Umoyilanga Wind Farm Grid Connection 132KV Power Line

Umoyilanga Wind Farm Grid Connection 132KV Power line

Basic Assessment - Avifaunal Impact Assessment

March 2021

Prepared by: Prepared for: WildSkies Ecological Services Coastal & Environmental Services Jon Smallie Caroline Evans [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary

The Umoyilanga (Dassiesridge) Wind Farm requires environmental authorisation for its’ 132kv grid connection overhead power line. Coastal and Environmental Services (CES) were appointed to conduct the necessary Basic Assessment process for the application. CES in turn appointed WildSkies Ecological Services to conduct the avifaunal specialist study.

Our findings with respect to the impacts of the proposed project on avifauna are as follows:

» Destruction of avifaunal habitat during construction and maintenance of the power line will be of Moderate Negative Significance both pre and post mitigation. Mitigation does not reduce the significance to Low because a certain amount of habitat alteration is inevitable in order to access the servitude for construction and to maintain a low fire risk beneath the power line once operational.

» Disturbance of birds in the study area during construction of the power line will be of Low Negative Significance. This is since no sensitive bird species are known to breed on or near the site and so disturbance will have a relatively small effect on local bird populations. The power line is also routed mostly close to existing infrastructure where birds are already accustomed to high levels of human disturbance.

» Electrocution of large birds such as eagles on the power line pylons will be of High Negative Significance pre mitigation. Several large raptor species occur in the area and are regionally and globally Red Listed. It is imperative that this risk be mitigated by using a eagle friendly pylon structure for the power line. This means that all phase-earth and phase-phase clearances must be a minimum of 1800mm. We recommend the use of a monopole structure with the Bird Perch on top of each pylon.

» Collision of large birds in flight with the overhead power line will be of High Negative Significance pre mitigation. This should be mitigated to Low Negative Significance by installing line marking devices onto the earth wire of the full length of the power line according to standard methods.

In our opinion the project may proceed with acceptable levels of risk to avifauna, provided that the recommendations of this report are implemented.

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 3 LIST OF FIGURES...... 3 LIST OF TABLES ...... 4 1. INTRODUCTION...... 5

1.1. TERMS OF REFERENCE ...... 5 1.2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITIES ...... 5 1.3. POTENTIAL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN BIRDS & THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...... 8 2. METHODS ...... 9

2.1. STUDY METHODOLOGY ...... 9 2.2. SOURCES OF INFORMATION ...... 10 2.3. LIMITATIONS & ASSUMPTIONS ...... 11 2.4. RELEVANT LEGISLATION & GUIDELINES ...... 11 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT...... 12

3.1. STUDY AREA VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION & BIRD MICRO HABITATS ...... 12 3.2. RELEVANT BIRD COMMUNITIES THAT MAY BE IMPACTED ...... 14 4. ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ...... 18

4.1. ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ON BIRDS ...... 19 4.2. REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 19 4.3. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ...... 23 5. AVIFAUNAL SENSITIVITY MAPPING ...... 24 6. CONCLUSION & IMPACT STATEMENT ...... 25 7. REFERENCES ...... 26 APPENDIX 1. CRITERIA USED FOR THE FORMAL ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ...... 28 APPENDIX 2. BIRD SPECIES DATA FOR THE SITE ...... 32 APPENDIX 3. SPECIALIST DETAILS ...... 39

List of Figures

FIGURE 1. THE LAYOUT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT...... 7 FIGURE 2. VEGETATION TYPE ALONG THE PROPOSED POWER LINE ROUTE (MUCINA & RUTHERFORD, 2006)...... 13 FIGURE 3. EXAMPLES OF MICRO HABITATS AVAILABLE TO BIRDS ON SITE...... 14 FIGURE 6. POWER LINE ROUTE ALTERNATIVES (ONLY THE SECTION WHERE THEY DIFFER)...... 23

List of Tables

TABLE 1. THE PRIORITY BIRD SPECIES FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT...... 16 TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF FORMAL ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON AVIFAUNA (SEE APPENDIX 1 FOR CRITERIA) . 21

1. Introduction

The Umoyilanga (previously Dassiesridge) Wind Farm requires environmental authorisation for its’ 132kV grid connection overhead power line. Coastal and Environmental Services (CES) were appointed to conduct the necessary Basic Assessment process for the application. CES in turn appointed WildSkies Ecological Services to conduct the avifaunal specialist study.

WildSkies has conducted numerous studies on the relevant site, including most importantly the full pre-construction bird monitoring (spanning four seasons), and most recently the avifaunal walk down for the site specific EMPr for the Umoyilanga (Dassiesridge) Wind Farm site.

1.1. Terms of Reference

A description of the services is as follows:

The main objective of the avifaunal study is to determine the impact that the construction of a 132kV power line will have on the local bird population, to determine sensitive areas and provide mitigation measures to reduce the impacts of the power line. More specifically:

» The sensitivity of the study area is to be mapped in terms of bird sensitivity » Provide a description of the existing avifaunal environment including a description of bird communities most likely to be impacted » The identification and description of micro habitats and possible bird species that will utilize them » Typical impacts that could be expected from the development will be listed as well as the expected impact on the bird communities. Impacts will be quantified (if possible) and a full description of predicted impact (direct and indirect) will be provided, as per Appendix 1: CES Impact rating methodology) » Gaps in baseline data must be highlighted and discussed. An indication of the confidence levels is to be given » The potential impact of the project on birds must be assessed and evaluated according to the magnitude, spatial scale, timing, duration, reversibility, probability and significance, and » Practical mitigation measures are to be recommended and discussed.

1.2. Description of the proposed activities

The following are the proposed project activities:

» Construction of a new 132kV powerline of approximately 20 kilometres length (depending on which route is selected) between the Umoyilanga (Dassiesridge) Wind Farm substation (not part of this application) and the existing Olifantskop Substation. » Two potential routes have been provided for assessment, the preferred route of approximately 17km and an alternate route of approximately 20km. » A 50m wide corridor has been assessed so as to allow flexibility in final positioning.

Figure 1 shows the layout of the project.

Figure 1. The layout of the proposed project. 1.3. Potential interactions between birds & the proposed development

Because of their size and prominence, electrical infrastructures constitute an important interface between wildlife and man. Negative interactions between wildlife and electricity structures take many forms, but two common problems in southern Africa are electrocution of birds (and other animals) and birds colliding with power lines (Ledger & Annegarn 1981; Ledger 1983; Ledger 1984; Hobbs & Ledger 1986a; Hobbs & Ledger 1986b; Ledger, Hobbs & Smith, 1992; Verdoorn 1996; Kruger & Van Rooyen 1998; Van Rooyen 1998; Kruger 1999; Van Rooyen 1999; Van Rooyen 2000). Other problems are electrical faults caused by bird excreta when roosting or breeding on electricity infrastructure, (Van Rooyen & Taylor 1999) and disturbance and habitat destruction during construction and maintenance activities.

Habitat destruction during construction During the construction phase of almost any development, some habitat destruction and alteration inevitably takes place. This happens with the construction of the development itself, access roads, and associated infrastructure. Birds rely on habitat to meet their needs for foraging, drinking, resting, commuting and breeding. Of these it is probably breeding habitat which is most important to protect, although this varies between bird species. The significance of habitat destruction is influenced by a number of factors, including: size of area to be affected; sensitivity of receiving habitat; uniqueness of the habitat; degree of habitat specialisation of the bird species utilising the habitat; and the conservation status and sensitivity of the species using the habitat.

Disturbance of birds during construction & maintenance of the proposed development The construction and operational activities can impact on birds through disturbance, particularly during bird breeding activities. Particular project activities of concern include blasting, drilling, heavy earth moving general vehicular movement and any other activities which result in noise or increased human activity in an area. Disturbance of non-breeding birds may simply require them to move further away or adjust their activities during the disturbance. This may be either temporary or permanent. Disturbance of breeding birds may result in lower breeding productivity, failed breeding in the relevant season, and temporary or permanent abandonment of a breeding site. All of these reduce the recruitment of young birds to the population and can have significant implications for Red Listed species in particular, many of which are slow to reach breeding age and breed in small numbers.

Electrocution of birds This is caused when a bird bridges the gap between either: a live and an earthed component (phase- earth electrocution); or two live phases (phase-phase electrocutions). This type of impact is a function of line design and the dimensions of a birds’ extremities. Power lines have also proven to be partially beneficial to many birds, including Martial Eagles Polemaetus bellicosus, Tawny Eagles Aquila rapax, African White-backed Vultures Gyps africanus, and even occasionally Verreaux’s Eagles Aquila verreauxii by providing safe nesting and roosting sites in areas where suitable natural alternatives are scarce (van Rooyen 2004). Cape Vultures have also taken to roosting on power lines in certain areas in large numbers (van Rooyen 2004a), while Lappet-faced Vultures Torgos tracheliotos are known to use power lines as roosts, especially in areas where large trees are scarce (pers.obs.). Although this provision of nesting and roosting substrate can be beneficial, it could also simply place these birds at greater risk of collision and electrocution with the power lines.

Collision of birds Collisions are the biggest single threat posed by the larger overhead lines to birds in southern Africa (van Rooyen 2004). Most heavily impacted upon are bustards, storks, cranes and various species of water birds. These species are mostly heavy-bodied birds with limited manoeuvrability, which makes it difficult for them to take the necessary evasive action to avoid colliding with power lines (van Rooyen 2004, Anderson 2001). The Red List bird species vulnerable to power line collisions are generally long living, slow reproducing species under natural conditions. Some require very specific conditions for breeding, resulting in very few successful breeding attempts, or breeding might be restricted to very small areas. These species have not evolved to cope with high adult mortality, with the result that consistent high adult mortality over an extensive period could have a serious effect on a population’s ability to sustain itself in the long or even medium term. Many of the anthropogenic threats to these species are non-discriminatory as far as age is concerned (e.g. habitat destruction, disturbance and power lines) and therefore contribute to adult mortality, and it is not known what the cumulative effect of these impacts could be over the long term.

2. Methods

2.1. Study methodology

In predicting the interactions between the proposed development and birds, a combination of science, field experience and common sense is required. More specifically the methodology used to predict impacts in the current study was as follows:

» The various avifaunal data sets listed below and the micro habitats within the study area were examined to determine the likelihood of these relevant species occurring on or near the site, and the importance of the study area for these species. » The power line route was driven and walked as far as possible. During this field work the following was conducted: o Identification of micro habitats/land use on site ▪ Representative photographs of available micro habitats (e.g. dams, wetlands, crops, forestry etc)

▪ Identification of any sensitive receptors e.g. wetlands, roosts, raptor nests etc ▪ Identification of any constraints to power line routing. For example wetlands, dams that could be avoided with slight route amendment » A list of priority bird species was determined for this assessment. » The potential impacts of the proposed facility on these above species and habitats were described and evaluated » Recommendations were made for the management and mitigation of impacts.

In simple terms, this study assesses which bird species could occur on site, how important they are, how important the site is for them, how the project will affect them, and how to mitigate these effects.

2.2. Sources of Information

The study made use of the following data sources.

» Bird distribution data of the Southern African Bird Atlas Project (SABAP1 – Harrison, Allan, Underhill, Herremans, Tree, Parker & Brown, 1997) obtained from the Avian Demography Unit of the University of Cape Town, in order to ascertain which species occur in the study area. The more recent SABAP2 data was consulted online at (http://sabap2.adu.org.za). The useful source www.mybirdpatch.org.za combines these two data sources. » Data on bird abundance and distribution on site from previous work by WildSkies in the area. » The regional conservation status of all bird species occurring in the aforementioned degree squares was then determined with the use of The Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland (Taylor et al, 2015). The global conservation status was obtained from the IUCN (2020). » A classification of the vegetation types in the study area was obtained from Mucina & Rutherford (2006). » The Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas of South Africa (Marnewick et al. 2015). There are no IBA’s close enough to site to be relevant. » The Co-ordinated Avifaunal Roadcount (CAR) data from South Africa (www.car.birdmap.africa) was consulted to determine its relevance. There are no CAR routes close enough to site to be relevant. » The Co-ordinated Waterbird Count (CWAC) data was consulted (www.cwac.birdmap.africa) to determine whether any data is available for the site. There are no CWAC sites close enough to site to be relevant.

» Information on the micro-habitat level was obtained through visiting the area and obtaining a first-hand perspective. » Primary data on bird species diversity and abundance was obtained by our own sampling on site. » Satellite Imagery of the area was studied using Google Earth ©2021.

2.3. Limitations & Assumptions

This study made the assumption that the above sources of information are reliable. The following factors may potentially detract from the accuracy of the predicted results:

» Predictions in this study are based on experience of these and similar species in different parts of southern Africa, through the authors’ experience working in the field of wildlife – energy interaction since 2000. However bird behaviour can’t be reduced to formulas that will hold true under all circumstances. » Some of the line route was difficult to access. However enough of the route was seen and sampled to allow a high confidence assessment.

2.4. Relevant legislation & guidelines

The relevant legislation to this specialist field and development includes the following:

» The Convention on Biological Diversity: dedicated to promoting sustainable development. The Convention recognizes that biological diversity is about more than plants, animals and micro-organisms and their ecosystems – it is about people and our need for food security, medicines, fresh air and water, shelter, and a clean and healthy environment in which to live. It is an international convention signed by 150 leaders at the Rio 1992 Earth Summit. eSwatini is a signatory. An important principle encompassed by the CBD is the precautionary principle which essentially states that where serious threats to the environment exist, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used a reason for delaying management of these risks. The burden of proof that the impact will not occur lies with the proponent of the activity posing the threat. » The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (also known as CMS or Bonn Convention) aims to conserve terrestrial, aquatic and avian migratory species throughout their range. It is an intergovernmental treaty, concluded under the aegis of the United Nations Environment Programme, concerned with the conservation of wildlife and habitats on a global scale. Since the Convention's entry into force, its membership has grown steadily to include 117 (as of 1 June 2012) Parties from Africa, Central and South America, Asia, Europe and Oceania. eSwatini is a signatory to this convention.

» The African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement. The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Water birds (AEWA) is the largest of its kind developed so far under the CMS. The AEWA covers 255 species of birds ecologically dependent on wetlands for at least part of their annual cycle, including many species of divers, grebes, pelicans, cormorants, herons, storks, rails, ibises, spoonbills, flamingos, ducks, swans, geese, cranes, waders, gulls, terns, tropic birds, auks, frigate birds and even the South African penguin. The agreement covers 119 countries and the European Union (EU) from Europe, parts of Asia and Canada, the Middle East and Africa. » The National Environmental Management – Biodiversity Act - Threatened or Protected Species list (TOPS). Those TOPS species relevant to this study and occurring on site are shown in Appendix 4. » The National Environmental Management Act, No. 107 of 1998 (NEMA as amended): An Environmental Authorisation is required for Listed Activities in Regulations pursuant to NEMA The avifaunal assessment feeds into the BA process to inform whether the project can proceed or not.

3. Description of the affected environment

3.1. Study area vegetation classification & bird micro habitats

The site is located on two different vegetation types. These are: “Coega Bontveld” (Least Threatened & Poorly Protected); and “Sundays Thicket” (Least Threatened & Poorly Protected). This can be seen in the map below (Figure 2)(Mucina & Rutherford, 2006).

Figure 2. Vegetation type along the proposed power line route (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006).

It is widely accepted within ornithological circles that vegetation structure and not species composition is most important in determining which bird species will occur there. Effectively, the micro habitats available to birds on site will determine species diversity, abundance and movement. The micro habitats which we identified on site include: open grassland; and thicket. Photographs of these micro habitats are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Examples of micro habitats available to birds on site.

3.2. Relevant bird communities that may be impacted

Various data sources were used in determining the distribution and abundance of bird species in the study area:

Southern African Bird Atlas Project 1 & 2 Data (SABAP 1 & SABAP2) The first atlas data was collected over an 11 year period between 1986 and 1997 (Harrison et al, 1997). This data was collected on the basis of quarter degree squares, which is a relatively large spatial scale. The more recent SABAP2 collected data on the basis of pentads which are roughly 9 kilometre x 9 kilometre squares, and are hence much smaller than the quarter degree squares used in SABAP 1 (www.sabap2.adu.org.za). This project is ongoing and as more counts are done in each pentad the data becomes available.

Approximately 301 bird species were recorded in the broader area within which this site falls by the above two atlas projects (see Appendix 2). Although the species shown in Appendix 2 were recorded in the broader area relevant to the site they may not have necessarily been recorded on the site itself. Those species recorded on site are presented in the final column ‘WildSkies’ in Appendix 2. These are the species recorded on site by our own work, so they are confirmed to definitely occur on site. A total of 85 species were confirmed to occur on site. The species diversity on the proposed site is far lower than the above atlas recorded diversity, since not all habitats available in the broader area are represented on site. For example there is no surface water available on site and a consequent absence of water fowl.

Table 1 presents the regionally and Globally Red Listed (Taylor et al, 2015, IUCN, 2021) and endemic bird species amongst these. A total of 50 bird species are shown in Table 1. Twenty of these are regionally Red Listed. Four of these are Endangered: Black Harrier Circus maurus; African Marsh- Harrier Circus ranivorus, Yellow-billed Stork Mycteria ibis and Martial Eagle. We did not record any of these species on site ourselves. Eight species are Vulnerable, and of these we recorded only 1 on site – the Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius. Eight species are Near-threatened and we recorded two of these: Knysna Woodpecker Campethera notata and Kori Bustard Ardeotis kori. We have annotated the table with ‘likelihood of occurrence’ in order to show which species have a reasonable likelihood of occurring on site. For those species with a possibility of occurring on site we have assessed the likely importance of the site for the species and if the importance is Medium or greater we have listed possible impacts for the spceies.

Table 1. The priority bird species for the proposed project.

Common name Scientific Name RD (Regional, E SAB SAB WildSkies Likelihood of occurring Importance of site for Possible Global) AP1 AP2 on site species impacts

Black Harrier Circus maurus EN, EN NE 1 1 Possible Low

African Marsh Harrier Circus ranivorus EN, LC 1 Low -

Yellow-billed Stork Mycteria ibis EN, LC 1 Low -

Martial Eagle Polemaetus bellicosus EN, VU 1 Possible Medium Electrocution

Blue Korhaan Eupodotis caerulescens LC, NT SLS 1 1 Possible Low

Forest Buzzard Buteo trizonatus LC, NT SLS 1 Low -

Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea LC, NT 1 Low -

European Roller Coracias garrulus NT, LC 1 Possible Low

Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus NT, LC 1 Low -

Half-collared Kingfisher Alcedo semitorquata NT, LC 1 Low - Knysna Woodpecker Campethera notata NT, NT E 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Protea Seedeater (Canary) Crithagra leucoptera NT, NT E 1 Possible Low

Mountain Pipit Anthus hoeschi NT, NT SLS 1 1 Possible Low

Kori Bustard Ardeotis kori NT, NT 1 1 Confirmed Medium Collision

Maccoa Duck Oxyura maccoa NT, VU 1 Low -

Black Stork Ciconia nigra VU, LC 1 1 Low -

Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus VU, LC 1 1 Possible Medium Collision, nesting Caspian Tern Hydropogne caspia VU, LC 1 Low -

Verreaux's Eagle Aquila verreauxii VU, LC 1 Low -

Denham’s Bustard Neotis denhami VU, NT 1 1 Probable Medium Collision

Crowned Eagle Stephanoaetus coronatus VU, NT 1 Low -

Southern Black Korhaan Afrotis afra VU, VU E 1 Possible Medium Collision

Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius VU, VU 1 1 1 Confirmed Medium Collision

Cape Siskin Crithagra totta E 1 Possible Low

Cape Sugarbird Promerops cafer E 1 Possible Low

Orange-breasted Sunbird Anthobaphes violacea E 1 Possible Low

Victorin’s Warbler Cryptillas victorini E 1 Possible Low

Cape Bulbul Pycnonotus capensis E 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Fiscal Flycatcher Melaenornis silens NE 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Jackal Buzzard Buteo rufofuscus NE 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Southern Double-collared Sunbird Cinnyris chalybeus NE 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Southern Tchagra Tchagra tchagra NE 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Cape Weaver Ploceus capensis NE 1 1 Possible Low

Swee Waxbill Coccopygia melanotis NE 1 1 Possible Low

Cape Grassbird Sphenoeacus afer NE 1 1 Confirmed Low

Cape White-eye Zosterops virens NE 1 1 Confirmed Low

Grey Tit Melaniparus afer NE 1 1 Confirmed Low

Brown Scrub Robin Cercotrichas signata NE 1 Possible Low

Fairy Flycatcher Stenostira scita NE 1 Possible Low

Karoo Thrush Turdus smithi NE 1 Possible Low

Cape Clapper Lark Mirafra apiata NE 1 Confirmed Low

Karoo Prinia Prinia maculosa NE 1 Confirmed Low

Cape Rock Thrush Monticola rupestris SLS 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Greater Double-collared Sunbird Cinnyris afer SLS 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Pied Starling Lamprotornis bicolor SLS 1 1 1 Confirmed Low

Drakensberg Prinia Prinia hypoxantha SLS 1 Possible Low

Eastern Long-billed Lark Certhilauda semitorquata SLS 1 Possible Low

Forest Canary Crithagra scotops SLS 1 Possible Low

Grey-winged Francolin Scleroptila afra SLS 1 Possible Low

Knysna Turaco Tauraco corythaix SLS 1 Possible Low

CR=Critically Endangered, EN = Endangered; VU = Vulnerable; NT = near-threatened, LC = least concern, E – Endemic, NE – near-endemic, SLS – endemic to South Africa, Lesotho & Swaziland

Taking the above described sources of information into account, we draw the following conclusions for regionally Red Listed species that are likely to occur in the area:

Raptors: Sensitive raptors in the study include large eagles and medium sized raptors, all of which could frequent the site at times. Potential impacts on these species would include collisions with the new power line as well as electrocutions (if the incorrect pylon structure is chosen), habitat destruction and disturbance. It will thus be critical to implement the required mitigation, detailed in Section 4.

Large terrestrial bird species: Cranes, bustards and korhaans occur at times in this study area and are very susceptible to power line collisions. Secretarybird is included here as its’ ecology is more similar to that of large terrestrials than raptors for the purposes of this assessment. Secretarybird is highly susceptible to power line collision. These impacts must be mitigated to reduce the impact.

Waterfowl & riverine species: Several species such as Greater Flamingo, Curlew Sandpiper, Yellow- billed Stork have been recorded in the broader area and would be susceptible to power line collision. However there is no open water on the proposed site and they are unlikely to occur on the site.

Red Listed species such as the above face considerable conservation challenges and can ill afford additional mortality factors associated with the construction and operation of new infrastructure. Although this impact assessment focuses on Red Listed species, the impact on non-Red List species is also assessed, albeit in less detail. It could be (justifiably) argued that if insufficient attention is given to assessing the impacts of developments on common bird species, these may with time make it onto the Red List as threatened species thereby adding to our already significant conservation challenges. However attempting to focus on too many species (remembering that up to 301 could occur on this site) would dilute attention from those species already highly threatened. Furthermore, the mitigation recommended for Red Listed species is likely to also provide cover for more common species.

4. Assessment of Impacts

4.1. Assessment of the impacts of the proposed project on birds

The potential impacts on avifauna have been assessed in Table 3 according to the standard criteria provided by CES (see Appendix 1).

Destruction of avifaunal habitat during construction and maintenance of the power line will be of Moderate Negative Significance both pre and post mitigation. Required mitigation consists mainly of measures to limit the amount of natural vegetation impacted on. Mitigation does not reduce the significance to Low because a certain amount of habitat alteration is inevitable in order to access the servitude for construction and to maintain a low fire risk beneath the power line once operational.

Disturbance of birds in the study area during construction of the power line and substations will be of Low Negative Significance. This is since no sensitive bird species are known to breed on or near the site and so disturbance will have a relatively small effect on local bird populations. The power line route also largely follows existing infrastructure and through areas already disturbed by human activities.

Electrocution of large birds such as eagles on the power line pylons will be of High Negative Significance pre mitigation. Several large raptor species could occur in the area and are regionally and globally Red Listed (see Table 1). It is imperative that this risk be mitigated by using an eagle friendly pylon structure for the power line. This means that all phase-earth and phase-phase clearances must be a minimum of 1800mm. This is to ensure that a perched eagle cannot bridge these gaps with outstretched wings. We recommend that a monopole structure (either steel or concrete) be used, in tandem with the standard Eskom Bird Perch on all towers.

Collision of large birds in flight with the overhead power line will be of High Negative Significance pre mitigation. This should be mitigated to Low Negative Significance by installing line marking devices onto the earth wire of the full length of the power line according to standard methods.

4.2. Required mitigation measures

To summarise, the following mitigation measures are necessary:

» The pylon/tower structure must be eagle friendly and have a minimum of 1800mm of phase-phase and phase-earth clearance. We recommend the use of a steel or concrete monopole structure in tandem with a Bird Perch on top of each structure.

» The earth wires on the full power line should be fitted with an approved anti bird collision line marking device to make cables more visible to birds in flight and reduce the likelihood of collisions. » All construction activities should be strictly managed according to generally accepted environmental best practice standards, so as to avoid any unnecessary impact on the receiving environment. » All temporary disturbed areas should be rehabilitated according to the site’s rehabilitation plan, following construction.

Table 2. Summary of formal assessment of impacts on avifauna (see Appendix 1 for criteria)

EFFECT SIGNIFICANCE

SIGNIFICANCE

PROJECT OF IMPACT

CAUSE AND COMMENT WITHOUT REVERSIBILITY MITIGATION MEASURES COMPONENTS WITH MITIGATION

MITIGATION

EXTENT

DURATION SEVERITY /

PROBABILITY CONSEQUENCE CONSEQUENCE

(SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION) (SIGNIFICANCE WITH MITIGATION)

Impact: Habitat destruction during construction

All construction activities should be strictly managed according to generally accepted During construction vegetation is altered or environmental best practice standards, so as to moved for the project footprint. This Overhead MODERATE avoid any unnecessary impact on the receiving MODERATE destroys avifauna habitat, makes it less Permanent Localised Slight Definite Very difficult power line NEGATIVE environment. NEGATIVE useful to birds, or less attractive to sensitive species. All temporary disturbed areas should be rehabilitated according to the site’s rehabilitation plan, following construction.

Impact: Disturbance of birds during construction & operations

Birds are disturbed by construction or All construction activities should be strictly operations activities & their survival or managed according to generally accepted Overhead Study LOW reproduction is compromised. Most Short term Slight Possible Moderate environmental best practice standards, so as to LOW NEGATIVE power line area NEGATIVE applicable with breeding sensitive bird avoid any unnecessary impact on the receiving species. environment.

Impact: Electrocution of birds on power line & in substations

The pole design must be eagle friendly and have Large birds are electrocuted whilst perched a minimum of 1800mm phase-earth and phase- Overhead on pylons, by bridging the critical HIGH MODERATE Permanent Global Severe Probable Very difficult phase clearance. It is recommended that a steel power line clearances between phases or phase –earth NEGATIVE NEGATIVE or concrete monopole structure is used in hardware. tandem with a Bird Perch on all pylons.

EFFECT SIGNIFICANCE

SIGNIFICANCE

PROJECT OF IMPACT

CAUSE AND COMMENT WITHOUT REVERSIBILITY MITIGATION MEASURES COMPONENTS WITH MITIGATION

MITIGATION

EXTENT

DURATION SEVERITY /

PROBABILITY CONSEQUENCE CONSEQUENCE

(SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION) (SIGNIFICANCE WITH MITIGATION)

Impact: Collision of birds on overhead power line

The earth wires on the full power line length Birds in flight collide with overhead cables should be fitted with an approved anti bird Overhead (conductors or earth wires) whilst in mid- HIGH Permanent Global Severe Probable Very difficult collision line marking device to make cables LOW NEGATIVE power lines flight. This occurs when they don’t see the NEGATIVE more visible to birds in flight and reduce the cables until too late to take evasive action. likelihood of collisions.

4.3. Analysis of alternatives

Two alternatives have been suggested for the proposed project. These are described below:

» The Preferred Route runs from the easternmost alternative site for the wind farm substation. It runs eastwards through the wind farm site to the gravel road and then runs dues south adjacent to the road for 3km. Just south of the road it turns east and runs straight through the existing Grassridge Wind Farm to the existing Olifantskop Substation. This route is approximately 17km long. From just south of the gravel road it is adjacent to an existing overhead power line. » The Alternate Route is identical to the above except that it starts at a substation site 3km further west. This alternative is approximately 20km long.

Our preference from an avifaunal perspective is for the Preferred Route as it is slightly shorter. Both of the alternatives are acceptable and neither is fatally flawed.

Figure 4. Power line route alternatives (only the section where they differ).

5. Avifaunal sensitivity mapping

No particularly sensitive features exist along the power line route. No differentiation of avifaunal sensitivity and mapping thereof could be conducted.

6. Conclusion & Impact Statement

Our findings with respect to the impacts of the proposed project on avifauna are as follows:

In our opinion the project may proceed with acceptable levels of risk to avifauna, provided that the recommendations of this report are implemented.

7. References

Anderson, M.D. 2001. The effectiveness of two different marking devices to reduce large terrestrial bird collisions with overhead electricity cables in the eastern Karoo, South Africa. Draft report to Eskom Resources and Strategy Division. Johannesburg. South Africa.

Harrison, J.A., Allan, D.G., Underhill, L.G., Herremans, M., Tree, A.J., Parker, V & Brown, C.J. (eds). 1997. The atlas of southern African birds. Vol. 1&2. BirdLife South Africa: Johannesburg.

Hobbs, J.C.A. & Ledger J.A. 1986a. The Environmental Impact of Linear Developments; Power lines and Avifauna. (Third International Conference on Environmental Quality and Ecosystem Stability. Israel, June 1986).

Hobbs, J.C.A. & Ledger J.A. 1986b. “Power lines, Birdlife and the Golden Mean.” Fauna and Flora, 44, pp 23-27.

Hockey, P.A.R., Dean, W.R.J., Ryan, P.G. (Eds) 2005. Roberts – Birds of Southern Africa, VIIth ed. The Trustees of the John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town.

Kruger, R. & Van Rooyen, C.S. 1998. Evaluating the risk that existing power lines pose to large raptors by using risk assessment methodology: the Molopo Case Study. (5th World Conference on Birds of Prey and Owls: 4 - 8 August 1998. Midrand, South Africa.)

Kruger, R. 1999. Towards solving raptor electrocutions on Eskom Distribution Structures in South Africa. M. Phil. Mini-thesis. University of the Orange Free State. Bloemfontein. South Africa.

Ledger, J. 1983. Guidelines for Dealing with Bird Problems of Transmission Lines and Towers. Eskom Test and Research Division Technical Note TRR/N83/005.

Ledger, J.A. & Annegarn H.J. 1981. “Electrocution Hazards to the Cape Vulture (Gyps coprotheres) in South Africa”. Biological Conservation, 20, pp15-24.

Ledger, J.A. 1984. “Engineering Solutions to the problem of Vulture Electrocutions on Electricity Towers.” The Certificated Engineer, 57, pp 92-95.

Ledger, J.A., J.C.A. Hobbs & Smith T.V. 1992. Avian Interactions with Utility Structures: Southern African Experiences. (Proceedings of the International Workshop on Avian Interactions with Utility Structures, Miami, Florida, 13-15 September 1992. Electric Power Research Institute.)

Mucina, L, Rutherford, C. 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland, South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

Taylor, M. R, Peacock, F., & Wanless, R. 2015. The 2015 Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho & Swaziland.

Van Rooyen, C.S. 1998. Raptor mortality on power lines in South Africa. (5th World Conference on Birds of Prey and Owls: 4 - 8 August 1998. Midrand, South Africa.)

Van Rooyen, C.S. 1999. An overview of the Eskom - WILDSKIES ECOLOGICAL SERVICES Strategic Partnership in South Africa. (EPRI Workshop on Avian Interactions with Utility Structures 2-3 December 1999, Charleston, South Carolina.)

Van Rooyen, C.S. 2000. “An overview of Vulture Electrocutions in South Africa.” Vulture News, 43, pp 5-22. Vulture Study Group: Johannesburg, South Africa.

Van Rooyen, C.S. 2004a. The Management of Wildlife Interactions with overhead lines. In The fundamentals and practice of Overhead Line Maintenance (132kV and above), pp217-245. Eskom Technology, Services International, Johannesburg.

Van Rooyen, C.S. 2004b. Investigations into vulture electrocutions on the Edwardsdam-Mareetsane 88kV feeder, Unpublished report, Endangered Wildlife Trust, Johannesburg.

Van Rooyen, C.S. & Taylor, P.V. 1999. Bird Streamers as probable cause of electrocutions in South Africa. (EPRI Workshop on Avian Interactions with Utility Structures 2-3 December 1999. Charleston, South Carolina)

Verdoorn, G.H. 1996. Mortality of Cape Griffons Gyps coprotheres and African White-backed Vultures Gyps africanus on 88kV and 132kV power lines in Western Transvaal, South Africa, and mitigation measures to prevent future problems. (2nd International Conference on Raptors: 2-5 October 1996. Urbino, Italy.)

Websites: www.sabap2.adu.org.za Southern African Bird Atlas Project 2 www.mybirdpatch.org.za www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed September 2021

Appendix 1. Criteria used for the formal assessment of impacts

The following standard rating scales have been defined for assessing and quantifying the identified impacts. This is necessary since impacts have a number of parameters that need to be assessed. The identified impacts have been assessed against the following criteria:

Six factors are considered when assessing the significance of the identified issues, namely:

1. Significance - Each of the below criterion (points 2-6 below) are ranked with scores assigned, as presented in Table 1 to determine the overall significance of an activity. The total scores recorded for the effect (which includes scores for duration; extent; consequence and probability) and reversibility / mitigation are then read off the matrix presented in Table 9-1, to determine the overall significance of the issue. The overall significance is either negative or positive. 2. Consequence/severity - the consequence scale is used in order to objectively evaluate how severe a number of negative impacts might be on the issue under consideration, or how beneficial a number of positive impacts might be on the issue under consideration. 3. Extent - the spatial scale defines the physical extent of the impact. 4. Duration - the temporal scale defines the significance of the impact at various time scales, as an indication of the duration of the impact. 5. The probability of the impact occurring - the likelihood of impacts taking place as a result of project actions arising from the various alternatives. There is no doubt that some impacts would occur (e.g. loss of vegetation), but other impacts are not as likely to occur (e.g. vehicle accident) and may or may not result from the proposed development and alternatives. Although some impacts may have a severe effect, the likelihood of them occurring may affect their overall significance. 6. Reversibility / Mitigation – The degree of difficulty of reversing and/or mitigating the various impacts ranges from very difficult to easily achievable. The four categories used are listed and explained in Table 9-1 below. Both the practical feasibility of the measure, the potential cost and the potential effectiveness is taken into consideration when determining the appropriate degree of difficulty.

The relationship of the issue to the temporal scale, spatial scale and the severity are combined to describe the overall importance rating, namely the significance of the assessed impact.

The impact is first classified as a positive (+) or negative (-) impact. The impact then undergoes an evaluation according to a set of criteria.

Ranking of Evaluation Criteria. Duration Short term Less than 5 years Medium term Between 5-20 years Long term More than 20 years Over 40 years or resulting in a permanent and lasting Permanent loss Extent Localised Impacts affect a small area of a few hectares in extent. Often only a portion of the project area. Study area The proposed site and its immediate surroundings. Municipal Impacts affect the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, or any towns within the municipality. Regional Impacts affect the wider area or the Eastern Cape Province as a whole. National Impacts affect the entire country. International/Global Impacts affect other countries or have a global Effect influence. Consequence/severity Slight impacts or benefits on the affected system(s) or Slight party(ies) Moderate impacts or benefits on the affected Moderate system(s) or party(ies) Severe/ Severe impacts or benefits on the affected system(s) Beneficial or party(ies) Probability Definite More than 90% sure of a particular fact. Should have substantial supportive data. Probable Over 70% sure of a particular fact, or of the likelihood of that impact occurring. Possible Only over 40% sure of a particular fact, or of the likelihood of an impact occurring. Unsure/Unlikely Less than 40% sure of a particular fact, or of the likelihood of an impact occurring. Impact Reversibility / Mitigation The impact can be easily, effectively and cost Easy effectively mitigated/reversed The impact can be effectively mitigated/reversed Moderate without much difficulty or cost Reversibility/ The impact could be mitigated/reversed but there will Mitigation Difficult be some difficultly in ensuring effectiveness and/or implementation, and significant costs The impact could be mitigated/reversed but it would Very Difficult be very difficult to ensure effectiveness, technically very challenging and financially very costly

Impacts Severity Rating Impact severity (The severity of negative impacts, or how beneficial positive impacts would be on a affected system or affected party) Very severe Very beneficial An irreversible and permanent change to the affected A permanent and very substantial benefit to the system(s) or party(ies) which cannot be mitigated. For affected system(s) or party(ies), with no real alternative example the permanent loss of land.

to achieving this benefit. For example the vast improvement of sewage effluent quality. Severe Beneficial Long term impacts on the affected system(s) or party(ies) A long term impact and substantial benefit to the that could be mitigated. However, this mitigation would be affected system(s) or party(ies). Alternative ways of difficult, expensive or time consuming, or some achieving this benefit would be difficult, expensive or combination of these. For example, the clearing of forest time consuming, or some combination of these. For vegetation. example an increase in the local economy. Moderately severe Moderately beneficial Medium to long term impacts on the affected system(s) or A medium to long term impact of real benefit to the party (ies), which could be mitigated. For example affected system(s) or party(ies). Other ways of constructing a sewage treatment facility where there was optimising the beneficial effects are equally difficult, vegetation with a low conservation value. expensive and time consuming (or some combination of these), as achieving them in this way. For example a ‘slight’ improvement in sewage effluent quality. Slight Slightly beneficial Medium or short term impacts on the affected system(s) or A short to medium term impact and negligible benefit party(ies). Mitigation is very easy, cheap, less time to the affected system(s) or party(ies). Other ways of consuming or not necessary. For example a temporary optimising the beneficial effects are easier, cheaper and fluctuation in the water table due to water abstraction. quicker, or some combination of these. No effect Don’t know/Can’t know The system(s) or party(ies) is not affected by the proposed In certain cases it may not be possible to determine the development. severity of an impact.

Overall Significance Rating OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE (THE COMBINATION OF ALL THE ABOVE CRITERIA AS AN OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE) VERY HIGH NEGATIVE VERY BENEFICIAL (VERY HIGH +) These impacts would be considered by society as constituting a major and usually permanent change to the (natural and/or social) environment, and usually result in severe or very severe effects, or beneficial or very beneficial effects. Example: The loss of a species would be viewed by informed society as being of VERY HIGH significance. Example: The establishment of a large amount of infrastructure in a rural area, which previously had very few services, would be regarded by the affected parties as resulting in benefits with VERY HIGH significance. HIGH NEGATIVE BENEFICIAL (HIGH +) These impacts will usually result in long term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as HIGH will need to be considered by society as constituting an important and usually long term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. Society would probably view these impacts in a serious light. Example: The loss of a diverse vegetation type, which is fairly common elsewhere, would have a significance rating of HIGH over the long term, as the area could be rehabilitated. Example: The change to soil conditions will impact the natural system, and the impact on affected parties (such as people growing crops in the soil) would be HIGH. MODERATE NEGATIVE SOME BENEFITS (MODERATE +) These impacts will usually result in medium to long term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as MODERATE will need to be considered by society as constituting a fairly important and usually medium term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are real but not substantial. Example: The loss of a sparse, open vegetation type of low diversity may be regarded as MODERATELY significant. LOW NEGATIVE FEW BENEFITS (LOW +) These impacts will usually result in medium to short term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as LOW will need to be considered by the public and/or the specialist as constituting a fairly unimportant and usually short term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are not substantial and are likely to have little real effect. Example: The temporary changes in the water table of a wetland habitat, as these systems are adapted to fluctuating water levels. Example: The increased earning potential of people employed as a result of a development would only result in benefits of LOW significance to people who live some distance away. NO SIGNIFICANCE There are no primary or secondary effects at all that are important to scientists or the public. Example: A change to the geology of a particular formation may be regarded as severe from a geological perspective, but is of NO significance in the overall context.

DON’T KNOW In certain cases it may not be possible to determine the significance of an impact. For example, the primary or secondary impacts on the social or natural environment given the available information. Example: The effect of a development on people’s psychological perspective of the environment.

All feasible alternatives and the “no-go option” will be equally assessed in order to evaluate the significance of the “as predicted” impacts (prior to mitigation) and the “residual” impacts (that remain after mitigation measures are taken into account). The reason(s) for the judgement will be provided when necessary.

All impacts must have a “cause and comment”, a significance rating before mitigation, after mitigation and for the no-go option. Impacts should also indicate applicable mitigation measure/ recommendations to reduce the impact significance.

Appendix 2. Bird species data for the site

‘1’ denotes presence not abundance RD (Regional, Global – regional conservation status (Taylor et al 2015), Global conservation status (IUCN, 2021) E – Endemic E or near endemic NE or South Africa, Lesotho, Swaziland SLS

Common name Scientific Name RD (Regional, E SAB SAB WildSkies Global) AP1 AP2

Black Harrier Circus maurus EN, EN NE 1 1

African Marsh Harrier Circus ranivorus EN, LC 1

Yellow-billed Stork Mycteria ibis EN, LC 1

Martial Eagle Polemaetus bellicosus EN, VU 1

Blue Korhaan Eupodotis caerulescens LC, NT SLS 1 1

Forest Buzzard Buteo trizonatus LC, NT SLS 1

Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea LC, NT 1

European Roller Coracias garrulus NT, LC 1

Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus NT, LC 1

Half-collared Kingfisher Alcedo semitorquata NT, LC 1 Knysna Woodpecker Campethera notata NT, NT E 1 1 1

Protea Seedeater (Canary) Crithagra leucoptera NT, NT E 1

Mountain Pipit Anthus hoeschi NT, NT SLS 1 1

Kori Bustard Ardeotis kori NT, NT 1 1

Maccoa Duck Oxyura maccoa NT, VU 1

Black Stork Ciconia nigra VU, LC 1 1

Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus VU, LC 1 1

Caspian Tern Hydropogne caspia VU, LC 1

Verreaux's Eagle Aquila verreauxii VU, LC 1

Denham’s Bustard Neotis denhami VU, NT 1 1

Crowned Eagle Stephanoaetus coronatus VU, NT 1

Southern Black Korhaan Afrotis afra VU, VU E 1

Secretarybird Sagittarius serpentarius VU, VU 1 1 1

Cape Siskin Crithagra totta E 1

Cape Sugarbird Promerops cafer E 1

Orange-breasted Sunbird Anthobaphes violacea E 1

Victorin’s Warbler Cryptillas victorini E 1

Cape Bulbul Pycnonotus capensis E 1 1 1

Fiscal Flycatcher Melaenornis silens NE 1 1 1

Jackal Buzzard Buteo rufofuscus NE 1 1 1

Southern Double-collared Sunbird Cinnyris chalybeus NE 1 1 1

Southern Tchagra Tchagra tchagra NE 1 1 1

Cape Weaver Ploceus capensis NE 1 1

Swee Waxbill Coccopygia melanotis NE 1 1

Cape Grassbird Sphenoeacus afer NE 1 1

Cape White-eye Zosterops virens NE 1 1

Grey Tit Melaniparus afer NE 1 1

Brown Scrub Robin Cercotrichas signata NE 1

Fairy Flycatcher Stenostira scita NE 1

Karoo Thrush Turdus smithi NE 1

Cape Clapper Lark Mirafra apiata NE 1

Karoo Prinia Prinia maculosa NE 1

Cape Rock Thrush Monticola rupestris SLS 1 1 1

Greater Double-collared Sunbird Cinnyris afer SLS 1 1 1

Pied Starling Lamprotornis bicolor SLS 1 1 1

Drakensberg Prinia Prinia hypoxantha SLS 1

Eastern Long-billed Lark Certhilauda semitorquata SLS 1

Forest Canary Crithagra scotops SLS 1

Grey-winged Francolin Scleroptila afra SLS 1

Knysna Turaco Tauraco corythaix SLS 1

Acacia Pied Barbet Tricholaema leucomelas 1 1 1

African Firefinch Lagonosticta rubricata 1 1 1

African Hoopoe Upupa africana 1 1 1

African Pipit Anthus cinnamomeus 1 1 1

African Stonechat Saxicola torquatus 1 1 1

Ant-eating Chat Myrmecocichla formicivora 1 1 1

Bar-throated Apalis Apalis thoracica 1 1 1

Black-headed Heron Ardea melanocephala 1 1 1

Blacksmith Lapwing Vanellus armatus 1 1 1

Bokmakierie Telophorus zeylonus 1 1 1

Brimstone Canary Crithagra sulphurata 1 1 1

Brown-hooded Kingfisher Halcyon albiventris 1 1 1

Brown-throated Martin Riparia paludicola 1 1 1

Cape Batis Batis capensis 1 1 1

Cape Crow Corvus capensis 1 1 1

Cape Glossy (Cape) Starling Lamprotornis nitens 1 1 1

Cape Robin-chat Cossypha caffra 1 1 1

Cape Sparrow Passer melanurus 1 1 1

Cape Turtle (Ring-necked) Dove Streptopelia capicola 1 1 1

Cape Wagtail Motacilla capensis 1 1 1

Cardinal Woodpecker Dendropicos fuscescens 1 1 1

Chestnut-vented Tit-Babbler Sylvia subcoerulea 1 1 1 (Warbler) Common Ostrich Struthio camelus 1 1 1

Common Waxbill Estrilda astrild 1 1 1

Crowned Lapwing Vanellus coronatus 1 1 1

Egyptian Goose Alopochen aegyptiaca 1 1 1

Emerald-spotted Wood Dove Turtur chalcospilos 1 1 1

Familiar Chat Oenathe familiaris 1 1 1

Fork-tailed Drongo Dicrurus adsimilis 1 1 1

Golden-breasted Bunting Emberiza flaviventris 1 1 1

Grey-backed Cisticola Cisticola subruficapilla 1 1 1

Hadeda (Hadada) Ibis Bostrychia hagedash 1 1 1

Hamerkop Scopus umbretta 1 1 1

Helmeted Guineafowl Numida meleagris 1 1 1

House Sparrow Passer domesticus 1 1 1

Karoo Scrub Robin Cercotrichas coryphoeus 1 1 1

Laughing Dove Spilopelia senegalensis 1 1 1

Long-billed crombec Sylvietta rufescens 1 1 1

Malachite Sunbird Nectarinia famosa 1 1 1

Neddicky Cisticola fulvicapilla 1 1 1

Pale Chanting Goshawk Melierax canorus 1 1 1

Pied Crow Corvus albus 1 1 1

Red-eyed Dove Streptopelia semitorquata 1 1 1

Red-faced Mousebird Urocolius indicus 1 1 1

Red-winged Starling Onychognathus morio 1 1 1

Rock Kestrel Falco rupicolus 1 1 1

Rock Martin Ptyonoprogne fuligula 1 1 1

Sombre Greenbul Andropadus importunus 1 1 1

South African Shelduck Tadorna cana 1 1 1

Southern Black Tit Melaniparus niger 1 1 1

Southern Boubou Laniarius ferrugineus 1 1 1

Southern Masked Weaver Ploceus velatus 1 1 1

Speckled Mousebird Colius striatus 1 1 1

Speckled Pigeon Columba guinea 1 1 1

Spectacled Weaver Ploceus ocularis 1 1 1

Spotted Eagle-Owl Bubo africanus 1 1 1

Spotted Thick-knee Burhinus capensis 1 1 1

Spur-winged Goose Plectropterus gambensis 1 1 1

Streaky-headed Seedeater Crithagra gularis 1 1 1

Wailing Cisticola Cisticola lais 1 1 1

White-browed Scrub Robin Cercotrichas leucophrys 1 1 1

White-necked Raven Corvus albicollis 1 1 1

White-throated Canary Crithagra albogularis 1 1 1

Yellow-fronted Canary Crithagra mozambica 1 1 1

African Black Duck Anas sparsa 1 1

African Black Swift Apus barbatus 1 1

African Fish Eagle Haliaeetus vocifer 1 1

African Goshawk Accipiter tachiro 1 1

African Harrier-Hawk Polyboroides typus 1 1

African Palm Swift Cypsiurus parvus 1 1

African Paradise Flycatcher Terpsiphone viridis 1 1

African Sacred Ibis Threskiornis aethiopicus 1 1

African Spoonbill Platalea alba 1 1

Alpine Swift Tachymarptis melba 1 1

Amethyst Sunbird Chalcomitra amethystina 1 1

Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica 1 1

Black Crake Amaurornis flavirostra 1 1

Black Cuckoo Cuculus clamosus 1 1

Black Kite Milvus migrans 1 1

Black Saw-wing Psalidoprocne pristoptera 1 1

Black-collared Barbet Lybius torquatus 1 1

Black-headed Oriole Oriolus larvatus 1 1

Black-throated Wattle-eye Platysteira peltata 1 1

Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus 1 1

Booted Eagle Hieraaetus pennatus 1 1

Cape Bunting Emberiza capensis 1 1

Cape Canary Serinus canicollis 1 1

Cape Shoveler Spatula smithii 1 1

Cape Teal Anas capensis 1 1

Citrine Wagtail Motacilla citreola 1 1

Common (Steppe) Buzzard Buteo buteo 1 1

Common House Martin Delichon urbicum 1 1

Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus 1 1

Common Quail Coturnix coturnix 1 1

Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris 1 1

Dark-capped Bulbul Pycnonotus tricolor 1 1

Desert Cisticola Cisticola aridulus 1 1

Diederik Cuckoo Chrysococcyx caprius 1 1

Dusky Indigobird Vidua funerea 1 1

European Bee-eater Merops apiaster 1 1

Fiery-necked Nightjar Caprimulgus pectoralis 1 1

Greater Striped Swallow Cecropis cucullata 1 1

Green Wood-hoopoe Phoeniculus purpureus 1 1

Green-backed Camaroptera Camaroptera brachyura 1 1

Grey Heron Ardea cinerea 1 1

Grey Sunbird Cyanomitra veroxii 1 1

Grey Wagtail Motacilla cinerea 1 1

Jacobin Cuckoo Clamator jacobinus 1 1

Klaas's Cuckoo Chrysococcyx klaas 1 1

Lazy Cisticola Cisticola aberrans 1 1

Lesser Honeyguide Indicator minor 1 1

Lesser Striped Swallow Cecropis abyssinica 1 1

Lesser Swamp Warbler Acrocephalus gracilirostris 1 1

Little Egret Egretta garzetta 1 1

Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis 1 1

Little Swift Apus affinis 1 1

Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis 1 1

Mountain Wagtail Motacilla clara 1 1

Namaqua Dove Oena capensis 1 1

Olive Bush-Shrike Chlorophoneus olivaceus 1 1

Pearl-breasted Swallow Hirundo dimidiata 1 1

Pied Avocet Recurvirostra avosetta 1 1

Pied Kingfisher Ceryle rudis 1 1

Pin-tailed Whydah Vidua macroura 1 1

Purple Heron Ardea purpurea 1 1

Red-billed Quelea Quelea quelea 1 1

Red-billed Teal Anas erythrorhyncha 1 1

Red-knobbed coot Fulica cristata 1 1

Red-necked Spurfowl Pternistis afer 1 1

Red-throated Wryneck Jynx ruficollis 1 1

Reed Cormorant Microcarbo africanus 1 1

Rock Dove Columba livia 1 1

Ruff Calidris pugnax 1 1

Rufous-eared Warbler Malcorus pectoralis 1 1

Sand Martin Riparia riparia 1 1

Southern Red Bishop Euplectes orix 1 1

Spike-heeled Lark Chersomanes albofasciata 1 1

Spotted flycatcher Muscicapa striata 1 1

Tambourine Dove Turtur tympanistria 1 1

Three-banded Plover Charadrius tricollaris 1 1

Western Barn Owl Tyto alba 1 1

Western Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis 1 1

White-rumped Swift Apus caffer 1 1

White-throated Swallow Hirundo albigularis 1 1

Wood Sandpiper Tringa glareola 1 1

Woodwards’ Batis Batis fratrum 1 1

Yellow (Eastern Golden) Weaver Ploceus subaureus 1 1

Yellow-billed Duck Anas undulata 1 1

Yellow-billed Kite Milvus aegyptius 1 1

Red-fronted Tinkerbird Pogoniulus pusillus 1 1

(Common) Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus 1

African (Purple) Swamphen Porphyrio madagascariensis 1

African Darter Anhinga rufa 1

African Dusky Flycatcher Muscicapa adusta 1

African Jacana Actophilornis africanus 1

African Olive Pigeon Columba arquatrix 1

African Pied Wagtail Motacilla aguimp 1

African Quail-finch Ortygospiza atricollis 1

African Rail Rallus caerulescens 1

African Reed Warbler Acrocephalus baeticatus 1

African Snipe Gallinago nigripennis 1

Banded Martin Riparia cincta 1

Black Cuckooshrike Campephaga flava 1

Black Sparrowhawk Accipiter melanoleucus 1

Black-backed Puffback Dryoscopus cubla 1

Black-bellied Starling Notopholia corusca 1

Black-crowned Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax 1

Black-winged Lapwing Vanellus melanopterus 1

Blue-mantled Crested Flycatcher Trochocercus cyanomelas 1

Burchell’s Coucal Centropus burchellii 1

Capped Wheatear Oenanthe pileata 1

Cinnamon-breasted Bunting Emberiza tahapisi 1

Collared Sunbird Hedydipna collaris 1

Common Greenshank Tringa nebularia 1

Common Ringed Plover Charadrius hiaticula 1

Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos 1

Common Tern Sterna hirundo 1

Crowned Hornbill Lophocerus alboterminatus 1

Dark-backed Weaver Ploceus bicolor 1

Dusky Sunbird Cinnyris fuscus 1

Eastern Clapper Lark Mirafra fasciolata 1

Eurasian Golden Oriole Oriolus oriolus 1

Giant Kingfisher Megaceryle maxima 1

Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus 1

Goliath Heron Ardea goliath 1

Great Spotted Cuckoo Clamator glandarius 1

Greater Honeyguide Indicator indicator 1

Greater Sand Plover Charadrius leschenaultii 1

Grey Cuckooshrike Ceblepyris caesius 1

Grey Penduline-tit Anthoscopus caroli 1

Grey-backed Camaroptera Camaroptera brevicaudata 1

Grey-headed Bush-Shrike Malaconotus blanchoti 1

Grey-headed Gull Chroicocephalus cirrocephalus 1

Horus Swift Apus horus 1

Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus 1

Kittlitz’s Plover Charadrius pecuarius 1

Lemon Dove Columba larvata 1

Levaillant’s Cisticola Cisticola tinniens 1

Little Bittern Ixobrychus minutus 1

Little Rush Warbler Bradypterus baboecala 1

Little Sparrowhawk Accipiter minullus 1

Little Stint Calidris minuta 1

Malachite Kingfisher Corythornis cristatus 1

Mocking Cliff Chat Thamnolaea cinnamomeiventris 1

Narina Trogon Apaloderma narina 1

Olive Thrush Turdus olivaceus 1

Olive Woodpecker Dendropicos griseocephalus 1

Red-capped Lark Calandrella cinerea 1

Red-chested Cuckoo Cuculus solitarius 1

Red-collared Widowbird Euplectes ardens 1

Red-headed Finch Amadina erythrocephala 1

Red-winged Francolin Scleroptila levaillantii 1

Rufous-breasted Sparrowhawk Accipiter rufiventris 1

Scaly-throated Honeyguide Indicator variegatus 1

Southern Black flycatcher Melaenornis pammelaina 1

Southern Grey-headed Sparrow Passer diffusus 1

Southern Pochard Netta erythrophthalma 1

Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides 1

Swallow-tailed Bee-eater Merops hirundineus 1

Terrestrial Brownbul Phyllastrephus terrestris 1

Thick-billed Weaver Amblyospiza albifrons 1

Water Thick-knee Burhinus vermiculatus 1

Wattled Starling Creatophora cinerea 1

Western Osprey Pandion haliaetus 1

Western Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava 1

Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybrida 1

White Stork Ciconia ciconia 1

White-backed Duck Thalassornis leuconotus 1

White-breasted Cormorant Phalacrocorax lucidus 1

White-winged Tern Chlidonias leucopterus 1

Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus 1

Yellow Bishop Euplectes capensis 1

Yellow Canary Crithagra flaviventris 1

Yellow-bellied Eremomela Eremomela icteropygialis 1

Yellow-billed (Intermediate) Egret Ardea intermedia 1

Yellow-breasted Apalis Apalis flavida 1

African Red-eyed Bulbul Pycnonotus nigricans 1

European Nightjar Caprimulgus europaeus 1

Great Egret Ardea alba 1

Lark-like Bunting Emberiza impetuani 1

Orange-breasted Bush-Shrike Chlorophoneus sulfureopectus 1

Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus 1

Red-billed Firefinch Lagonosticta senegala 1

Tawny-flanked Prinia Prinia subflava 1

Village Weaver Ploceus cucullatus 1

Yellow-throated Petronia Gymnoris superciliaris 1

Black-throated Canary Crithagra atrogularis 1

Black-winged Kite Elanus caeruleus 1

Cape Longclaw Macronyx capensis 1

Sabota Lark Calendulauda sabota 1

Appendix 3. Specialist details

Professional registration The Natural Scientific Professions Act of 2003 aims to “Provide for the establishment of the South African Council of Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP) and for the registration of professional, candidate and certified natural scientists; and to provide for matters connected therewith.” “Only a registered person may practice in a consulting capacity” – Natural Scientific Professions Act of 2003 (20(1)-pg. 14)

Investigator: Jon Smallie (Pri.Sci.Nat) Qualification: BSc (hons) Wildlife Science, MSC Environmental Science Affiliation: South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions Registration number: 400020/06 Fields of Expertise: Ecological Science Registration: Professional Member

All specialist investigators specified above declare that:

» We act as independent specialists for this project. » We consider ourselves bound by the rules and ethics of the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions. » We do not have any personal or financial interest in the project except for financial compensation for specialist investigations completed in a professional capacity as specified by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2006. » We will not be affected by the outcome of the environmental process, of which this report forms part of. » We do not have any influence over the decisions made by the governing authorities. » We do not object to or endorse the proposed developments, but aim to present facts and our best scientific and professional opinion with regard to the impacts of the development. » We undertake to disclose to the relevant authorities any information that has or may have the potential to influence its decision or the objectivity of any report, plan, or document required in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2006. » Should we consider ourselves to be in conflict with any of the above declarations, we shall formally submit a Notice of Withdrawal to all relevant parties and formally register as an Interested and Affected Party.

Terms and Liabilities » This report is based on a short term investigation using the available information and data related to the site to be affected. No long term investigation or monitoring was conducted.

» The Precautionary Principle has been applied throughout this investigation. » Additional information may become known or available during a later stage of the process for which no allowance could have been made at the time of this report. » The specialist investigator withholds the right to amend this report, recommendations and conclusions at any stage should additional information become available. » Information, recommendations and conclusions in this report cannot be applied to any other area without proper investigation. » This report, in its entirety or any portion thereof, may not be altered in any manner or form or for any purpose without the specific and written consent of the specialist investigator as specified above. » Acceptance of this report, in any physical or digital form, serves to confirm acknowledgment of these terms and liabilities.

Signed in March 2021 by Jon Smallie in his capacity as specialist investigator