on the eastern side of the site totalling 2560 m2 and the construction of a new farm shed of approximately 800 m2. With additional clearing around each unit for biosecurity measures it is estimated that total clearance will be approximately 2 hectares

Figure 3. Site development plan including expansion of existing infrastructure and construction of new infrastructure relating to the chicken rearing facility on Farm 238/18, Stormsvlei.

During my site visit I surveyed each of the development footprints and have outlined my findings below:

8

9

1. Extension to existing rearing house

The proposed extension area on this site falls within old ploughed agricultural lands. Species recorded within the proposed development area include Searsia pallens, Dodonea angustifolia, Athanasia trifurcata, Cynodon dactylon, Lampranthus sp., Metalasia acuta, Elytropappus rhinocerotis, Oedera squarrosa, Cliffortia ruscifolia, Pelargonium sp., Themeda triandra. and Ischyrolepis capensis,

At the time of the survey approximately 30% of the site was open ground.

There is a small area (roughly 40 m2) within the proposed extension area of this chicken rearing facility that has not been ploughed and will be impacted by this proposed extension (see plate on left).

Give the isolated location of this patch however, and the fact that it has relatively low species diversity the botanical impact will be medium and the conservation impact medium.

2. Extension to existing rearing house

This site is situated in old ploughed agricultural lands with approximately 20% open ground and a covering of weedy pioneer species.

Species recorded on the site include Athanasia trifurcata, Cliffortia ruscifolia, Elytropappus rhinocerotis, Dodonea angustifolia and Cynodon dactylon. No species of conservation value were recorded and the site has low botanical and low conservation value.

9

10

3. Extension of exiting house 3

The area for the proposed extension of this rearing facility is already disturbed and falls within old agricultural lands. Approximately 30% of the site is open disturbed ground. Species recorded within the proposed extension area include Searsia pallens, Lampranthus sp., Elytropappus rhinocerotis and Dodonea angustifolia.

This proposed extension area has low botanical value and low conservation value.

4. Extension of existing house 4

The proposed extension area of this laying pen is situated in disturbed, old agricultural lands. There is a total of approximately 40% open ground. Plant species recorded in the proposed extension area include Cliffortia ruscifolia, Athanasia trifurcata, Aspalathus sp., Elytropappus rhinocerotis, Hermannia sp., Freylinia undulate, Ifloga sp. and Carpobrotus edulis.

The extension area has low botanical value and low conservation value.

10

11

5. Extension of existing double laying pen

The area for the proposed extension of this pen has already been cleared of all natural vegetation for biosecurity and turning of trucks. It has low conservation, and low botanical value.

6. Already authorised site in the south east of the farm

This site is already authorised, but has not been built yet. It is situated in old agricultural lands. It has approximately 80% cover of kweek (Cynodon dactylon) and other grasses. It has low botanical value and low conservation value.

11

12 7. Already authorised site in north eastern corner This site has already been authorised but not yet built. It will be situated in an area that was previously impacted by agricultural activities. The vegetation on the site is dominated by kweek (Cynodon dactylon) which covers approximately 80% of the site. Other species recorded include Helichrysum petiolare, Cliffortia ruscifolia, Ficinia sp. and Searsia pallens.

The site has low botanical value and low conservation value.

8. New site in south western corner

This site for a proposed new rearing facility is located in old agricultural lands dominated by kweek (Cynodon dactylon) and Klaaslouwbos (Athanasia trifurcata), with a total combined coverage of approximately 80%. Other species recorded include Elytropappus rhinocerotis (renosterbos), Searsia pallens, Dodonea angustifolia, Aspalathus sp. and Chrysocoma ciliata. The site has low botanical value and low conservation value.

9. New site in north western corner

This site is situated within a heavily disturbed area of old ploughed agricultural lands.

The site has an existing access track. The surrounding vegetation is dominated by a dense population of Athanasia trifurcata. There is also some scattered Port Jackson (Acacia saligna), which is an invasive species from Australia.

The proposed development area has low botanical value and low conservation value.

12

13 10. New rearing site on eastern boundary

This site is quite close to some natural vegetation on the eastern edge of the site. However the 30 m buffer proposed on the edge of the site will be enough to accommodate the patch of Aloe ferox.

The erection of the proposed new rearing pen must stay at least 30m away from the intact vegetation (Area B in Figure 2). If this is done the site will have low botanical and low conservation value.

11. New Farm shed

This site has already been partially cleared of vegetation and therefore has low botanical value and low conservation value.

Table 1. Impact assessment rating for development sites on Portion 18 of Farm 238, Stormsvlei.

Sites Impact Extent Intensity Status Significance Confidence 1 Loss of vegetation local permanent Medium -ve medium medium 2 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 3 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 4 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 5 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 6 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 7 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 8 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 9 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high 10 Loss of vegetation local permanent low -ve low medium 11 Loss of vegetation local permanent Low -ve low high

13

14 The alternative no-go option allows for the continuation of the status quo with a neutral impact and possible increase in current alien infestation levels.

6. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Portion 18 of Farm 238, Stormsvlei falls within an area of extremely high botanical and conservation value. The original natural vegetation of this farm would have been Central Ruens Shale Renosterveld. This vegetation type is critically endangered and all remaining natural remnants of this vegetation type must be conserved. As described in a previous botanical survey of the site, there is however a large area of the farm that has been ploughed in the past and has low botanical and low conservation value as a result. This highly degraded area was defined as area A by Johns 2011. It comprises the western portion of the farm on the south – north fence line (GPS 34o 04’ 36.1” S: 20o 06’ 08.2” E to 34o 04’ 25.3” S : 20o 06’ 18.4” E). It is characterised by resilient plant species typical of old disturbed agricultural lands in this area. This low species diversity and high habitat disturbance makes the vegetation here of low botanical sensitivity and low conservation value. Given that very little of the indigenous vegetation remains and that rehabilitation of this area would be extremely difficult, the conservation value of this area of the site was rated as being low and as a result the initial chicken rearing facilities were all constructed in this area.

The owners of the farm are now planning to expand on these existing structures as well as build new structures within area A. The current study was commissioned in order to assess the proposed expansion plan in relation to the original botanical study undertaken in 2011, with particular focus on the new and expanded development footprints.

Of the eleven proposed new or extension sites, only one, (site 10) could potentially impact on high botanical value habitat. However the proposed 30 m buffer around the natural vegetation will safeguard it from this development. All the other sites have low botanical and conservation value supporting the findings of Johns 2011. It is suggested that the proposed new double laying pens at site 10 (eastern boundary of the site), be carefully positioned to ensure that it is at least 30m away from the intact natural Central Ruens renosterveld on the eastern boundary of the site.

S D J Privett 02 April 2019

14

15 LITERATURE CITED

Anonymous 2003. C.A.P.E. Agulhas Biodiversity Initiative (ABI). United Nations Development Programme, Global Environment Facility. UNDP Project ID: SAF/03/G31/A/G/99. Anonymous 2009. Draft National List of Threatened Ecosystems Gazette No 32689 Cowling RM, Pressey RL, Heijns CE, Richardson DM, and Lombard AT. 1998. Systematic conservation planning for the CAPE Project. Conceptual approach for the terrestrial biodiversity component. Report IPC 9803 Cape, UCT. De Villiers, C, Driver, A., Clark, B., Euston-Brown, D., Day, L., Job, N., Helme, N., Brownlie, S. and Rebelo, T. 2005. Fynbos Forum Ecosystem Guidelines for Environmental Assessment in the Wetsern Cape. Germishuizen, G & Meyer, N. L. (eds) 2003. Plants of southern Africa: an annotated checklist. Strelitzia 14. National Botanical Institute, Pretoria. Johns A., 2011 Botanical assessment of portion 18 of Farm 238 Stormsvlei. Report for PHS Consulting, Hermanus. Lombard M., Cowling RM, Pressey RL, and Mustart PJ. 1997. Reserve design on the Agulhas Plain, South Africa: a flexible tool for conservation in a species rich and fragmented landscape. Conservation Biology 11, 1101 to 1116. Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M. (eds) 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. Privett S. D. J. and Lutzeyer H.H.M. (2010). The vegetation of Grootbos and the Walker Bay Region. Grootbos Foundation. Raimondo D. 2009. Red Data Book of threatened plants of South Africa. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. Rouget M., Reyers, B., Jonas, Z. Desmet, P., Driver, A., Maze, K., Egoh, B., Cowling, R. M., Mucina L., and Rutherford M. 2004. South African Biodiversity Assessment 2004: Technical Report Vol. 1. Terrestrial component. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

15