Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This article was downloaded by: On: 12 May 2010 Access details: Access Details: Free Access Publisher Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37- 41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t917447442 The geomorphic provinces of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland: A physiographic subdivision for earth and environmental scientists T. C. Partridge a; E. S. J. Dollar b; J. Moolman c;L. H. Dollar b a Climatology Research Group, University of the Witwatersrand, WITS, South Africa b CSIR, Natural Resources and Environment, Stellenbosch, South Africa c Directorate: Resource Quality Services, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa Online publication date: 23 March 2010 To cite this Article Partridge, T. C. , Dollar, E. S. J. , Moolman, J. andDollar, L. H.(2010) 'The geomorphic provinces of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland: A physiographic subdivision for earth and environmental scientists', Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 65: 1, 1 — 47 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00359191003652033 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00359191003652033 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa Vol. 65(1), February 2010, 1–47 The geomorphic provinces of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland: A physiographic subdivision for earth and environmental scientists T.C. Partridge† FRSSAf1, E.S.J Dollar2*, J. Moolman3 & L.H. Dollar2 1Climatology Research Group, University of the Witwatersrand, WITS, 2050 South Africa 2CSIR, Natural Resources and Environment, P.O. Box 320, Stellenbosch, 7599 South Africa *Author for correspondence: Present address MWH Global UK, Chepping House, 17–18 Temple End, High Wycombe, HP13 5DR, UK e-mail: [email protected] 3Directorate: Resource Quality Services, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Private Bag X313, Pretoria, 0001 South Africa This work has drawn upon previous attempts to define geomorphic provinces, but also on more recent work on the geological and geomorphological evolution of southern African fluvial systems. It has also used Digital Terrain Model (DTM)-derived data and statistical techniques to determine 34 geomorphic provinces and 12 sub-provinces within South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Ninety-nine main stem river longitudinal profiles and valley cross-sectional profiles were generated from the DTM-derived data, and a statistical technique, the Worsley likelihood ratio test (WLRT), was applied to define statistically signifi- cant changes in slope and valley cross-sectional width along the river continuum. This isolated 471 macro-reaches for the 99 main stem rivers. Each macro-reach was then analysed using a variety of descriptors including shape, best fit curve, slope, sediment storage potential and valley width. Principal component analysis was applied to the data set to determine whether significant groupings existed, indicating significant similarities in the data by way of area, and conversely, whether distinct differences between groups of data were evident. The scores for the whole data set showed a large grouping around the origin with some scatter along the PC1 axis. Distinct groups were, however, evident for macro-reaches within each province. These reflect the extent of uniformity in the slopes, valley widths, altitudes and shape descriptors of each province. A description of each of the 34 provinces and 12 sub-provinces is Downloaded At: 12:45 12 May 2010 presented. Keywords: geomorphic provinces, South Africa, Lesotho, Swaziland, conservation planning, rivers. INTRODUCTION that conserve the diversity of communities and ecological sys- On a global scale, freshwater ecosystems are experiencing a tems represents a significant challenge and various solutions significant loss of biodiversity due to human impact (Klaphake have been offered [e.g., Omernik, 1987; Roux et al., 2002; et al., 2001). There is a growing recognition that this loss is not Kleynhans et al., 2005). Conventional wisdom has it that a port- sustainable in the long-term because functioning aquatic eco- folio of representative spatial units/sites is needed to help set systems deliver significant economic and social benefits to soci- conservation targets and goals (Nel et al., 2007). The targets are ety (Costanza et al., 1997). Progressive legislation has been set at multiple spatial scales and levels of organisation to ensure promulgated in some countries to ensure that freshwater eco- the protection of all communities and ecosystems and not just systems are protected [e.g., South African National Environ- the rare ones. mental Management: Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004)], and that a balance is achieved between using freshwater as a re- South African context source (rivers and other surface and groundwater bodies) and In 2002 the then South African National Department of Water protecting it [e.g., the South African National Water Act (No. 36 Affairs and Forestry (DWAF), the Council for Scientific and of 1998)]. In addition to nation-state initiatives, there are nu- Industrial Research (CSIR) and the Water Research Commis- merous international conventions that seek to conserve sion (WRC) embarked on a project to develop a policy and aquatic ecosystem diversity [e.g., Convention on Biological planning tool(s) for the systematic conservation planning of Diversity (CBD), Ramsar Convention]. freshwater ecosystem biodiversity in South Africa (Nel et al., One of the main objectives in protecting freshwater ecosys- 2005). Although a number of objectives were identified for this tems is to ensure the long-term survival of native species and project, termed the Freshwater Biodiversity Initiative (FBI), community types through the design and conservation of port- two are relevant here: folios of landscape-scale spatial units (cf. Groves et al., 2000). • to identify those freshwater ecosystems best suited to receiv- The identification and selection of representative spatial units ing a high protection status; and ISSN 0035-919X print © 2010 Royal Society of South Africa DOI: 10.1080/00359191003652033 http://www.informaworld.com 2 Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa Vol. 65(1): 1–47, 2010 Figure 1. Hierarchical descriptions of levels of organisation (after Dollar et al. 2007). • to develop methods and data layers for the spatial represen- on a theoretical framework for interdisciplinary understand- tation of both biodiversity pattern (so that a sample of all ing of rivers as ecosystems (Dollar et al., 2007). Application of biodiversity can be conserved) and ecosystem processes (so this framework requires, among other dimensions, a detailed that the processes that sustain biodiversity can be sustained). description of the relevant levels of organisation that character- This needs to be done at scales that are appropriate to ise different subsystem hierarchies (e.g., geomorphology, national and sub-national biodiversity planning initiatives. hydrology and ecology) of the river ecosystem. The highest To meet the second objective, an approach was developed level of organisation of the geomorphology hierarchy is repre- that incorporated the notion of physical signatures as surro- sented by a geomorphic province (Figure 1). Geomorphic prov- gates for biodiversity pattern. Although the concept of catch- inces are defined as similar land areas containing a limited Downloaded At: 12:45 12 May 2010 ment signatures had been developed by King & Shael (2001), range of recurring landforms that reflect comparable erosion, the concept of physical signatures for rivers was first applied as climatic and tectonic influences, and impose broad constraints part of the Greater Addo Elephant National Park Conservation on lower levels of organisation, e.g., drainage basins, macro- (GAENP) project (Roux et al., 2002). The aim of the GAENP reaches, channel types (Figure 1) (Dollar et al., 2007). project was to conserve biodiversity and stimulate sustainable This article describes the process of revising the geomorphic development in the region. This required the identification of provinces delineated by Lester C. King (1967) for South Africa, options for expansion that would allow for the conservation of Lesotho and Swaziland, and presents a revised description of representative and viable biodiversity patterns and processes each of the provinces. These geomorphic provinces have been within the context of systematic conservation planning (cf. utilised in developing physical